May 2001 posts
My Thoughts On The Gift -- Kerri,
13:49:32 05/23/01 Wed
Wow! That was a really fantastic episode!!! The ending was somewhat
predictable, but I think that is part of what made it so great-
everything
really fit together at the end. First the Buffy/ Faith dream two
years ago,
and the refrence to the Robert Frost poem-"miles to go untill
I sleep."
Buffy had responsibilities and she couldn't give up, she had miles
to go.
Now she is "sleeping."
About what the first slayer/spirit guide told Buffy, "death
is your gift" I
was wondering-is death a gift for Dawn or for Buffy. It may be
a gift that
Buffy gives to her sister-sacrificing her life so that Dawn can
live. On the
other hand it is a gift to Buffy-she doesn't have to experience
the pain of
living without her sister-which as Spike said wouls destroy Buffy.
Death
will bring Buffy peace-going back to what Spike told Buffy in
Fool For Love.
I had one small problem with the last scene-which don't get me
wrong I
loved. When Buffy is saying her last words to Dawn the camera
moves off them
and we don't hear what she says until later, and we don't see
the
expressions on their faces. While I did like hearing Buffy's parting
words-which were fantastic and my new favorit qoute from the show-ehile
we
see the reaction of her friends, I really wanted to see Buffy
and Dawn's
faces as Buffy spoke. I think that a great deal of emotion was
taken away by
not seeing the faces of the two sisters. While the scene was tremendously
sad and I began to cry when I rewatched it I think that what really
would
have made it heartwrenching and would have helped us to understand
the
characters better would have been toi see their faces. However,
I still
loved the scene and Buffy's final words.
The ending was great! I know some people were disappointed but
I thought it
was perfect for Buffy to sacrafice herself for Dawn. The only
thing about
Buffy dying that I really didn't like is how bringing her back
will almost
undermine what happened with Joyce. There was such a big deal
about death
being final and not bringing people back to life that I think
Joss will
really have to come up with something amazing to explain Buff's
return-and I
have no doubt he will!
I think it will actually make for great character developement
to see how
Buffy is changed by the experience-what new knowledge and enlightenment
she
gains.
I liked that Willow went to Angel-I would have liked to see his
reaction to
hearing that Buffy was dead, and I really hope that they will
address that
again next season.
The first scene was really good and worked really well to show
the audience
how far Buffy has come. At first it's the old Buffy-joking, trying
to make
light of being the slayer, but at the end there is a somber tone
in her
voice that has come from her experience. Also, Buffy saying how
she's just a
normal girl, but she proves herself to be anything but normal.
Like Giles
says-she's a hero!
I have to say I liked seeing the Ripper. It was an interesting
character
developement for Giles, and we really saw some of his dark side
in the Gift.
It also showed how Buffy couldn't take an innocent life.
Well, that's all for now-I can't wait to see what Joss will do
with this
one! How do you think he'll bring Buffy back?
I have to say that was maybe the best Buffy I've ever seen!
~Kerri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Trusting Joss -- Humanitas, 14:39:43 05/23/01 Wed
I have to say that I hate the fact that Buffy died. Not that it
wasn't the
perfect ending for the epsiode and the season's story arc - it
was.
Everything has been leading up to this, and Buffy's death was
the logical
conclusion. Despite this, I have two problems:
The first problem is that I know there is a season 6, and that
SMG is under
contract to play Buffy, so her death doesn't have the poignancy
that it
ought to have. It was moving, yes, but it should have been absolutely
heartbreaking, and it wasn't, because I have no (well, not as
much) sense of
loss. I was more affected by Joyce's death, because I figured
that the rules
would not be bent for her.
The other problem is that I can't see any good way to bring her
back.
Anything I can come up with cheapens her sacrifice unbearably.
If this were
a comic book, or a daytime soap opera, that would be fine. I hold
BtVS to a
higher standard, mostly because it generally rises to one.
Having said all this, I still have faith that next season will
be up to par.
I trust Joss to pull it off. After all, he managed the Buffybot,
and none of
us thought he would. I was sure that could only be bad. May I
always be
wrong in this particular way!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Trusting Joss -- Shiver, 16:32:55 05/23/01 Wed
I've been thinking the same thing all day. When Buffy stabbed
Angel and sent
him to Hell, I was weepy for days. Because I hadn't read any spoilers
(grin)
and I didn't know for sure he was coming back next season. But
I know Buffy
isn't going to really stay dead ... so it makes all the rest of
it seem so
empty. Spike and Willow's grief, and all the rest - I want to
yell at the TV
and say, well she's coming back, dummies ... the only stirrings
of emotion I
had during the ep were when Buffy said "I wish my mom was
here ...." now
that was sad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Maybe I'm a big softie, but -- Masquerade, 16:38:43
05/23/01 Wed
personally I sobbed the first time and this morning when I re-watched,
not
because she was dead, but because she was willing to die. It was
such a
touching and heroic thing and I couldn't stand seeing her sister
and friends
in pain like that. Spike crying about killed me! OK, I also cry
at some
credit card commercials about home and family and dogs and that,
but...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Buffy's sacrafice -- Kerri, 16:43:19 05/23/01
Wed
Maybe bringing Buffy back cheapens her death as humanities said,
but it
certainly doesn't cheapen her sacrafice-she still gave up her
life for Dawn
and the world
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Join the Softie Club -- Solitude1056,
17:20:20 05/23/01 Wed
The ones that got me were Dawn & Spike, not Buffy. I mean, Buffy's
the hero.
She chooses this, even when she says she's not choosing it...
when push
comes to shove, she goes that extra mile. It's her purpose, and
she embraces
it. But Dawn's new to this game, and Spike - well, Spike's supposed
to be a
bad boy, a killer, and Buffy's worst nightmare. Instead he's trying
to tell
Dawn he's sorry for not saving her, in that split second before
he's tossed
off the edge, and Dawn's screaming for Doc not to do it. And at
the end, it
was Spike's and Dawn's reactions that got me the most - the most
jaded
experienced, even cynical character ... and the newest, naive,
child-like
but wizened character, both equally distraught and in pain at
the fact that
they were both helpless to prevent the circumstances that made
Buffy choose,
yet again, to do The Hero Thing. Now that got me hard.
Ok, I'll stop going on about it, since this time (yay!) I've got
it to
watch, again, once I get back from out of town. Yippee. Btw, does
anyone
know if the WB is going to show reruns this summer, or if this
season was it
until the show's syndicated?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Join the Softie Club -- rowan,
18:45:10 05/23/01 Wed
"Instead he's trying to tell Dawn he's sorry for not saving
her, in that
split second before he's tossed off the edge, and Dawn's screaming
for Doc
not to do it. And at the end, it was Spike's and Dawn's reactions
that got
me the most - the most jaded experienced, even cynical character
... and the
newest, naive, child-like but wizened character, both equally
distraught and
in pain at the fact that they were both helpless to prevent the
circumstances that made Buffy choose, yet again, to do The Hero
Thing. Now
that got me hard. "
Me too. This was the most emotional moment of the ep for me. If
I live to be
100, I don't think I will ever forget the agonized look on Spike's
face, the
tears in his eyes, Dawn's fear, her instinctive move towards him,
Spike's
whispered, 'no', followed by Dawn's scream of the same word. I
can't believe
how much was conveyed without words by the looks on two actors'
faces -- and
in such a short period of time. Everything of their love for each
other, an
acknowledgement of each other's death (I believe Dawn thought
the fall would
kill Spike), an acknowledgement of the apocalypse to come, and
the guilt
over a failure that now Buffy would have to fix somehow.
Wow.
Willow telling Tara she would always find her got me too. I used
alot of
tissues last night.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Join the Softie Club --
Rufus, 19:13:55 05/23/01 Wed
Spike always wanted to slip in and have himself a good day, he
finally got
what he said he wanted only to find it the worst day and loss
of his
unlife...his reaction was extreme...his facade of the big bad
finally
dissolved in grief....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Be careful what you
wish for...it might come true, hmm?
-- rowan, 19:24:43 05/23/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Be careful
what you wish for...it might come
true, hmm? -- Rufus, 21:44:15 05/23/01 Wed
In FFL Spike was so busy putting on the big Discovery Channel
version of his
life that he pissed Buffy off in the end. He couldn't resist the
temptation
to show her that he would be there when she lost her will to live.
Her death
wish. What he said he wished for came true except for the fact
that he never
really wanted that by the time FFL came about. He didn't truly
know what he
wanted...he only knew that he wanted Buffy and felt a need to
impress
her...only to put his foot in his mouth. His fear of being humiliated
kept
him from being genuine with Buffy about who he had become and
how he really
felt. Pride screwed up a chance for Buffy to see him a different
way. The
only save that night was when he comforted Buffy on the back steps.
Unfortunatley she was in too much pain to realize just how much
the big bad
had started to change.
Those big bad words about being there when Buffy died came true.
Not only
can he feel guilt that he couldn't protect Dawn the way he wanted
but now he
has to live with his words about a good day. I bet he would love
to take
them back, and I believe he would have taken her place if he could
have.
I find it so ironic that Spike was busy shadowing and attempting
to kill the
girls that were the embodiment of what he wished he was. Does
he get it? The
most efflugent thing he ever wanted for himself he snuffed out
every chance
he got until he found Buffy who showed him what a hero really
is. He always
wanted something glistening, and glowing....and there are the
Summers girls,
Buffy who has love brighter than the flame, and Dawn who is pure
green
glowing energy. What will he do next? He has a promise to keep.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Be careful
what you wish for...it might come
true, hmm? -- squireboy, 10:51:03 05/24/01 Thu
Excellent points, Rufus (bonus points for working in "effulgent"
:D). I
especially like your reminder about Spike's promise. He may have
made it
assuming he was about to die, he always figured he'd go down fighting,
but
alas, he lived, and now he has to be Dawn's protector. A real
commitment, I
wonder if he will be up to the challenge.
Season 6 looks very promising. Naturally, I can't wait. :)
squireboy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Be careful what you wish for...it might
come true, hmm? -- rowan, 19:39:21 05/24/01 Thu
I don't know if I can quite express this, but I'll try.
I think that Spike and Dawn are just totally in love with each
other. Not in
a romantic/sexual way, but in a Buffy/Angel soulmate way (again,
without the
romantic/sexual aspect). I have never seen two people look at
each other
quite the way those two did up on the tower before Doc threw Spike
off.
I have to admit, the idea of a B/S ship intrigued me at the start
of S5. And
I'm glad that they're relationship is improving and maturing,
because it
provides alot of opportunity to explore shades of grey not within
Buffy's
other friendships.
But that storyline is not even close to as compelling as Spike
and Dawn.
They have become such a couple in my mind...just as I think of
Xander/Anya
and Willow/Tara as a unit, I think of Spike/Dawn the same way.
I think I'll
be really shocked if they aren't joined at the hip in S6. I'm
not really
sure if Joss intended this (or perhaps I'm overemphasizing it).
Maybe it's
just the chemistry between MT and JM that does it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Be careful what you wish for...it might
come true, hmm? -- squireboy, 20:07:26 05/24/01 Thu
No offense, rowan, but um, ewww.
I think the evolution of Spike this year has been fascinating
and there's no
doubting that he and Dawn have a bond. I know you're struggling
to express
it, but I don't think it's as close as you're getting at. I wonder
what joss
has in mind for Spike next year as he takes full centre stage
as the major
male figure, with ASH moving to recurring and Xander's quirkiness
being
written out to demonstrate maturity/growth. I'd hate to think
that joss
intends Spike to be Giles the Second and I hold out hope that
there is some
resolution some time for the deus ex machina chip in his head.
Spike used to get all the clever lines. Now he gets all the good
scenes and
JM is taking full advantage. He was pretty amazing this season,
especially
in the finale. For Spike to be most effective though, I think
there has to
be a certain amount of Monster first, Man second for him to truly
work.
Otherwise, he's just a tough Xander with headaches.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Be careful what you wish for...it
might come true, hmm? -- rowan, 20:35:26 05/24/01 Thu
"No offense, rowan, but um, ewww."
Hey, I told you, I did not mean sexually. That would be disgusting
given
both the characters and actors age differences. Let me be totally
clear on
that issue. I'm not suggesting Lolita here.
I happen to believe reincarnation. Sometimes, you instantly bond
with
someone, even if there's a great age difference between you, or
some
difference in circumstance that seems like it would normally preclude
a
close friendship. I always feel in those situations that it's
souls that
have travelled through time together before finding each other
again.
I think that's how I feel about Spike and Dawn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: Be careful what you wish for...it
might come true, hmm? -- Max, 18:37:53 05/25/01 Fri
Buffy was 16 when she met Angel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Be careful what you wish for...it
might come true, hmm? -- verdantheart, 09:13:22 05/25/01 Fri
The Spike/Dawn relationship has gotten a lot of attention and
I think that
this is to a large extent due to the gifts of both actors (amazing,
indeed).
Both make their roles more vivid. Put them together in a scene
and you
multiply that effect. (I suppose that's why some--not you, rowan!--have
carried this toward eww-land.)
The Spike character was made more and more complex by the additions
of pain
and conflicts. Mr Marsters made the transition believable and
enabled us to
identify with Spike to the point that we can forgive his stalking
and foray
into bot-play. Now he's in for a huge guilt trip. I think the
man/monster
conflict will be around indefinitely.
Just my 2 cents.
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Amazing
how all 3 Summers women captured his
heart, hmm? -- rowan, 19:32:14 05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yup..................:):):)
-- Rufus, 21:39:48
05/24/01 Thu
He couldn't help himself...but after he made that deal with Buffy
in season
two he was a goner...the ep when he had cocoa with Buffys mom
was
priceless...he sounded like he could have been one of Buffys friends...when
he tried to lie about being in a band with Buffy....flash forward
to bitty
Buffy and you can see this guy is stuck with the Summers girls,
like it or
not(and I think he likes). Now we only have to wonder if he will
keep his
promise or will he go into a cycle of destruction? Will he ever
revert back
to his evil ways....I don't know...and I love the uncertainty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Too true! -- rowan, 14:05:35 05/25/01 Fri
You know, when you put it that way (looking back on it), you really
do have
to say, "boy, that poor guy is a goner and he doesn't even
know it yet."
I'm hoping that Spike will channel his guilt in productive ways
and won't
succumb to self-pity. I'd like to see my boy earn some respect
next season
and not be a whipping boy for every other character (God, sounds
like
Xander's problem...).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Buffy reruns on WB on Wed at 9:00
-- Jen C., 18:45:53
05/23/01 Wed
Starting June 6th, I believe. Angel reruns on Mon @ 9:00 starting
June 4.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Guess it's time to hand out the hankies.....:)
-- Rufus,
18:27:49 05/23/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Maybe I'm a big softie, but -- OnM,
21:19:56 05/23/01 Wed
Two things:
1 > People, keep in mind that there is *us*-- you, me, all
of us who live
our lives as devoted fans and post at these boards and hang on
every
spoiler-- and then these are just regular, normal viewers of the
show (yes,
they exist, and in great quantity).
We just assume everyone is like us, but they aren't. We knew in
advance what
was going to happen, they very likely did not. *BUFFY is DEAD*
to these
people. They don't expect her to return. The WB kept referring
to the show
as the 'Series Finale'. They quite possibly no nothing about UPN
picking up
the program, or that SMG has two more years on her contract or
any of that
stuff.
You think you're depressed over this plot turn? How many other
TV shows can
you recall where the writers killed off not *a* character, but
*THE*
character, the one the show is *named after*???
2 > As to my reaction, I was mildly bummed (and again, I *knew*
what was
going to happen for 99.5% certain right after that incredible
sequence that
opened the show, where they breezed through clips from all the
past seasons)
immediately after the show. Later in the evening, after sacking
out, I had
trouble getting to sleep. When I woke up this morning (much earlier
than my
norm) I actually felt bad, like there was a pressure in my chest,
an ache. I
realized that the ending was still in my thoughts, and that I
was feeling
very depressed. I was up and around for over an hour before it
went away.
***I have a clear understanding of the difference between reality
and
fantasy***, I was spoiled pretty badly as to what was going to
happen, but
it was like some post-traumatic stress thing had taken hold of
me.
So all I can say is, they better damn well bring her back, or
I'm gonna be
one very unhappy old geezer! We need and love our heroes, they
make life
worth living because they are what we wish we could be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Need for Heroes -- Brian, 09:16:44
05/24/01 Thu
OnM, I couldn't agree with you more. We need our heroes, (Do we
have any in
real life?) and Buffy is a great one. I know I'm not ready to
give up my
weekly fix that takes me away from the dull routine of life into
a magical
world. Two more years, and maybe movies? One can only hope!
Maybe someone will write a book - Everything I know about Life
I learned
from BtVS?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Not the first time a main character
was killed in a season
finale, but definitely the best... -- Rob, 09:28:09 05/24/01 Thu
The only other show I can recall that killed off its main character
at a
season finale was "Xena: Warrior Princess." At the end
of the fourth season,
Xena and Gabrielle, her sidekick, were crucified by the Romans
and died.
They were brought back by a holy man and an angel, and it turned
out Xena
had died only to be reborn again, with a baby, immaculately conceived.
Not
that this has anything to do with how Buffy will return, but I
just wanted
to point out that, even though I adored "The Gift" and
the entire plot, it
isn't the first time it's been done. I do hope, however, that
the resolution
of Buffy will be much more satisfying. Despite the fact that it's
a fantasy,
Buffy is always logical in following its own rules. I'm sure Joss
knows a
way to explain Buffy's return, and still follow his rule in "Forever"
that
you can't ressurect the dead, and if you do it will not be the
same person
you loved, but a zombie, or at least something will be wrong with
them.
Xena, on the other hand, is a fantasy show that has very few rules,
and has
characters die and return with very little logical explanation.
That's why
when Xena returned, I excepted it, besides the fact that when
a minor
character dies, they never try to bring them back, but if Xena
dies, they
do. I always thought that was a double standard and not competely
ethically
fair. Buffy, on the other hand, does not break its own rules without
an
examination of the morality/ethics/etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Not the first time a main
character was killed in a
season finale, but definitely the best... -- Anthony8, 17:04:58
05/24/01 Thu
Actually, if there was a Hall of Fame for cheap character
kill-offs/resurrections, I have two in mind that may be before
your time (at
least with regards to first-run episodes). Back in the 80's, there
were two
really popular shows that brought back dead characters and, lost
a
substantial segment of loyal viewers as a result.
First there was "Magnum, P.I." a show starring Tom Selleck
(recently of
"Friends") about an ex-Vietnam War marine/vet-turned-private
detective and
his circle of former war buddies. The show was at the top of its
ratings
after a number of years so the producers decided to go out on
top. In the
series finale (at least as far as everyone knew at the time),
Magnum was
shot and dies. The last scene had him leaving his body and walking
off into
the proverbial "white light." It actually wasn't as
corny as it sounds.
Well, there was such a fervent fan campaign to un-cancel the series
that,
voila, it was back on the air the next season. Magnum was miraculously
revived on the operating table and his "soul" was sucked
back from the light
and into his body. After the return episode, the series died a
slow two year
death until it was cancelled due to poor ratings.
The all-time infamous character resurrection, however was that
of Bobby
Ewing on the primtime soap "Dallas." Patrick Duffy who
played Bobby decided
to move on to other projects, so he was killed off in the series
season
finale. After a year out in the wilderness, the actor decided
to return to
the show. Now "Dallas" had a devoted following and great
ratings at the time
and his initial departure from the show had no effect on that.
After a year
of well developed story arcs that required consistent viewer attention,
the
character is alive and well and taking a shower in the comfort
of his own
bathroom. His wife pulls back the shower curtain, and to her relief,
Bobby's
death and the entire previous season's plotlines were only a bad
dream!
Needless to say, that commenced the ratings decline which eventually
killed
the show.
Given the above, I'm glad that JW had this death and resurrection
storyline
pre-planned 2 years ago. At least he is not betraying the viewers
by
springing something absolutely ridiculous on them. The Buffyverse
requires a
certain extra suspension of disbelief on our part, but we participate
gladly
because of the metaphysical rewards. We have already experienced
the
permanency of physical death with "The Body." As discussed
in other posts,
the parental figure must die for the Hero to take the next step
in her
evolution. Her next step in this journey was her own spiritual
death and
(next season) rebirth. We are supposed to identify with the Hero
and take
the journey with her. Consequently, the impact of her mother's
death as
opposed to her own should parallel what we would feel under similar
circumstances. Two entirely different types of loss with two completely
different results. And very well done in each case.
And that is our moment in television history for the day.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Well, I wasn't spoiled on the death,
but I knew the UPN scoop
before hand -- Masquerade, 11:08:33 05/24/01 Thu
I know as a Buffy fansite WebMistress, I will do what I can to
get the word
out to fans, and will encourage other webmasters I know to do
the same. I
already got one letter from a woman in Montreal who knew about
the UPN
change but thought maybe that was a false Web-rumor after viewing
the "WB
Series Finale" and seeing Buffy die.
BTW, any Montrealers know what station UPN shows appear on? I
remember
seeing "Voyager" when I lived up there, but don't remember
the station it
was on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Well, I wasn't spoiled
on the death, but I knew the
UPN scoop before hand -- Nina, 20:46:43 05/24/01 Thu
I am from Montreal and "Voyager" is now on CFCF12. From
what I can gather tv
stations here buy what they like and it doesn't matter from where
they buy
it. I still don't know if I will get Buffy next year.
I'll cross my fingers and keep hoping I guess. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Trusting Joss -- Mindtrekker, 22:58:54 05/23/01
Wed
First, I have to say that I don't think you can blame the show
for your
access to spoiler material. I didn't have any idea that SMG had
signed a
contract or that the show was moving to another network. Having
watched the
show in that context, I was depressed all day until I read the
posts here
about next season. Had it been any more poignant, I might have
tried to jump
into a gateway between worlds thingy or whatever it was.
Secondly, I don't think the fact that we know the hero will win
is a
reasonable criticism of any story. We ALWAYS know the hero is
going to
win..that's why a story is being told about them..you don't tell
adventure
stories about losers. (Note that even though Buffy died, she did
not lose)
The essense of good storytelling then is the ability of the storyteller
to
take us to a deep dark place in which we can't see ahead .. so
that even
though we know the hero will win, we nonetheless doubt the outcome.
Joss is
an expert at this as you note when you say that you can't see
how Buffy can
be brought back.
Frankly, I can't either and it seems like they've written out
the characters
most closely linked to Buffy--her mother and Riley--which seems
like a sign
that they intend to move on without her. So I'm still in that
deep dark
place until Joss shows me the way out, and I can't believe I have
to wait
three months for that. In that, lies the tension and the drama--not
in the
actual outcome, which I hope is favorable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Trusting Joss -- MKS, 09:22:07 05/24/01
Thu
Actually, the UPN premier will probably be in OCTOBER (according
to Joss),
so you have FIVE months to wait. Have a nice day! :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Trusting Joss -- LoriAnn, 09:46:57
05/24/01 Thu
"Actually, the UPN premier will probably be in OCTOBER (according
to Joss),
so you have FIVE months to wait. Have a nice day!"
Actually, Joss said this, "I don't know the date. I believe
we're looking at
early October, but nothing's been set." So when will it be?
The only piece
of information in here that isn't qualified in some way is "nothing's
been
set."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Whoo! Guess I'd better clarify... -- Humanitas,
10:33:36 05/24/01
Thu
First of all, let me say that I used plenty of tissues this ep.
I'm a big
sucker for noble sacrifice, and going on knowing that you may
well be going
to your death. All those little scenes of the gang getting ready,
Spike and
Buffy, Xander and Anya, Buffy and Giles, etc. had me tearing up,
and crying
right along with everyone else. Where do I sign up for that Softie
Club? :)
Mindtrekker, you bring up some very valid points. I guess I was
just hoping
that there would be a different solution, since we've seen major
characters
die and come back on other shows before. Maybe that's just me
going through
the 'anger' stage of the greiving process. ;) I certainly agree
that it's
the tension of "how are they going to get out of this,"
as opposed to "are
they going to get out of this," that is facinating. They
made such a big
deal about death being final this season, though, that the deep
dark place
seems darker than usual. Joss is a fiend, and I trust him.
It's gonna be a long, long summer...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: My Thoughts On The Gift -- darrenK, 17:07:55 05/23/01
Wed
You're right, it is a great episode. I tried rewatching it tonight
and
realised during the "previously..." section that it
would be too unbearably
painful.
As I wrote in another thread, I think it's purposeful that we
didn't hear
Buffy's conversation with Dawn, just as it's purposeful that we
didn't hear
Willow's conversation with Angel.
You see, I think it would spoil us for how Buffy comes back (if
she's
actually dead). I think she's told Dawn something that will bring
her back
and we are not to know for 3+ months. The wait is going to be
a killer.
dK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The power of silence -- Solitude0156, 17:23:26 05/23/01
Wed
Remember that Joss didn't let us hear what Buffy said to Dawn
in the
hallway, about their Mom, either. It's almost as if he's giving
them private
time, as sisters, even while onscreen. And so in some way, by
having Buffy's
voiceover while she falls, it seemed (to me) as if she were whispering
it
not in her sister's ears, but in mine. As if, somehow, we were
supposed to
be experiencing that just-for-us that Dawn had experienced only
a minute
before.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The power of silence -- rowan, 18:48:37
05/23/01 Wed
I loved how they shot the discovery of Buffy's body. First, we
see the core
SG -- Giles, Xander (holding Anya), and Willow (holding Tara).
The camera
gives them private time to feel their grief.
Then Spike is introduced -- a newer part of the group, but now
truly part
('We few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he today who
sheds his
blood with me shall be my brother, be he ne'er so vile, this day
shall
gentle his condition' -- good old Joss pulling Shakespeare in!).
Then each character gets some private time for their individual
reactions,
and finally Dawn appears.
Powerful.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Cinematically speaking (or more accurately,
viewing)... -- OnM,
21:37:50 05/23/01 Wed
...you could form a trilogy of *Fool for Love*, *The Body/Forever*
and *The
Gift*, and if you think about it, they essentially tell the whole
story of
the season.
These eps are also the most 'cinematic' of all the seasons eps,
not a
coincidence, methinks. They are also the most passionate, in the
terms that
Angel spoke of it so long ago.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: My Thoughts On The Gift -- Kerri, 19:31:15 05/23/01
Wed
But we did hear their conversation-that's what we heard at the
end-I was
just saying I would have liked to see their faces as it was said
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: My Thoughts On The Gift -- OnM, 21:51:02
05/23/01 Wed
It's a judgement call on the part of the writer/director (same
person, in
this case), but I think that if you go back and watch the scene
in the
future, you may come to find that the method he chose was actually
more
powerful.
Those words were Buffy's dying words-- she just didn't make the
final leap
off the platform yet-- it would be a physical impossibility to
speak to Dawn
while falling through the portal. But we, the audience, need to
hear them
*as she is dying*, for they are words of hope, and that's the
point-- she
gives her life to give dawn-- and by extension, us-- hope. The
events need
to coincide.
Also, there was the synchonicity between the much earlier scene
of silence
when she told Dawn of her mother's death (moment of utter despair)
to when
she uttered her final words to Dawn at the top of the platform
(the gift of
hope).
I really can't think of a single fault in that sequence, or any
way to do it
better. You've probably heard me use the phrase 'Perfect Moment
of Cinema'
in my Classic Movie column. This was one of those.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: My Thoughts On The Gift -- mundusmundi,
14:47:31 05/24/01
Thu
Agreed. It was an interesting stylistic choice. Most directors
probably
would've gone the other way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Even the music was perfect (not
too sappy) -- Anthony8,
16:26:35 05/24/01 Thu
In scenes of this type, the background score can make or break
the dramatic
impact. The music playing as Buffy has her moment of clarity and
dives into
the portal had just the right amount of poignancy to put a finishing
touch
on the perfection of the moment for me. The music sounded familiar
(it may
have been used in another episode though I can't recall), but
wasn't too
syrupy or even sad. It really captured the resolved calm of the
Hero and the
sorrow and shock of separation you see in Dawn's face. Nice piece
of work.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> You're absolutely right, excellent
point. The sound and
the visuals... -- OnM, 17:24:12 05/24/01 Thu
...become as one when everything is right, our brains process
it as a single
emotional reaction of high intensity, even though the sources
are entering
from two different sensory organs. Creating these moments is what
seperates
the pros from the wannabes.
I've quoted/paraphrased this before, but it applies: From *Dune*--
"Each
sound has a thought".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Even the music was perfect
(not too sappy) -- rowan,
19:45:45 05/24/01 Thu
The music was fantastic, and it was the same as what played while
Dawn had
that incredible scene where she folded her clothes carefully on
the chair &
tucked her shoes underneath (reminded me of how suicides prepare
for death).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, rowan. -- OnM,
06:43:01 05/25/01 Fri
I knew that action she was taking with the clothes and shoes was
significant, but I couldn't quite figure it out. Your enlightenment
is
appreciated!
Mourning the dead -- Aelith,
14:10:02 05/23/01 Wed
Buffy will be dead for me and many others. I don't get UPN.
And my mourning will now double because I found this board 4 years
too late.
I agree that Buffy is the mythic hero, just as Giles called her
before
killing what's his name. This is the Sacrifice and Resurrection
part of the
cycle.
*sigh*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Mourning the dead -- Rufus, 17:43:37 05/24/01 Thu
I can only hope that where you live that you may be able to see
Buffy. If
you have a channel that gets programs like Voyager and Andomeda,
you may
still get Buffy, if not there are ways around not getting UPN
like a tape
exchange.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Thank you Rufus -- Aelith, 19:00:54 05/24/01 Thu
You give me hope. If my cable isn't pressured into getting UPN
by this Fall,
I'll try your other suggestion. Mean while it looks like I have
a lot of
reading to catch up on.
Oh and I appologies for a slight exaggeration. I've only had my
computer
since last September.
Still......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> You are very welcome........:):) -- Rufus, 21:16:25
05/24/01 Thu
Keep coming back.....
That little nagging pinch of
humanity -- Rufus, 14:11:32 05/23/01 Wed
We have discussed Ben at length and I have noticed how many people
say he is
weak ect, but Glory had a point when she said this last night:
Glory(to Dawn): "What do you have against old Benjy?"
Dawn: "He's a monster. At least you're up front about it."
Glory: "Just don't be so hard on the boy. He just wants to
live. Most guys
would do the same. Besides, he's probably the reason your sis
and her little
cartoon pals are still alive. That little nagging pinch of humanity
that
makes me go for the hurt instead of the kill. Lowering myself
to trade blows
with the slayer when I should have just put my fist through her
heart. It's
gotta be Ben."
Ben was weak at the end, he chose his life over the survival of
humanity.
His fight with himself has been not noticed because we didn't
see much of
it. Ben was an innocent who was created to be the vessel of a
god. His life
was gone before it began. The fact he was a doctor did have meaning.
It may
have been a bit for the pills, but I think that Ben did want to
be part of
humanity, he just was never allowed to. His longing to live isn't
new, his
choice of self over others isn't new either. But it was his contribution
of
humanity to the god that deafeated Glory. Glory would have killed
all of the
SG but it was Ben that held her back. Even though in the end he
wimped out,
Ben did indirectly help the SG in ways they never knew. Ben gave
Glory a
need to help others that she never would have had without Ben.
Ben isn't a
hero in the usual sense, but he did contribute to defeating Glory
with a
little nagging pinch of humanity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Spoilers in my post above -- Rufus, 14:12:52 05/23/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That little nagging pinch of humanity -- Solitude1056,
16:19:16
05/23/01 Wed
And yet, at the same time, Giles recognized what Buffy didn't
have time to
process: that despite Ben's insistence that he & Glory would go
far away...
Glory would still come back for vengeance. There's nothing that
indicates
she's no longer a God. To all indications, as a matter of fact,
she's simply
now a God who's trapped here permanently. In that sense, in a
wierd way,
killing Ben may have been an inverted act of mercy for Glory -
a character
that, like Dawn, I respected at the end for at least being honest
about her
motivations and intentions and attitude. That, and she provided
some bizarre
humorous moments that made me laugh out loud: "say, did anyone
know the
Slayer's a robot?"
As much as I don't like the idea of killing someone now because
of their
potential for evil (as the Knights intended to do to Dawn), in
Ben's case,
it's a lesser of two evils. To prevent the great risk of later
harm, harm
must be done now. Giles made that choice. Yeah, it was an ugly
choice and an
ugly consequence, but in his place? I would've done it, with just
as little
satisfaction as Giles himself displayed.
Notice, too, that Giles didn't stab Ben, nor break his neck, nor
any of the
multiple ways I'm sure the Ripper knows... he just suffocated
Ben. It
occured to me, then, as it does now, that somehow Giles - at the
same time
he had to be judge, jury, and executioner to relieve Buffy of
the
responsibility later - was also protecting Buffy of the knowledge
that this
choice had to be made. As far as the rest of the Scoobies will
ever know
(I'm guessing), they will think that Glory allowed Ben to come
forth when
she felt the body dying, and that Ben is the one who experienced
the dying.
Ben was a character shrouded, and we never knew much about his
history or
why he did what he did or how he came to be who he is. And we
only have
hints of how he felt about it; pretty opaque, even by Joss' standards.
So it
seems rather appropriate that his death was also one that will
be hidden in
mystery, as far as the rest of the Scoobies are concerned.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Thoughts on... (*Gift* spoilers) -- OnM, 20:56:13
05/23/01 Wed
Giles smothers Ben/Glory, Buffy, while in her fugue state, smothers
Dawn?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: That little nagging pinch of humanity -- Wiccagrrl,
22:44:05
05/23/01 Wed
Notice, too, that Giles didn't stab Ben, nor break his neck, nor
any of the
multiple ways I'm sure the Ripper knows... he just suffocated
Ben. It
occured to me, then, as it does now, that somehow Giles - at the
same time
he had to be judge, jury, and executioner to relieve Buffy of
the
responsibility later - was also protecting Buffy of the knowledge
that this
choice had to be made. As far as the rest of the Scoobies will
ever know
(I'm guessing), they will think that Glory allowed Ben to come
forth when
she felt the body dying, and that Ben is the one who experienced
the dying.
The thing with that is, though, that it leaves it looking like
Ben died of
his injuries. Injuries Buffy inflicted (on Glory, yes, but still...)
She
made the choice to spare him, because she couldn't bring herself
to finish
him off. Giles was able to (and made, I think, the right decision)
But, if
she had survived, would Giles have let Buffy think Ben had died
(inadvertantly) because of her actions? In Buffy's mind, I think
she saw Ben
as being in a very similar situation to Dawn. She didn't know
about Ben's
betrayal of Dawn, or about the Queller Demon. Would Giles have
eventually
have had to tell her what really happened? Once the battle was
over, would
she have accepted, maybe even been relieved, that Ben hadn't survived?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That little nagging pinch of humanity -- Shiver, 16:35:47
05/23/01
Wed
I actually read that differently. Not that Ben's touch of humanity
was
making Glory compassionate - but that it was making her more sadistic
and
cruel. I think back to Glory's speech to Dawn in the prior ep
about humanity
and how people all over were shooting up, shooting each other,
suffering and
causing others to suffer. I think that Glory's remark about her
little bit
of humanity was meant to reflect that viewpoint, and not that
humanity was a
positive thing.
The nature of Glory -- Sam of
Seneca, 14:20:27 05/23/01 Wed
I've wondered what Glory represents since the character appeared
last year.
I believe she's a dramatic and essential component of the story
and its
universe. But I also believe that the "creator" of Glory
is saying something
else: I'm absolutely convinced that the person who originally
"wrote" Glory
has had substantial experience with someone who suffers from Borderline
Personality Disorder. Every time she appears, and last night was
no
exception, I am more certain of this. Any thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The nature of Glory -- Rufus, 19:11:13 05/23/01 Wed
Would you like to tell me why you believe that Glory represents
a borderline
personality as opposed to say a narcissistic personality disorder?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The nature of Glory -- Sam of Seneca, 20:32:17
05/23/01 Wed
Rage, "splitting," projection, poorly supported internal
sense of self,
"sexualizing". . . . In a sense it's 6 of one and half
a dozen of the other,
though violent mood swings and character's gender indicate BPD
is more
likely than NPD--at least as I read it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The nature of Glory -- Mindtrekker, 22:41:30 05/23/01
Wed
I've been wondering if Glory doesn't perhaps represent the various
threats
to the show's future? Just as Dawn perhaps represents each new
day the show
continues to air.
Consider that Glory is a vain, self-absorbed being who feeds off
the mental
energies of others. A television executive perhaps?
And why the name Glory?? That's an interesting question.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The nature of Glory -- Rufus, 22:48:51 05/23/01
Wed
Oh no, I never saw it that way...LOL....television executive.
Jackpot! (long) -- Solitude1056,
19:39:39 05/23/01 Wed
If you want to follow along, I found a nifty website here.
Basically, it helps you outline a hero's journey, using the classic
steps as
defined by Campbell & his sort. (And yes, you can enter the character
& her
life story, and it'll help you outline the story in a series of
steps.) The
following are the basic steps, divided into three movements, and
each step
includes the suggestions from the web page about how to
define/outline/identify the step. I've added notes of where I
think each
step occured in the BtVS cycle, and wow... it lines up rather
nicely, if you
think about. Any/all input is welcome! :)
DEPARTURE
1. The Call to Adventure
What stage of life is he or she in? What do you see coming next
for this
person? What would cause the person to leave this stage, to "leave
home"?
What is the person doing when the call comes? Is it an accident,
a blunder,
something planned, or hoped for? Is it anticipated or dreaded?
Pre-season 1, Buffy receives Slayer spirit/calling.
2. Refusal of the Call
Does the hero refuse the call? If so, what motivates the refusal?
Obligation
and duty, fear, a sense of inadequacy to take on the quest, a
dread or
dislike of the task to be taken on? Is the person ready to leave
home, to
accept adult status? If not, why?
Season 1-2.
3. Supernatural Aid
What special friends or helpers does the hero have? Does the hero
receive
some magical help, advice, or talisman from someone wise and benevelont?
Is
there someone who helps them prepare to leave on their journey?
Is it a one
time assistance, or will the helper (or helpers) appear throughout
the
journey? Is the helper an internal aspect of the hero?
Season 1-on. Specifically Angel, then later Whistler.
4. Crossing of the First Threshold
What world is being left; what world is being entered? What or
who is
guarding the threshold? What obstacles must the hero overcome
to truly begin
the journey? Limits of home or society, limits of personality,
limits of
perception, physical limits? What events cause the person to cross
the
threshold? What is the threshold and how does the person cross
it?
Season 2. Angelus' death & Buffy's love as obstacle.
5. Belly of the Whale
Is the person ready to transform? Does he or she enter the belly
of the
whale willingly, or is he or she thrust into or captured in that
place? What
self is being left? The self of childhood? Of incomplete or unfulfilled
adulthood? An outgrown self? What self is the person moving toward?
What
will symbolize this stage in the story?
Interlude between Season 2 & 3; Season 3.
INITIATION
1. The Road of Trials
Given this person's background and experience, what kinds of trials
or
ordeals make sense for him or her? What would be truly challenging
for this
person? What does the person fear and how will this fear be represented
to
him or her? What does the person consider to be obstacles to progress
or
growth? Does the person have some personality or character traits
that will
be mirrored back to him or her in a challenging way? What strategies,
skills, insights, known or unknown strengths or talents, etc,
does the
person use or develop to survive or resolve these trials? What
assistance,
seen or unseen does the person have or receive to deal with these
trials?
Season 4. Freshman year in college.
2. The Meeting with the Goddess
How will this step be represented in the story? Does the person
have a soul
mate, an other half? Does an all loving god or goddess, or non-gendered
but
supremely loving force make itself known to the person? Can the
person
accept and/or identify with the ultimate creative/destructive
nature of the
universe? Does the person begin to understand or experience the
union of
opposites, for example spiritual/material, good/bad, male/female,
life/death, etc.
Restless. The first slayer (assuming that "supremely loving"
does not
contradict "vicious killer").
3. Woman as the Temptress
Given this person's background and experience, what kinds of temptations
make sense for him or her? Is this person on a spiritual journey,
will he or
she experience the temptations of the flesh? Are there habitual
patterns of
thought or behavior that serve to undermine, or tempt the person
from his or
her path?
Season 5. Glory, the deathwish.
4. Atonement with the Father (Mother)
How does the person resolve him or herself with the sources of
control and
power in his or her life? What experiences mark the person as
ready to take
on the new roles of his or her transformed self? What behaviors,
attitudes,
relationships, dependencies, body parts, must be sacrificed to
achieve this?
Season 5. Joyce's illness & death.
5. Apotheosis
Given this person's background and experience, what would heaven
be for him
or her? What does this person know or experience now that is beyond
good and
evil, male and female, life and death? Does the person give him
or herself a
moment to bask in the glow of what has been achieved?
Season 5. Seeking peace/ending of fighting; knowledge that sister's
love
overrules world's needs.
6. The Ultimate Boon
Given this person's background and experience, what would be the
goal of his
or her quest? What is the ultimate boon for this person? Was there
a stated
goal of the quest? If so has it changed? Has the person learned
more or less
than he or she expected? What are the rewards of this person's
journey? What
relationship does this person now have to his or her own immortality,
gods,
or god-like figures?
End of Season 5. Buffy's death/coma/transformation, achieving
end to
fighting thus peace.
Now you get to fill in the blanks for the next season...
RETURN
1. Refusal of the Return
Does the person refuse to come back to everyday life? Is the person
concerned that their message won't be heard, or that their gifts
will be
unappreciated, or that the wisdom gained can not be communicated?
2. The Magic Flight
Are there obstacles to the person's returning to normal life?
Given this
person's background and experience, what kink or obstacle would
make sense
or be especially difficult or suiting to his or her situation?
Will these
obstacles further enlighten us about either the person, their
quest, or
their boon?
3. Rescue from Without
Must the person be rescued from their journey? Can their original
guides and
assistants still help them?
4. Crossing of the Return Threshold
What marks the person's return to normal life? What challenges
does the
person face in integrating the experience of the quest into his
or her life?
Can/does the person share his or her experiences and the wisdom
gained from
them with others? How do others receive the person upon the return?
5. Master of the Two Worlds
Given this person's background and experience, what would represent
the two
worlds in his or her life? Does this person demonstrate his or
her mastery
of both the spiritual and material, the inner and outer worlds?
6. Freedom to Live
Does the person achieve the ability let go of the fear of death,
to live in
the moment, to neither anticipate the future nor regret the past?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Jackpot! (long) -- Rufus, 22:54:48 05/23/01 Wed
Hey, thanks for the site...it's quite an experience.
I wonder if Buffy will have to go through the Rescue from Without?
That
would make for a great 2 hour season opener.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Nicely done -- darrenK, 05:48:49 05/24/01 Thu
Very cool.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Jackpot! (long) -- mundusmundi, 08:11:55 05/24/01 Thu
Great site. A good book that deals with this subject is Chris
Vogler's _The
Writer's Journey_, which takes Campbell's thesis and applies it
to feature
films. He also abbreviates and clarifies some of the stages, so
it reads a
little more smoothly. It goes like this:
Act One: 1. Ordinary World. 2. Call to Adventure. 3. Refusal of
the Call. 4.
Meeting with the Mentor. 5. Crossing the First Threshold.
Act Two: 6. Tests, Allies, Enemies. 7. Approach to the Inmost
Cave.
Act Three: 8. The Road Back. 9. Resurrection. 10. Return with
the Elixir.
Looks like our heroine is poised right before Resurrection.
Vogler also goes into a lot of detail about Jungian archetypes,
which are
interestingly applied to the Buffyverse: Hero, Mentor, Threshold
Guardian,
Herald, Shapeshifter, Shadow, Trickster. Lots of variations and
blends and
ambiguities there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Jackpot! (long) -- Humanitas, 10:47:58 05/24/01 Thu
Wow! Great post and great site! Thanks for the tip.
Question: would you include the Scoobies under Supernatural help?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Jackpot! (long) -- Solitude1056, 12:51:14 05/24/01
Thu
I did, just because it definitely seems like the Scoobies have
always
represented the "best parts" of Buffy herself: head,
heart, mind, hand, etc,
etc.
And then I went & read purplegirl's original post on heros...
it's a bit
easier (now that we're later in the cycle) but I'm still tempted
to repost
her post just as a corrollary, except that then it'd reveal MY
post for the
pathetic knock-off that it really is.
bwahahahaha. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Spirit, Heart and Mind -- Avatar 2001, 16:08:29
05/29/01 Tue
Willow - Spirit/Spiritus
Xander - Heart/Animus
Giles - Mind/Sophus
From -Primeval
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> hero's journey -- purplegrrl, 14:32:05 05/30/01
Wed
Well, I did have an advantage - I got to hear Christopher Vogler
lecture on
his book "A Writer's Journey" about 15 months ago. (Hey,
repost away!!)
I think it's kind of interesting that when I originally posted
about the
hero's journey I'm not sure that people saw the "big picture"
of how it
applied to the Buffyverse. Well, that and that was when Spike
was starting
to do some rather un-vampire-like things and a lot of people wanted
to
insert Spike into the hero role. We ended up with ATLtS (All Threads
Lead to
Spike).
For me, Spike's role is changeable - villain, trickster, mentor,
gate
guardian, maybe even hero. But the story is about Buffy, she is
the hero.
Now that Buffy has made the ultimate sacrifice for family, friends,
the
world, a lot more people are seeing Buffy's journey as that of
the hero. But
the "Death" in the hero's journey is not necessarily
death of the physical
body. It can be death of an idea, a way of thinking or reacting,
a view of
the world, etc.
We know Buffy will be returning from the dead (but not exactly
how). This is
similar to several Greek myths where someone goes to the underworld
to beg
the release of their loved one (the story of Orpheus is one) -
classic hero
stories. Will this be the way Buffy is returned to us? Who knows.
Maybe
Giles will make this perilous journey to retrieve Buffy. Maybe
Willow will
try (will Tara let her?). Will Buffy come back as Buffy the young
woman (no
super powers or fated duty) or Buffy the Vampire Slayer (hardcore
slayer
since "the best part of her" is now Dawn)?? Will she
gain something useful
from her experience? Will she be able to use that knowledge?
Joss has said that Buffy will be different when she returns, so
I think all
bets are off.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: hero's journey -- LoriAnn, 15:21:51
06/01/01 Fri
If Dawn is made from the best part of Buffy, does that necessarily
mean that
Buffy, herself, is whatever was left over after Dawn was made?
I doubt it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> the best part -- purplegrrl, 07:45:54
06/04/01 Mon
I think what Buffy meant when she said that Dawn was the best
part of her
was that Dawn could be a young woman without having to deal with
all the
weirdness of being the Slayer. Most of Buffy's angst and ruined
relationships stem directly from her duties as the Slayer. As
much as Buffy
has embraced her Slayer-hood, there is still a part of her that
wants to be
a normal, non-superpowered person. She sees Dawn as that part
of herself. To
Buffy that part is the best part of herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Mother Death/Daughter death -- darrenK, 12:54:32 05/24/01
Thu
After reading this post and the TVguide online interview with
Joss, it
occured to me that one of the reasons Joyce died was to show the
audience
that when an ordinary person dies, death is final.
Even in the Buffyverse.
But when a hero dies, that's different. Or will be.
I wonder if Angel clues the Scoobies into the resurrection of
Darla? Or if
Willow performs the resurrection from the Darkest magics?
I just hope it doesn't end up as a Pet Semetary (poor attempt
at the Stephen
King spelling)thing where Buffy is resurrected as some sort of
shuffling,drooling maggot-eaten, half-zombie. Even if she recovers
from
that, it would be too depressing. America already has too few
heros, there's
no need to trash the one we've got. dK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Not all heroes come back. -- Solitude1056, 19:40:32
05/24/01 Thu
Doyle died - and rather poignantly, too, given the short time
he was on the
show - and as a hero, at that. So far (despite significant begging
from
fans), there's been no return. Not all heroes come back. Sheesh,
come to
think of it, just how many have died & returned, short of CPR?
(Which, in my
book, doesn't really count - that's only a few seconds, really.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> None, unless you count Angel's trip to hell
as death! -- Avatar
2001, 16:15:54 05/29/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Mother Death/Daughter death -- maddog, 20:19:24
05/30/01 Wed
What I found interesting in that tvguide article was how Joss
said, Buffy
will be back and we'll explain why she will be back and why Joyce
won't.
Cause that's gonna be huge at first, no matter what way she comes
back the
immediate thought is, well then why not bring Joyce back that
way too. And
then the fallout when Buffy and Dawn realize they can't bring
their mother
back that way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Jackpot! (long) -- Justin, 15:30:15 05/29/01 Tue
Thanks Solitude. I appreciate that list. I printed it and I think
I'll end
up referencing it often for many things.
J
Joss interview on TV Guide.Com
-- rpcvc76, 01:13:34 05/24/01 Thu
I found on tv guide online, that Joss recently answered more questions
about
"The Gift", UPN move, Sarah staying, Buffy being *really*
dead and rotting
in her grave as we speak (his words), and other extra good info.
http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/010524a.asp
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Joss interview on TV Guide.Com -- verdantheart, 06:58:39
05/24/01 Thu
Early October?! Can we wait?!
Well, at least it will give me more time to find some way of getting
UPN!
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Hey, what happened to early return in August?! --
rowan, 19:25:16
05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Joss the god give hope and ... -- purplegrrl, 09:06:59 05/24/01
Thu
Tantalizing interview. Joss gives some straight answers and leaves
others
dangling just out of reach.
I read in another interview (I think BtVS the Offical Magazine)
that Joss
had the end of Season 5 planned since about Season 3.
We're not worthy!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Joss the god give hope and ... -- Humanitas, 10:58:57
05/24/01 Thu
So let me see if I have this straight:
1. Buffy is dead.
2. Death is not final.
3. There's gonna be grieving, and then a litteral resurection
of the slayer,
and all will be explained in an honest, 'real,' non-cheesy way.
AAaugh! Joss makes my brain hurt, and it is good!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Joss the god give hope and ... -- rowan,
19:30:28 05/24/01 Thu
"3. There's gonna be grieving, and then a litteral resurection
of the
slayer, and all will be explained in an honest, 'real,' non-cheesy
way."
Didn't he say rebirth? Maybe there's not a difference, but resurrection
implies something different to me than rebirth. Resurrection almost
means
restoring what was there before, but rebirth means becoming like
a child
again. I feel like there's a clue there to how this will be done
(especially
since her body is rotting, it would be gross to resurrect it),
but I'm too
thick to figure it out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Joss the god give hope and ... --
FanMan, 21:57:54 05/24/01
Thu
Maby the clue is that Joss said the slayer would be ressurected
instead of
saying Buffy?
I'm too thick to add more...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Joss the god gives hope and ... --
purplegrrl, 08:04:47
05/25/01 Fri
And then it's always possible that Joss is using the words "rebirth"
and
"resurrection" interchangably - either to throw us for
a loop or because
that's just what comes out of his mouth at the time.
Should be an interesting ride.
Buffy, you are the weakest link...
goodbye! -- Manoon, 01:47:36 05/24/01 Thu
Of course, I'm only kidding...
hmmmm, so who IS the weakest link, then?
(no, it's NOT Tara!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Weakest links -- LoriAnn, 05:39:10 05/24/01 Thu
Each of the Scoobies is weak in some way or other, even Buffy.
To name one
or another the "weakest link" would be to ignore their
strengths and,
particularly, their strengths combined. Each character performs
a function
in the Scoobies and in the structure of the stories. Anya, for
instance, is
usually comic relief, but this week, although her take-the-
bull-by-the-horns attitude irritated almost everyone, it was she
who got
things off dead center when all anyone could do was get upset
over killing
or not killing Dawn. In her own way, she took Willow's role from
the
previous week. She had the strength to be practical when practicality
was
what was called for.
Each of the SG functions in ways to add to the whole, and the
whole is
greater than the sum of the parts. If there is a weakness, it
is an overall
weakness and probably that they all care too much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I like that answer! Yes I do! :) -- Rob, 07:58:02
05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> hmmm -- Manoon, 09:05:54 05/24/01 Thu
Not really what I meant though. I chose the word 'weakest' cos
I'm a Brit
and you just got our dreadful show with that dreadful woman -
i am SO SO
SORRY!!
anyway, what I was really getting at is many people post often
about who
their FAVOURITE characters are, and why. I was just curious to
know the
other side of the coin.. who is NOT liked (or better: who is LEAST
liked),
and why?
Just as it is a good thing to have favourite characters among
the buffyverse
in general, it's equally valid to not warm to others. It's not
an insult to
the show, to the meanings behind the metaphors we love to interpret,
or to
anyone else's posts...
For example, I'm not a huge fan of Spike's dodgy English accent!
Or Willow
when she witters (tho Assertive Willow is cool). And I feel there
is so much
more Xander can do, so why make him so goofy all the time? I don't
relate
very well to him because of this.
Thats the kind of thing I was getting at, I guess
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: hmmm -- Rob, 09:15:38 05/24/01 Thu
IMO, the weakest link was Riley...I always thought he was whiney
and a
little too possessive over Buffy. That jealousy over Angel was
ridiculous.
Over all, his personality just annoyed me.
But luckily, he was voted off, in a manner of speaking. You are
the weakest
link. Goodbye, Iowa! LOL.
And so right now I love the entire cast to bits and pieces!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: hmmm -- FanMan, 15:07:47 05/24/01
Thu
I agree Rily screwed up; Buffy's love is for everyone. She loves
Angel? no
jealosy from me, I would be happy if Buffy were my friend, even
a smile
would make my day......Sarah has a beutifull smile! Rily was loved
by Buffy,
he complained she did not love him enough.
I would be satisfied with just a smile from Buffy...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: hmmm -- verdantheart, 07:47:25 05/25/01
Fri
How about Spike with a southern accent (as was contemplated)?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> maybe -- Manoon, 08:12:39 05/25/01
Fri
or a nice French accent... or an Indian one! :)
I guess it's not so bad (that means that I am used to it) Druscilla's
UK
voice is MILES more dodgy than his!
Gaining Knowledge/understanding
-- Kerri, 07:47:50 05/24/01 Thu
Bear with me her:
Charaters seem to gain a certain amount of understanding from
being removed
from reality, soctiety, etc. I guess the best way to explain is
by giving
examples:
1)Crazy people: Gain a new perspective by being removed from reality.
Only
people who can see the key. Also there is a sort of wisdom that
seems to
come with being crazy-ex)Tara calling Giles a killer in The Gift.
2) The Desert: The desert is removed from society. It is here
we see the
Spirit quest and the knowledge gained in Restless.
3) Dreams: Again being removed from reality. Well the best example
of corse
is restless, also Buffy has had many dreams that serve as prophesies-ex)
in
season 2 Angel dying, Hush, etc.
4) Death: seems to be as removed as person can get, completely
seperate from
life itself. In Prophesy Girl Buffy died for a few seconds and
when she came
back there was something different: Xander tells her she's still
weak and
she say no she feel good, strong, there was some enlightenment
that came
from that moment of death.
I'd have to imagine a great deal of knowledge, understanding,
enlightenment
will come to Buffy as a result of her death. However, this may
not be
knowledge meant to be in this world, and it will be interesting
to see how
Buffy is changed when she returns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Gaining Knowledge/understanding -- Rufus, 12:49:27 05/24/01
Thu
I find that the insane frighten us because even though removed
from reality
they often say things that make complete sense. You can't get
much further
from reality than death. What will Buffys experience of death
be? With Angel
we know he was removed from this reality but he didn't "die"....will
she see
her mother...not want to come back? In FFL Buffy feared the death
that has
chased her from season one. In dying that is the one fear she
will
conquer....you can't fear death when you know what is to come....unless
you
went somewhere very unpleasant.
Read this: Joss' interview w/
TV Guide about what's gonna happen next
season... -- Rob, 09:09:39 05/24/01 Thu
Here's the link where I got the interview from:
http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/
-------------------------------------------------------
TVGO: First off, is Buffy really dead?
Whedon: Yes. She's rotting in her grave even as we speak.
TVGO: But Sarah's coming back?
Whedon: Yes.
TVGO: You can understand how some people might be confused...
Whedon: Yes.
TVGO: Are you worried about alienating viewers by bringing her
back from the
dead? I mean, we saw the tombstone.
Whedon: Yes, I'm always worried about that. The point is, you
have to take
it seriously and pay it homage and make it as hard and strange
for the
people in the show as it is for the audience to accept. Then you
earn it.
TVGO: If you bring Buffy back, then why couldn't you also bring
back Joyce?
Whedon: You could, but we'll explain why.
TVGO: What's the craziest Buffy resurrection scenario you've heard
in the
last 48 hours?
Whedon: Buffy shows up in an alternate universe, but I don't think
that's a
good idea.
TVGO: You already know how this will be resolved, then?
Whedon: We've had next season planned out for a long time - before
we even
knew we were changing networks.
TVGO: Do you think, in retrospect, it's a little confusing? First
Buffy
leaves the WB, and now Buffy is dead. Some fans are wondering
if the show is
over.
Whedon: It's our job this summer to make people aware that Buffy
- starring
Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy - is coming back on UPN next fall.
And I'm
just gonna keep saying it to everybody I meet and every chance
I get, and
UPN is going to start advertising it today. We'll get the word
out.
TVGO: Do you think the WB purposely added that farewell message
at the end
of the episode to further confuse people?
Whedon: You know, it was sort of incredibly classy and slightly
underhanded.
The whole "Series Finale" thing has been a little cheesy,
but actually, I
was pretty touched when I saw the message. The fact of the matter
is they
didn't say, "Goodbye. It's over." They said, "Thank
you." So, at the end of
the day, I thought that was kind of nice.
TVGO: If and when the day comes that Sarah leaves the show, would
you
retitle it Dawn the Vampire Slayer?
Whedon: What I would do with it is hard to say, but that's certainly
a show
I'd watch. Michelle [Trachtenberg] is a powerhouse. I have the
best ensemble
that I could ever hope to work with. It could happen, but if it
did, it
wouldn't be for years because Sarah's coming back.
TVGO: Did anyone else die during the climax? Anya looked like
she was in
pretty bad shape.
Whedon: She's OK, she made it.
TVGO: What was up with Giles killing Ben? Is that going to be
the beginning
of a trend?
Whedon: No, that's just the thing he had to do. And you know,
Giles will be
recurring next year instead of a regular because [Anthony Stewart
Head is]
going to live in England. We're working on a BBC [spinoff] show
for [that
character]. So, it's a side of Giles you're more likely to see
on his show
than you are on Buffy. But, it's not like he's going to become
an evil
killer or anything.
TVGO: Does Ben's death mean Glory is dead too?
Whedon: Yeah, it does.
TVGO: Whose voice was telling Spike to go rescue Dawn? It was
a very Star
Wars-type moment.
Whedon: It was Willow... Just yet another example of how Willow's
power is
increasing.
TVGO: Given that Buffy's death factored into Angel's finale, won't
you have
to kick off the season with some type of WB/UPN crossover?
Whedon: No, I really won't. And I'm not entirely sure that either
network
would want to. Not that Angel won't be dealing with the idea of
Buffy's
death and her rebirth, but the fact is, he's on his own now. He's
at the big
scary network by himself and he's going to have other very pressing
matters
to deal with.
TVGO: So you won't pick up Angel next fall where the season finale
left off?
Whedon: No. Like we usually do, it will be a few months later.
TVGO: Do you know the date of Buffy's two-hour premiere?
Whedon: I don't know the date. I believe we're looking at early
October, but
nothing's been set.
TVGO: Will Amber Benson (Tara) be added to the opening credits
next season?
Whedon: No, Amber's going to stay at a recurring status. But she
will, like
this year, be in most of the shows.
TVGO: Any other cast changes on Buffy?
Whedon: Apart from Giles becoming a recurring character? No.
-----------------------------------------------------
A lot of information to process! LOL. I personally am even more
intrigued
about how they'll bring Buffy back than before. I'm especially
interested to
know why Buffy could be brought back, but Joyce can't.
And I'm also still wondering why Amber won't be in the opening
credits...James got in the opening credits only 2 or 3 weeks after
the chip
was implanted, Michelle, on her 2nd episode had her name in the
credits,
Mark midseason did also, Anya got onto the credits finally this
season...Why
not Amber already?
Anyway, any of you guys have any thoughts on the stuff I raised
questions
about or anything in the article in general?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Oops! I made a little goof... -- Rob, 09:11:20 05/24/01
Thu
I said all the actors' names for getting on opening credits, but
said "Anya"
instead of "Emma." Not a big deal, but just thought
I should fix that... :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Oops! I made a little goof... -- Manoon, 09:18:20
05/24/01 Thu
So Tara ISN'T going to be on the main credits, she's again resigned
to
'recurring character' mode, but will be in most of the episodes..
why? I
don't get it?
Hasn't she earned full status already? I was convinced she had
a greater
part to play next season (although thinking about it, she did
feature well
from the second half of series 5 onwards) to be the light to Willows
coming
darkness... now I am a little less confident :(
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Come on, Joss! We want more Tara!!! -- Rob,
09:29:40 05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Recurring Tara -- Humanitas, 11:11:06 05/24/01
Thu
I'm not sure, but I think there are usually contract issues involved
in this
sort of thing. Anyone know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Don't get it. Wish the interviewer had asked
the obvious followup ?
-- Wiccagrrl, 21:47:12 05/24/01 Thu
Why???
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Don't get it. Wish the interviewer
had asked the obvious
followup ? -- purplegrrl, 08:41:35 05/25/01 Fri
Maybe recurring character status is at Amber's request. She has
other
interests. She recently filmed an independent film (with James
Marsters if I
remember correctly). And she is supposed to write a Buffy comic
for Dark
Horse.
Maybe it's just a case of too many irons in too many fires and
she doesn't
want to stretch herself too thin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Don't get it. Wish the interviewer
had asked the obvious
followup ? -- verdantheart, 09:20:36 05/25/01 Fri
That's Chance, a comedy, classified as in production at imdb.com,
for those
interested.
Themes for Next Season (spoilery
and long-winded) -- mundusmundi, 10:14:23
05/24/01 Thu
POTENTIALLY SPOILERY AND TEDIOUSLY LONG-WINDED ;)....
This year, like all Buffy years, we've seen some recurring themes:
family,
mortality, duality, sacrifice, and other motifs mentioned by many
of you in
many excellent posts. Any ideas for what might emerge next season?
Here are
a few personal thoughts:
1. Disunity. Now that the Slayer is gone, however temporarily,
what happens
to the rest of the group? We've seen this play out before -- the
start of
B3, with Buffy's self-imposed exile and friction-packed return,
and B5, with
college-life and the Initiative creating barriers between the
Gang -- but
this may be the strongest test yet on the glue that holds the
Scoobs'
together.
2. The Evil Within. Many of the gang have dark sides that have
the potential
to be unleashed. Willow's witchery, Anya (still brooding over
her line from
_Restless_: "This'll be a big year for vengeance"),
Giles's Ripperocity,
Spike, natch. Even Buffy, when she returns: What will her moral
compass be?
3. Cheating (and Cheapening) Death. Some have already expressed
the
understandable worry that B's return, however it's done, will
cheapen the
sacrifice. Knowing Joss -- creatively-speaking, not personally
;) -- he will
likely address this issue within the show itself. That it's going
to happen,
one way or another, makes it seem likely to be a big theme, maybe
*the*
theme next season. And finally...
4. Duty. Will Buffy still be the Slayer? Will she still want to
be? Will she
have to contend with a new Slayer and what will her response be?
(I know,
I've read some folks claim that for whatever reason a new Slayer
can't or
won't be activated, but frankly I don't see Joss letting the opportunity
pass by.)
Looking forward to your ideas, and to next season....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded) --
Malandanza,
10:56:21 05/24/01 Thu
Except for the disunity issue, I agree with everything you've
said.
Unity: I think that Buffy's death will serve to bring the Scoobies
closer
together. There is potential for chaos (consider Xander's comment
about
smart girls being sexy and Willow's flirtatious response) but
disunity has
been done. Even in the Xander/Willow area, as soon as Anya and
Xander are
married, the sublimated romance between them will finally be at
an end. And
there's dawn to consider -- what happens to her? will Child Protective
Services finally track down Hank (and if they do, why would he
move to
Sunnydale?) or will she end up a ward of the court? She could
be adopted by
a married couple (like Anya and Xander), but I don't really see
another way
to keep her on the show. More than anything else, Dawn's continued
presence
would keep the group together. (By the way, even if Buffy returns,
she'll be
legally dead and unable to gain custody of Dawn).
Evil Within: Particularly where Willow is concerned. Previously,
Buffy, Oz
and Tara have expressed grave concerns about her magic -- but
now that
Willow's magic has been instrumental in saving the world, they
can no longer
argue about its danger. essentially, she has carte blanche to
continue to
delve into Darkest Magicks. I don't think Buffy will return dark
(although I
would definately be interested in seeing a darker Buffy), instead,
I think
she will return as an even purer version of herself.
Cheating/Cheapening Death: It's hard to imagine how they could
do the series
with Buffy dead but keeping SMG on the show -- Ok, they could
do a
retrospective one week, some dream sequences, the Buffybot (yuck!),
they
could even have an episode where the Scoobies sit around wondering
"What
Would Buffy Do?", then have a seance to find out. But, eventually,
they have
to bring her back -- and bring her back in such a way that it
is clear that
Buffy's is a one-time only ressurrection. However she returns,
her sacrifice
has been cheapened. Balancing this is that we might get insights
into the
afterlife in the Buffyverse when she returns from the "undiscovered
country." And she becomes a hero like Heracles or Odysseus
once she's
complete her trip to the underworld.
Duty: I'd like to see a return of Buffy without her powers. I
have a problem
with yet another slayer being called and Buffy still keeping her
powers --
three slayers? Actually, I think another slayer will be called
-- here's
why: Initially, Buffy had the connection with the First Slayer
-- she lost
it when she briefly died (but kept the powers). Kendra then had
that
connection. At this point, if Buffy had died, another slayer would
not have
been called. Kendra's death passed the connection on to Faith,
who, because
she did not have Kendra's training or Buffy's force of spirit,
was more
susceptible to the influence of the First Slayer, and, thus, a
darker
slayer. Buffy reconnected to the First Slayer in season 4, severing
Faith's
connection in the process -- now Buffy has the dark impulses while
Faith has
a chance to atone. If Faith dies, I don't think a new slayer will
be called
(Buffy has stolen Faith's birthright)-- but I do think that Buffy's
death
will call the next slayer. Perhaps Buffy will be the watcher for
her new
protege.
Oh, and you're not long-winded on this board until you reach your
5th page
of writing :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- Rob, 12:29:38
05/24/01 Thu
I found your comments very interesting, but I have a few problems
with them.
Firstly, I don't agree that it cheapens Buffy's sacrifice were
she to come
back. Or it depends on how it is done. I will reserve my judgment
for next
season. However, considering that Joss has had the entire outcome
planned
for a long time, I see Buffy's death as a predestined occurence
that is
necessary for her to complete her hero's journey. Many heroes
in mythology
had to go down into the "belly of the beast," i.e. die
to be reborn stronger
and greater. When they sacrifice themselves, they do not know
they will be
able to return. Buffy jumped with no knowledge for all we know
that she has
any way of returning. Therefore, her return I think should be
considered a
reward for this self-sacrifice, not a cheapening.
I also disagree with your opinion that Buffy's death will call
on another
slayer, although we'll have to wait to see for that as well. We
have seen on
the show that the Slayer powers are not a single force that occupies
one
girl, then goes onto another when that one dies, evidenced by
the fact that
when Buffy was revived, she retained the Slayer powers even when
Kendra was
called. After Kendra's death, Faith had the slayer powers. I don't
believe
her "going bad" prevents Faith from being the one to
call the next slayer,
for two reasons: (1) Faith has begun to redeem herself now. (2)
Presumably,
only one girl can pass on the powers when she dies, or from now
on there
will be 2 slayers. If it were anything else, Buffy could be killed,
revived,
killed, revived, etc just in order to bring forth a whole army
of Slayers,
each one of whom would have the power to call a slayer themselves.
I don't
think it could possibly work that way, or it would have already
been done.
No, I believe each slayer can die only once in order to fit into
the rules
of then calling another slayer. If they are revived, they fit
outside the
accepted rules. They can, as Buffy was up till now, continue to
fight and
protect the world as the Slayer, but their death will not call
another.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Spoiler from another source... -- Wisewoman,
14:52:58 05/24/01
Thu
How consistent is Joss within the various segments of the Buffyverse?
The
reason I'm asking is that I read an interview where he spoke about
writing a
Buffy-related comic book that would take place 300 years in the
future, and
centre around the FIRST slayer to be called since Buffy Summers
(which right
there is inconsistent, because of Kendra and Faith...)
Of course, he could just have been joking, but under what circumstances
would there be no need for a new slayer for 300 years? Buffy comes
back
immortal and lives that long? All the vampires die of some sort
of plague
and there's no need for a slayer? Gotta love that Joss, he always
keeps me
guessing... ;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy returning -- FanMan, 16:35:14
05/24/01 Thu
"You think you know what you are, what is to come. You haven't
even begun"
Buffy is on the path of self/slayer discovery that other slayers
chose not
to follow or did not survive long enough to start. She has shown
a
willingness to seek more than the lameness of the WC line of the
Slayers
being servants of the Watchers. Her story is a modern eqivilant
of the
mythic hero stories of legend. Ressurecting a slayer who is simply
a warrior
would be cheap; Buffy has allways presurved her humanity and now
she has
moved on to the spiritual aspects of slayerness so she is a heroic
figure
beyond the normal heroism of the "average slayer" and
ressurecting her is
not cheap. I am curious how it will be done and if it will be
slightly
cheesy, however since Joss planned this for two years he has had
a loooooong
time to figure out somthing that will make sense...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy returning -- Rufus, 17:27:36
05/24/01 Thu
Hey! Maybe that's what the chees man really represents....all
the fan
complaints of cheesy endings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cheese man was a warning
that there would be
"something cheesy going on" -- FanMan, 19:02:16 05/24/01
Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy returning -- rowan,
19:22:26 05/24/01 Thu
Yes, I thought the cheese man was Joss's little joke on us and
our fear of
cheesiness (inexplicably spelled with a z as he said in one interview).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> future slayer -- purplegrrl, 09:19:07
05/25/01 Fri
Concerning the Slayer comic Joss is writing for Dark Horse:
As I understand it there is a point in the future inwhich vampires,
demons,
etc., no longer exist in this dimension - due to a plague or magic
happening
or ??? (I don't think this has been detailed yet). Because of
this lack of
evil that needs fighting, Slayers are no longer being called/chosen
and the
Watchers Council turns into a pack of "jibbering idiots."
About 300 years in
the future, vampires start reappearing in this dimension. A Slayer
is
called, but she has no training and no real concept of what her
role is.
And then the story unfolds.
The first installment should be out soon - if I remember correctly.
Check
your local comic store.
(BTW, I think Joss saying she is the first Slayer called since
Buffy is just
some convenient shorthand so we understand where the story is
coming from.
It would be harder to grasp if Joss said she was the first Slayer
called
since Slayer X (a Slayer some time after Faith). Or maybe Buffy
really will
be resurrected as immortal!! With Joss you never know! ;) )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- Jack
Shadow, 21:48:25 05/24/01 Thu
It seems to me that one interpretation of "death is your
gift" is just that
- by dieing Buffy can create other slayers. She has, after all,
done this
once, so there is really no reason it couldn't happen again. Somehow
the
magical rules that create slayers require something arbitrary,
like the
heart to stop or perhaps even the soul to leave the body. Apparently
this
happened to Buffy, with the result that Kendra was activated.
I could see a
plot line like this:
a)Buffy comes back from the underworld, maybe via the Valet. It
would
certainly seem that Angel is owed a life. Joss said it was cheesy
and this
is - laid out in advance but probably too easy.
b)Another slayer in some far off place has been activated, say,
China or
Europe. Faith is still a slayer.
c)Buffy is a plain old person now, but Dawn is still the Key,
whatever that
means, Willow is a big-time witch, etc.
d)Buffy feels really really out of it; normality is a huge bore
and she has
no real life anyway
e)Buffy takes up with Spike for solace
f)Buffy gets vamped by Spike at her request and cursed by Willow
g)Buffy is back as the vampire vampire slayer. At this point,
I don't think
there is much likelyhood of her ever being really happy again.
h)Season 7 ends with Buffy really dieing in some act that has
the effect of
wiping out all vampires, including her and Spike. Angel has become
human by
this point - he has an easy way out via the demon blood. We pretty
much know
that this is how Joss intends to end the series to set up the
background for
the comic.
The alternative way to run it is she is still a slayer when she
comes back,
just like the first time. Different stories follow, but we still
end up with
the same end at the close of season seven (big mojo wipes out
all vampires).
In any case, I've never understood where all this "single
line of slayers"
stuff comes from other than the "one girl in the world"
pitch line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Army of Slayers -- Malandanza, 20:03:53
05/25/01 Fri
"I also disagree with your opinion that Buffy's death will
call on another
slayer, although we'll have to wait to see for that as well. We
have seen on
the show that the Slayer powers are not a single force that occupies
one
girl, then goes onto another when that one dies, evidenced by
the fact that
when Buffy was revived, she retained the Slayer powers even when
Kendra was
called. After Kendra's death, Faith had the slayer powers. I don't
believe
her "going bad" prevents Faith from being the one to
call the next slayer,
for two reasons: (1) Faith has begun to redeem herself now. (2)
Presumably,
only one girl can pass on the powers when she dies, or from now
on there
will be 2 slayers. If it were anything else, Buffy could be killed,
revived,
killed, revived, etc just in order to bring forth a whole army
of Slayers,
each one of whom would have the power to call a slayer themselves.
I don't
think it could possibly work that way, or it would have already
been done.
No, I believe each slayer can die only once in order to fit into
the rules
of then calling another slayer. If they are revived, they fit
outside the
accepted rules. They can, as Buffy was up till now, continue to
fight and
protect the world as the Slayer, but their death will not call
another."
I agree that only one girl's death will call the next slayer.
I do not think
it is reasonable to assume that no slayer has ever been revived
before
Buffy. If each slayer's death called another slayer, we should
have more
than two, perhaps dozens (or even an "Army of Slayers,"
if some clever, but
evil, watcher decided to revive his slayer over and over for the
good of the
world). The slayer powers, once granted, cannot be revoked --
hence Buffy
still possesed all the slayer abilities after her death. But the
ability to
call the next slayer passes to the next slayer. thus, there is
only one
"legitimate" slayer, the one whose death calls the next
-- the one with the
connection, not to TPTB, but to the First Slayer.
The First Slayer is not about saving the world, she is about death.
She
sleeps on a bed of bones (presumably, not vampire bones) and her
gift is
death. Far from Faith having "gone bad," I believe Faith
was closer to the
First Slayer than Buffy ever was. Until those pesky moral ambiguities
settled in, Faith was all about the slaying. After the joining
ritual, I
believe Buffy inadvertantly reconnected herself to the First Slayer,
and
severed Faith's ties, reestablishing Buffy as the legitimate slayer.
Thus,
Buffy's death, rather than Faith's, will call the next slayer.
Supporting
this view is the manner in which Buffy began acting this season
-- much more
in touch with the darker side of slaying. There were some definite
Faith-like moments this season (hunting vamps, then snuggling
up next to
Riley, torching the Vamp Brothel and massacring the vamps, casually
snapping
the neck of a demon).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- rowan,
19:20:07 05/24/01 Thu
"Unity: I think that Buffy's death will serve to bring the
Scoobies closer
together. There is potential for chaos (consider Xander's comment
about
smart girls being sexy and Willow's flirtatious response) but
disunity has
been done. Even in the Xander/Willow area, as soon as Anya and
Xander are
married, the sublimated romance between them will finally be at
an end. And
there's dawn to consider -- what happens to her? will Child Protective
Services finally track down Hank (and if they do, why would he
move to
Sunnydale?) or will she end up a ward of the court? She could
be adopted by
a married couple (like Anya and Xander), but I don't really see
another way
to keep her on the show."
I agree. I think there will be strong unity (which will now include
Spike,
although some members of SG will have fears of him reverting if
chip fails).
I too puzzle over Dawn. If ASH is in less eps, I don't see Giles
as a
guardian. Plus, you wonder if DCS would give a 15 year old girl
as a ward to
a 45 year old single man. Xander and Anya appear to be the best
possibility
for guardians, other than Hank. I suspect if Hank is found and
Dawn must
reside elsewhere, Spike will go along for the ride. Or perhaps
Dawn will
rebel and run. I can visualize Dawn wanting to live in Spike's
crypt and
stay one step ahead of DCS, but I imagine the entire SG will want
her to
have as normal a life as possible, which would not include Spike's
crypt.
I wonder if Joss will spend any time on Dawn's situation at all,
or if S6
will start with it all as accomplished fact?
"(By the way, even if Buffy returns, she'll be legally dead
and unable to
gain custody of Dawn)."
Assuming that they actually reported her death to the authorities!
(guess
they had to in order to get a death certificate to bury her).
I wonder what
that scene looked like. "Umm, officer, you see, there was
this portal...."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- Anthony*,
19:51:10 05/24/01 Thu
Hey, it's Sunnydale--wouldn't you like to have a copy of its daily
obituaries?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And what the heck happened to the dragon?!
-- rowan, 19:54:11
05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> This is the story I heard... --
OnM, 15:45:57 05/26/01 Sat
He paid a visit to a couple of studios in Hollywood, but found
that nobody
wanted to hire him because it was cheaper to do a CGI dragon than
to feed
him every day. (Eating one of the studio heads in a fit of pique
didn't help
his case either).
Rumor now has it he's off to Japan to see what Godzilla is up
to.
(Well, inquiring minds want to know, you know?)
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded) --
rowan, 19:10:24
05/24/01 Thu
"1. Disunity. Now that the Slayer is gone, however temporarily,
what happens
to the rest of the group? We've seen this play out before -- the
start of
B3, with Buffy's self-imposed exile and friction-packed return,
and B5, with
college-life and the Initiative creating barriers between the
Gang -- but
this may be the strongest test yet on the glue that holds the
Scoobs'
together."
Unfortunately, I have no brilliant ideas to offer, other than
to speculuate
on disunity. I thought that S4 was about disharmony & the drifting
apart of
the SG. I'm speculating that Joss would probably not repeat that
in quite
the same way.
Joss has said in interviews that the season will show the SG "without
buffers" and having to realize they are the adults (and perhaps
aren't doing
such a great job at it). We also know that ASH is going to be
in less eps
since he's moving back to the UK. This also fits in with the "no
buffer"
idea. I'm wondering if the SG will stay close together, but will
encounter
alot of obstacles in dealing with adulthood that they will have
to solve
together. My gut feeling is that they will live according to Buffy's
words
-- love each other & take care of each other.
If Buffy doesn't return immediately, a major test will be dealing
with Dawn.
Who does she live with? After all, everyone else is independent,
but a 15
year old minor must have a guardian.
Also, Anya and Xander are planning a weddding. This is another
major
transition to adulthood which the group will encounter. And after
marriage
comes...babies!
Looks like it could be a very interesting season.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- Solitude1056,
20:13:33 05/24/01 Thu
There were also comments, about a month or two ago?, in some Joss
interview
that AH has asked for some time off next season... so there will
be a
stretch of 4 or 5 episodes in which she'll be gone. I don't recall
him
saying why or how or even what for in terms of AH herself. I think
the
comment was more to describe his willingness as a boss to allow
his
employees freedom to explore other avenues instead of chaining
them to the
set for all 22 episodes.
But... it still raises some issues about who could be there for
Dawn, and I
can't help but wonder why no one has suggested Tara? She's (supposedly)
a
year older than the Scoobies, and has no ties to home. Xander
& Anya might
be potential material if it weren't for the fact that Anya clearly
gets on
Dawn's nerves sometimes, Anya's not used to sisters or sharing
space other
than with Xander...
If Buffy is just "gone" one day & that's that - no official
word - then Dawn
could feasibly stay with Tara (assuming Hank stays absent - hey,
it's more
of that "what does Joss have against Dads?" routine).
As far as Child
Protection Services would be concerned, Dawn is going to school
and appears
to be fed & washed regularly. They'd have no reason to question
it
otherwise, since the last word was that the authorities would
be contacted
if Dawn were not "brought into line," so to speak -
implying that good Dawn
= no CPS. If Dawn straightens up & flies right, and Buffy's absence
isn't
mentioned to any officials, then I'd see no reason that CPS would
have to
question Dawn's home condition.
That'd be my suggestion on how it could be handled, since I don't
get the
impression that our faithful Scooby family takes too kindly to
outsiders
pushing in on their affairs... especially those who tend towards
the
boneheaded end of the authoritative spectrum (think Synder).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Themes for Next Season (spoilery and long-winded)
-- Isabel,
21:09:05 05/27/01 Sun
I've been wondering about what's going to happen to Dawn too.
I don't think you can have a grave without a death certificate.
Wouldn't her
friends consider it a violation of her memory to just tote away
her body and
hide her death? "She saved the world a lot," is that
the epitath of someone
you stick in a car trunk and bury in the woods? It's not like
they're afraid
she wouldn't be buried in hallowed ground because she's a suicide.
Yes, she
saved the world, but the authorities won't understand that.
As for not telling anyone that Buffy's dead and having the Scoobies
take
Dawn, difficult to manage. Do they revive the Buffybot to be Dawn's
'official' guardian and have Willow and Tara move in with them?
1) The 'Bot
would have to not be too badly damaged by Glory and repairable
by Willow. 2)
They'd have to think of it very soon after Buffy's death. They
looked too
torn up with grief to be thinking about much. Plus, none of them
would be
able to publicly mourn her if that were the case.
Let's face it, no matter what we, as viewers, know or think we
know, to the
Scoobies Buffy is not coming back so there is no reason to conceal
her death
so her legal identity is preserved with the authorities. Maybe
if Buffy made
out a will naming one of her friends as Dawn's guardian if something
happened to her Social Services might allow it, depending on who
it is. I
agree that a 15 year girl would not be allowed to live with a
single man in
his 40's, no matter how respectable. And what about a (seemingly)
25 year
old single man who is also an immigrant, unemployed, and homeless
with a
strange allergy to sunlight. NOT! Willow and Tara are both in
college and
how can they both go to college and take care of Dawn? Xander
and Anya,
despite possible personality clashes, are the closest thing the
Scoobies
have as guardians of Dawn.
Isabel
Article from the Washington Post
-- Solitude1056, 10:28:30 05/24/01 Thu
Nyah-Nyah, UPN: WB Makes Things Tough for 'Buffy' Fans
By Lisa de Moraes
We know that Buffy didn't really die at the close of Tuesday night's
season
finale -- because the WB network is still trying real hard to
kill her off
before her move to UPN in the fall.
Z WB is about to announce that it won't run "Buffy the Vampire
Slayer" on
Tuesday nights this summer after all.
"Buffy" has been a Tuesday TV institution for years.
Instead, WB will bounce "Buffy" around its prime-time
schedule like a
ping-pong ball all summer long. The "Buffy" spinoff
"Angel," now airing
Tuesdays at 9, will be yanked off the night, too, and sent packing
to
Mondays at 9, where it's supposed to go this fall.
The idea here is to break "Buffy" fans of their Tuesday
viewing habit before
the hit drama moves to UPN this fall. UPN execs announced to advertisers
last week that the network would keep "Buffy" in its
longtime Tuesday slot
so as to keep viewer confusion to a minimum when the show switches
networks.
WB, however, wants them to be confused. Earlier this month, after
haggling
for months with the show's production house, 20th Century Fox
TV, over the
price tag, WB lost "Buffy" to rival UPN. Last week,
during WB's unveiling of
its prime-time schedule for the 2001-02 TV season, an exec stood
up in front
of hundreds of advertisers and said the network wasn't broken
up over the
loss because the show was beginning to skew a tad old -- not enough
teen
viewers for WB. To prove the point, the WB exec announced that
"Buffy" would
be replaced in the fall with the series "Gilmore Girls,"
whose star Alexis
Bledel, 18, is a full five years younger than "Buffy"
lead Sarah Michelle
Gellar.
(Gellar must have seen this one coming; she had, after all, turned
24 last
month, which puts her more than halfway into WB's 12-34 target
demo with her
best years behind her.)
At that same presentation, WB announced that it would run Wednesday
movie
night this summer, using titles from parent company AOL Time Warner's
considerable flick library. But WB brass apparently changed their
minds
after UPN suits announced a couple of days later that they had
bought not
only "Buffy" but also "Roswell" -- another
WB drama produced by 20th Century
Fox -- and scheduled them both on Tuesday night next season. This
week,
however, WB has decided to make its summer Wednesday movie its
summer
Tuesday movie instead.
So, on June 4, "Angel" makes the move to Mondays, replacing
the UPN-bound
"Roswell," which WB will not air in reruns this summer
for reasons too
obvious to explain.
WB's "Flix From the Frog" movie night will debut June
5 with the broadcast
of the feature film "I Know What You Did Last Summer,"
which, not
coincidentally, co-starred Gellar -- when she was much younger,
of course.
Then, on June 6, "Buffy" gets booted to her first stop
on the schedule:
Wednesdays at 9, replacing "Felicity."
A WB spokesman said the change of plans on the summer movie night
wasn't
about messing with "Buffy" but "really about inventory
and getting 'Gilmore
Girls' over there [on Tuesday] at the right time."
And noted various TV industry executives, if WB really wanted
to deep-six
"Buffy," they'd putting it on Sunday night.
That hasn't happened -- yet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The WB is only proving how fearful they should be... --
Rob, 10:45:29
05/24/01 Thu
Logically, if the WB is so certain that "Buffy" is for
an older demographic
now, and that it was the right choice to leave it behind, why
are they
bothering to move it to Wednesday nights at 9? If they were so
certain that
their channel was mostly based on teen ratings and they are equally
certain
that many teens stopped watching the show, they would not need
to lamely
attempt to break up the viewers' Tuesday night Buffy ritual. These
teens,
according to them, have already stopped watching and thus do not
need any
further discouragement. Hey, it's their logic, not mine! What
they are
actually proving is that they are fearful that the people in their
key
demographic will bail on them and move over to UPN.
The fact is that Tuesday night at 8 is Buffy night. People who
watch the WB
have known that for years. Therefore, in great likelihood, those
who do not
know Buffy has moved, will turn on the television, see that teeny-bopper
show, "Gilmore Girls" and turn off in disgust. At least,
that's what I'm
hoping! If they were smart, they would have done something like
keep
"Roswell," and put it on up against "Buffy."
A cult hit like "Buffy," which
many "Buffy" fans watch, that could have cut into some
of Buffy's viewers.
Instead, the WB let go of 2 of their big cult hits, and I predict
that their
ratings will plummet a great deal because of that. The only one
left now is
"Angel," which, when you think about it, is aimed at
an even slightly older
demographic than "Buffy." After all, none of the characters
are in college.
Hell, the main character is over 200 years old! It is also darker.
Why then
place it after the feel-good family show of the century, "7th
Heaven"?!? It
just doesn't make sense. The WB's reasoning is absurd at worst,
and a
desperate struggle to stay alive at best.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Plus no Roswell reruns -- Elizabeth, 10:56:37 05/24/01
Thu
I already screwed up taping two episodes, and they didn't even
have reruns
in mid-season. I hope UPN may pick up Roswell reruns to promote
the show for
the fall???
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: WB Execs are not thinking right -- FanMan,
14:54:57 05/24/01
Thu
I am 28 and Buffy is my favorite show.
So the WB is losing teen viewers? The WB was the new kid on the
block, and
had a good market strategy. Teens are fickle, not stupid. Teens
have just as
much desire for quality as adults. The WB needs quality shows
that teens can
relate to if they want that demographic. Buffy is like the X-Files,
Star
Trek, and a few others; it will still be watched and rewatched
for decades
after the last episode airs because it is multifaceted and you
need to see
many episodes to really understand how complex Joss can be. It
is still a
show with a fringe viewing demographic; the only reason many people
watched
the WB is because of BUFFY. The WB could have switched focus to
adult shows
and it would be good to keep BUFFY at the same time because BUFFY
is now a
more adult and grey show like reality that adults deal with: kids
have a
simple view of reality until they grow up and see that there are
many greys
in choices.....well smart people figure out that painfull truth(grin)
BUFFY has many adult viewers and teens who grew up loving it are
now close
to collage age and haveing some real spending money so keeping
the show
would have kept those viewers loyal at a time they are a better
marketing
demographic(17-22) than teens whose income is an allowance or
very part time
work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: WB Execs are not thinking right --
Cynthia, 16:55:35
05/24/01 Thu
If WB Execs are hoping that all of BTVS fans are going to turn
on at 8 p.m.
on Tuesday come fall, they idiots. Haven't they heard of the interet,
fanboards, chatrooms. 99.9% of BTVS are going to be watching Buffy,
not
turning WB to watch Buffy and in a supposed stupor (I guess they
think we've
to "old" to turn the channels) watch Gilmore Girls.
And, I guess, the execs have never heard of vcrs or tivo's either.
I've
faithly watched two shows that are on at the same time for years.
The days
of just one show, one time period are long gone. I wonder when
the TV execs
are going to realize that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful they should
be... -- rowan,
19:02:00 05/24/01 Thu
Okay, wait a minute. The Gilmore Girls is not a teeny-bopper show,
even if
that article gave the impression it is. It's actually a show that
appeals to
an older female demographic, because it's really more focused
on a 30
something single woman raising a daughter.
But I think you're right that WB is trying to suck people into
another show
by putting it in Buffy's timeslot. The Gilmore Girls would actually
be a
better fit after 7th Heaven, and if the WB wasn't so interested
in playing
games, they'd realize that.
I don't understand this messing with the reruns. With a non-mainstream
show
like BtVS, I can't imagine that the loyal core fanbase is going
to be lost
by this type of obvious shell game.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful they
should be... --
Anthony8, 19:42:04 05/24/01 Thu
I really wonder about the so-called demographics cited by networks
in their
promotion and scheduling of shows. I think that the WB seriously
misread
BTVS' demographic. I believe it has a much broader age and gender
appeal
than they ever realized. Gilmore Girls too. It is obvious from
this message
board that, at least here, viewers are interested in quality storytelling
and non-pandering entertainment. I wouldn't be surprised if you
sat down a
group of intelligent viewers of any age or gender background (I
won't
include ethnicity because there is still a long, long way to go
regarding
that) and find that they would like BTVS, Gilmore Girls, The West
Wing, and
maybe even a sitcom like Seinfeld. Quality writing crosses demographics,
but
I think that is way too complicated for network executives to
comprehend and
quantify. After all those people are bean counters not creative
types.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful
they should be... --
rowan, 19:53:01 05/24/01 Thu
I agree. I think BtVS is totally mis-marketed. It is a show that
can really
appeal to an older audience. I have now forced my brother (30),
mother (69),
and best friend (34) to watch an ep. I have converted them all
to loyal
fans. They marketing had turned them off, until I could convince
them to
watch an ep. BtVS comes out of the same tradition (for me at least)
as JRR
Tolkien, CS Lewis, etc. Even Harry Potter appeals to both children
and
adults.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful
they should be... --
Anthony8, 20:26:38 05/24/01 Thu
Similar demographic here--mother (58) and best friend (32). I've
been trying
to get my father interested since he has always been interested
in Joseph
Campbell-type studies of mythology, but he's not a big TV watcher
these
days. Someday I'll have to sit him down in front of a vcr and
give him a
"Best of" showing.
There has been enough attention in the media (Matt Rousch of TV
Guide and
Joyce Millman of salon.com, to name two) drawing attention to
the quality
viewing that BTVS is that you would think the network executives
would have
eventually caught a clue as to how to promote the show to a broad
audience.
Oh well.
By the way, Tim Goodman is a writer for the San Francisco Chronicle
who
mentions BTVS at least once a week in his various reviews and
editorials.
Most recently, he wrote an article for the Sunday Datebook section
that
lamented the lack of truly complex characters in dramatic TV today
and cited
Buffy as perhaps the only one left worth watching.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful
they should be... --
Rufus, 21:10:16 05/24/01 Thu
If you tell a good story....it crosses generational lines...something
they
should be paying attention to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The WB is only proving how fearful
they should be... --
Anthony8, 21:24:51 05/24/01 Thu
By the way, that Tim Goodman article on the lack of complex tv
characters
can be found at this
address--http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/05/06/PK148408.DTL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks for the link...........
-- Rufus, 21:33:49 05/24/01
Thu
Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- Rob, 10:34:20 05/24/01
Thu
I was thinking about a few of the postings I read here, that perhaps
when
the Monks created Dawn, they isolated the more "girly"
side of Buffy, while
Buffy herself kept the Slayer side. That actually makes a great
deal of
sense, considering that when Dawn arrived is around the time that
Buffy
started to distance herself from Riley and take him for granted.
This
eventually lead to their breakup. Also, all year Buffy has repeatedly
wondered whether she has the ability to feel love anymore, which
mirrored
Dawn's wondering whether she was real or not. Perhaps Buffy's
feelings of
distance towards humanity at times and her taking Riley for granted
are thus
a result of Dawn's creation, as the non-slayer side of Buffy was
put into
another vessel. This could also explain why, in "Weight of
the World,"
Willow talked to 2 Buffys at the end. Although we know that Dawn
can
metaphorically be called "the softer side of Buffy,"
perhaps she is
literally as well. This year, Buffy explored the darker side of
being the
slayer. Perhaps, in her hero's journey, it was necessary for the
"girly"
part to be separated from her for a while, to more objectively
understand
her role as the Slayer, and the difference between herself and
a regular
killer. She was, however, required to protect the other side of
herself, not
let it get away (or be taken), as she focused more deeply on her
training.
At the end of "Becoming," Buffy sacrificed the human
side of herself, her
passionate love for Angel, and kept the Slayer side, in order
to save the
world. This lead to a period of great darkness for her, where
she felt
compelled to run away and change her identity. Thus forgoing her
humanity
and love is not the right choice, at least in a metaphysical sense.
At the end of "The Gift," Buffy sacrificed her "slayer"
side to save the
more human side of herself, and the world. This leads to her death,
and thus
this is not the most beneficial to her either. She has learned
from this,
however.
Perhaps this was the lesson she had to learn: that both sides
of herself are
equally important; that in some cases her being a human girl who
cannot kill
her own sister, even to save the world, is more important than
being the
Slayer, and should come first.
While ostensibly this season was about how dark the job of the
Slayer is, it
also reveals, in a brilliant twist, that sometimes the job of
being human is
more important.
At the moment, Buffy's hard and soft sides are separated, in fact
the hard
side is for all intents and purposes dead and gone.
Could Buffy's resurrection next year have something to do with
joining both
sides together again, with the "Slayer" and the "Human"
both now the wiser?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer side of Buffy"
-- rowan, 18:58:05
05/24/01 Thu
This is a very interesting topic that I think will be explored
next year.
IMHO, Buffy did make an identification of Dawn's as part of herself,
and it
seemed clear it was probably the "girly" part as opposed
to the "Slayer"
part.
But I wonder if Buffy is really right about that? You know, Spike
oftens
hits upon very signficant truths. Remember when he called Dawn
"bitty Buffy"
when they went after that egg for the resurrection spell? I'm
not saying
that Dawn has Slayer genes (although I'm wondering about Joss's
comments
that he thinks Dawn the Vampire Slayer would be a show he would
watch), but
she may have a little more of the assertive Buffy side than Buffy
thinks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer side of
Buffy" -- Anthony8,
19:20:10 05/24/01 Thu
It was also interesting to me that Buffy tells the gang that the
monks made
Dawn from her (not from Joyce). From the beginning of the whole
Key arc
(that is, from the time the monk reveals the truth to Buffy),
my whole
impression was that Buffy was acting as Dawn's real mother. Joyce
seemed
more of a foster-type mother. As deep as sibling love can be,
Buffy's
actions from "There's No Place Like Home" through the
end of "The Gift" were
more like that that of a mother protecting her child than sister
for sister.
Even her "live for me" words sound like what every parent
says to their
child ("I want you to have the things I couldn't have...").
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- rowan,
19:28:00 05/24/01 Thu
Yes, I absolutely agree. At the time, it wasn't perhaps immediately
obvious.
Before Buffy encountered the monk, she was very much the older
sister
frustrated with the younger sibling. Then, she had a shock when
she
discovered Dawn's origins, and had an immediate withdrawal from
Dawn. But
after Dawn ran away & Glory found her at the hospital, Buffy escalated
into
ultra-protective mode.
It finally all made sense when she explained to the SG how she
felt in The
Gift. I found myself saying, "oh, of course, this is why
she's been acting
the way she has."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" --
Anthony8, 19:48:25 05/24/01 Thu
It's funny because all during her little speech to Giles and the
SG at the
magic shop, I really wanted her to say something to the effect
of "for all
intents and purposes, Dawn IS my child, guys." But I guess
there would be no
art in that. It's that darned ambiguity that keeps us coming back
week after
week.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> So true! -- rowan, 19:50:01 05/24/01
Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn; Spoilers for 'The
Gift' and the Season. --
Age, 20:39:55 05/24/01 Thu
Spoilers for 'Buffy Versus Dracula', elements of the season, 'The
Gift' and
'Angel' finale.
I thought this short analysis would add to the discussion about
Dawn.
In ep one Buffy is confronted by Dracula as a manifestation of
her
subconscious attachment to the new power she'd gained by accepting
her
slaying. She says it herself: she had become a hunter. This manifestation
was symbolically transformed into a three way conflict between
the beast,
Glory,(the temptation to give into the animal predatory power;
Glory is the
logical conclusion of Buffy's descent into predatory power); the
human, Ben,
housing Glory( representing Buffy's desire to get on with her
regular life
as a student, ie become one of the herd); and Dawn, the innocent
girl, the
Key to Buffy herself, that part of her which should never be given
up for
either one of the two above.
In the final episode, Buffy must save Dawn from a huge tower.
As she's
climbing up to Dawn she's fighting Glory, fighting therefore her
own
temptation to give into the animal power of the predator, seeking
to rise
above it. She and Glory fall from the tower to the ground and
there she
beats Glory into submission(Glory and Ben have fused somewhat,
making Glory
vulnerable, but also symbolizing that Buffy's fighting the other
conflicts
in her life in her subconscious.) Buffy subdues Glory and then
goes to the
top to free Dawn. But she has already been cut and the portal
has opened.
Not only are demons coming through, but the earth is being changed
into a
demon realm. Dawn, Buffy's original nature, her humanity, her
'child of
God', offers to sacrifice herself, but Buffy won't allow her.
Because they
have the same blood, Buffy jumps down from the top of the tower
into the
portal and closes it. She has symbolically risen from animal to
human, from
aggression to love, from subconscious to consciousness(as she
then realizes
what her gift is) and then deliberately dives off what would have
been the
end result of her transformation into a hell god if she'd given
into
temptation(ie being at the top of the food chain above all the
others) and
instead gives her life out of love to save the human world, saving
herself
as human in the form of Dawn. And Dawn is appropriately named
because for
Buffy this is the dawn of something new in her life: not only
has she
accepted being the slayer, she now has vanquished her attachment
to the
power of slaying. She is just love, a bodhisattva. Well, that's
stretching
things. She's also a human being having trouble facing the grey
area of life
and afraid of losing those dear to her. But I'm sure she'll figure
out how
to deal with those problems in seasons six and seven....
As for Buffy being the mother, this fits very well with the theme
of the
natural order of life and death. The previous generation has to
die to make
way for the next. Vampires as perpetual teenagers are an unnatural
rebellion
against this. They are also the animal predator that Buffy has
been fighting
against externally and internally. Buffy dies to show the sacrifice
we all
make as human beings. Her dive reproduces the fall into death
we all face
and which was the season arc story: Dawn fell from childhood to
adolescence
when she discovered she was the Key; Riley fell from adolescence
into
adulthood when he discovered that all endings are not happy; and
Joyce fell
into death.
The conflict between Glory and the knights is symbolic of the
duality we
experience in ourselves: Glory as animal wants to use the Key,
stripping the
human of her identity; the knights as patriarchal agents want
to destroy the
key itself. This is the dichotomy between total acceptance of
sexuality(Dawn
bleeds when she finds out that she's the key and Spike tells her
she's
Little Red Riding Hood: both relate possibly to menstruation)
and total
denial of our sexuality. We as human beings must balance our identity
as
human with our role as links in the sexual reproductive chain.
In other
words, Whedon is interested in how we continue as human beings
and as a
human race, because without either, both are lost. If we give
into our
animal nature and see ourselves simply as animals(Glory) we lose
what we
are. If on the other hand we deny our role and sever the link,
as the
Knights wish, humanity dies with us.
The dichotomy between Glory and the Knights is also between the
predator and
the herd, the latter willing to allow one of its own to be culled
for the
'good' of the rest(wolf, ram and hart.) Buffy will neither be
a predator nor
a herd animal; she remains Dawn, the human. This part of her is
what she
leaves to live on: the human as person and as member of the human
race.
Buffy's death marks the end of the hero myth and also the end
of childhood
for the gang. The slayer/mother who has protected them is gone
and now the
gangs on both shows have to fend for themselves as adults in a
world of
grey. For a little while anyway...
Age
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I like that....just killed another
tree........ -- Rufus,
21:07:21 05/24/01 Thu
In the Shooting script Buffy makes reference to being or feeling
like she is
Dawns mother. And the words she used to Willow....I don't have
a life I have
Dawns......Now Dawn lives on for her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> I keep wondering if that phrase
is really significant...
-- OnM, 06:05:15 05/25/01 Fri
"I don't have a life - I have *Dawn's life*."
I keep having this nagging sense that Dawn is going to be the
key to Buffy's
rebirth.
Then there is this quote by Joss from TV Guide Online (05/24/01):
TVGO: "If and when the day comes that Sarah leaves the show,
would you
retitle it 'Dawn the Vampire Slayer'?"
Whedon: "What I would do with it is hard to say, but that's
certainly a show
I'd watch. Michelle [Trachtenberg] is a powerhouse. I have the
best ensemble
that I could ever hope to work with. It could happen, but if it
did, it
wouldn't be for years because Sarah's coming back."
The first line of Joss' response seems somewhat deliberately evasive,
in
that he may have already decided to make Dawn a Slayer, maybe
not the next,
but if not, eventually. Is the key to Buffy's rebirth her desire
to keep
Dawn 'pure' (i.e purely 'human', not Slayer/human as she was)
and her return
is to forstall that happening?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I keep wondering
if that phrase is really
significant... -- Rufus, 06:22:24 05/25/01 Fri
Sometimes people say things in frustration and in this case I
think Buffy
may have meant one thing but it will come out to be more profound
than she
could have imagined.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Wow, very perceptive! -- Solitude1056,
21:55:54 05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you must be the influence
of my cats....and
chocolate....:):) -- Rufus, 21:57:33 05/24/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Sorry answered wrong
line......... -- Rufus, 05:57:08
05/25/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> You're really Joss, aren't you?
Well, if not, he would be
proud! -- OnM, 05:51:11 05/25/01 Fri
As the regulars here know, I'm rarely at a loss to comment on
just about
anything, but that was incredible.
Mere genuflection is inadequate, I most humbly prostate my unworthy
self
before you, and fervently pray that no evil hellgod ever sucks
your brain!
:)
(Well, I sincerely thought about it, anyway, arthritis ya know
;) ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spoilers for 'Spiral'
and 'Over the Rainbow' and 'Fear
Itself' and Fourth Season Big Bad. -- Age, 08:09:13 05/25/01 Fri
Spoilers also for the 'Angel' ep that followed 'Fear Itself.'
No, but everything in these shows is metaphorical, and dictates
the drama.
For example, when Buffy met up again with the Knights, it wasn't
simply to
wrap up a loose end. Whedon used the Knights as symbols of what
Buffy
herself had momentarily come to contemplate: destroying the Key.
She met up
with the Knights on the road because their paths of thought had
crossed.
Whedon had their meeting set on a lonely desert road to symbolize
the barren
end-of-the-line(link dead) condition that would mean for the human
race, ie
kill the link between the generations and the human race dies.
It becomes as
extinct as the gas station which symbolizes both the sexual act(pumping
gas
is a nozzle fitting into a hole) and the means of keeping things
going(keeping the human race going) by giving cars energy. Obviously
its
deadness symbolized the end of the human race. Of course, the
images also
show Buffy's mental condition.
If you noticed, the title of this episode, 'Spiral' is an allusion
to 'The
Wizard of Oz' by suggesting the tornado of the film. Quite a bit
of the plot
in this ep follows what happens to Dorothy before she's knocked
out, except
of course for Buffy there's no longer any place called home, nor
is there a
kindly salesman to suggest she go back home. The film portrays
the journey
from adolescence to adulthood in which a young woman has to discover
that
she has in herself what it takes to continue the human race(the
ruby
slippers symbolize menstruation.) The woman/witch of the west(death)
wants
to take way Toto, an obvious symbol of Dorothy's animal nature,
ie her
sexuality. Only after discovering that she has the brains, the
heart, and
the courage to be an adult does Dorothy succeed in deconstructing
adults
from their God position by uncovering the little man behind the
big image,
and completes the journey from the land of the little people(symbolizing
children, ie what Dorothy would stay as if she didn't make the
journey and
symbolizing also her potential to create the next generation.)
Whedon uses
the meaning of the film to help create the symbolism of his episode.
Note
that 'Angel' uses the film as an allusion too('Over the Rainbow'),
and
reinforces my belief that on a weekly basis from the start of
the 'Angel'
series the two shows have been linked together in a meaningful
way to
reinforce one another.
Foremost, both 'Buffy' and 'Angel' are metaphorical treatments
of themes
about humanity. The big bads simply represent what the title characters
have
going on internally and what they must face to remain human.
For example Adam last year represented the Scooby gang's repressed
fear that
their personal Initiative meant the end of their friendship, hence
the
nuclear fission, the splitting as a form of fuel source. Or, more
accurately, Adam represented the Scooby gang's fear that to stay
together
they had to be like one another, like parts sewn together.The
gang had to
descend into the Initiative complex, down into their subconscious,
and
excise this fear and belief. In doing so they banded together,
yet remained
separate, using their individual strengths together in a symbolic
representation of their having recognized that they could be friends
and
have their separate lives and strengths also.
The symbolism of this fear began in the halloween episode in which
the gang
started to come apart, 'Fear Itself,' and to reinforce my idea
that 'Buffy'
and 'Angel' are linked on a weekly basis, the 'Angel' ep that
followed it
was about a guy who could take himself apart and used his obsession
to try
to keep himself together.
Thank you,
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'm glad you said that
about the big bads -- Rufus,
14:24:43 05/25/01 Fri
I shake my head when someone complains that the big bad wasn't
big enough
ect. I always see the Big Bad as the thing the SG and ATS have
to battle in
their own lives. That's why I see Wolfram and Hart as the Big
Bad that will
never go away, they are a representation of the worst of us. Both
series
this year had some Oz in them. In Angel he was about to say "There's
no
place like...." getting cut off by the sight of Willow. His
home isn't
perfect but it's sure better than Pylea. Angel, Wes, Gunn, and
Cordy got to
face what they feared or disliked about themselves. Angel faced
his inner
demon, Wesley his insecurity, Gunn his need to save everyone.
Cordy got a
new appreciation of her visions. Last year she would have Com
shucked the
heck out of Groo to get rid of her burden and headache. Now she
sees that
the visions were indeed a gift that has made her into a better
person.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm glad you
said that :Spoilers for 'Dead Man's
Party.' -- Age, 00:03:08 05/26/01 Sat
Yes the big bads have a purpose that has nothing to do with being
villains.
They are metaphorical representations of problems facing the characters.
That the name Wolfram and Hart is made up of animals points to
Joss Whedon's
main concern: how do we remain human? Do we become predators like
the wolf
or do we become herd animals willing to sacrifice the weaker members
for the
'good' of the herd like the ram or the hart? Wolves, rams and
harts don't
have the choice, but to a certain extent we do. This is why Whedon
has
concentrated so much on the role of parenting(especially the role
of the
father given that we've just emerged from a patriarchal society.)
What we
get taught as children will obviously be a large part of the map
we use to
direct our lives.
I did not realize that 'Buffy' was metaphorical until third season
when the
zombies crashed Buffy's party. I sat up and realized that as in
all fairy
tale structures, the real emotions were being resolved using the
supernatural. The zombies represented the repressed anger of the
Scooby gang
and of Buffy's mum, erupting out of the subconscious. The zombies
are
stopped when the symbol of repression, the mask, is destroyed.
After that I was hooked.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That was
the epiphany, huh? Just wondering, did
you then go back... -- OnM, 14:21:43 05/26/01 Sat
...and start checking out the previous eps to see if the same
was true for
them? Just curious.
I don't think that I ever had an epiphany per se when I suddenly
realized
that Buffy was metaphorical, at least not as extensively as I
see it today.
It was more like a slow gradual process, and I found that the
single thing
that helped the most was to regularly tape the eps, which I was
very erratic
in doing for most of the first three seasons.
Part of it is that the way my head works memory-wise is that I
seem to have
only limited recall the first time through, perhaps because I
tend to
experience the show emotionally first and then later go on to
think about it
on a more forebrain level. Taping thus becomes indispensible.
For the last
two seasons, I have never missed taping a show, and always watch
the tape at
least once afterward, sometimes 3 or 4 times for the really classic
eps
(hey, you know 'em when you see 'em!).
I really don't know of any other show on currently that I would
want to see
more than once or twice, even excellently written shows such as
Law & Order
or ER. They tell great stories, 'tis true, but there is very little
in the
way of use of metaphor that allows them to work under repeated
viewings/hearings, just as with the best movies or music.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
That was the Epiphany. Spoilers for All
Seasons, up to 'The Gift. -- Age, 18:17:10 05/26/01 Sat
Again, please note that in passing I mention all the seasons.
All the big
bads. Specific episodes like the fourth season premiere and finale.
Spoilers
for 'The Gift' and 'Gingerbread.' Spoilers for third season finale
also.
Unfortunately I do not have the first two seasons on tape, but
when
syndication begins I shall be eager to do some analysis of them.
My first
instinct was to analyze the basic metaphors of the series itself:
Sunnydale
has the hellmouth because the weather(sunny in the day, ie putting
on a mask
of everything being sunny, happy and bright) is a metaphor for
the
repression of emotions and/or problems: had the weather been grey,
most of
the problems would not have occurred because that metaphor would
have
implied a healthier way of approaching life: not so black and
white. I saw
the supernatural first as a function of repression in which emotions
repressed take on a life of their own, ie denied, repressed, unmanaged,
they
are still there and don't get dealt with until they've taken on
enough power
to burst forth out of the subconscious like supernatural creatures
bursting
out of the night. Repression is denial of who we are, a function
of the
patriarchal society we've just emerged from. Emotions are devalued
as
feminine and thus repressed. People are not encouraged to manage
their
emotions(as the Watcher symbolizes: management) but simply to
repress them
and deny them, especially those deemed bad like sexual feelings.
I saw the vampire and the slayer as symbolic representations of
the conflict
between males and females in a patriarchal society(and their
deconstruction): the vampire represents the sexual predator(males
are taught
that power is all that matters); while the Slayer(holding a phallic
symbol
in her hand in the form of a stake) is the female reaction to
living in a
world where women do not have any power: she is the emasculator
who gains
whatever small power she can for herself and for her children
by holding sex
over the head of the male. The relationship is power driven and
fundamentally unhealthy. Whedon's concern is that we continue
as human
beings and that includes understanding that both sexes have value,
and that
the relationship should be based on love and respect. It should
be between
two human persons and not between a sexual predator/boy and a
virgin/whore/mother. The act of love in such an unhealthy relationship
is
centred on satisfying only the male because the woman is taught
she's
supposed to not want sex. The sexual act then becomes a form of
staking in
which the male satisfies himself at the expense of the woman.
It is a form
of violence against the selfhood of the woman because it proves
his conquest
over her.(The reference in 'Restless' to conquistador and comfortador
cover
both roles: sexual predator and boy.)
Buffy as slayer deconstructs this by staking the sexual predator
with a
phallic symbol. The vampires as myth-ological creatures represent
the
patriarchal myth. Buffy deconstructs this myth using herself as
the
argument: she is the deconstruction of the blond bimbo stereotype
as well as
the refutation of females as the weaker sex. Foremost Buffy the
vampire
slayer is a deconstructor of myth and this accounts for why the
library(symbol of knowledge) was located over the hellmouth and
inside the
school(symbol of patriarchal structure.) It is knowledge after
all that
deconstructs myth. This is one of the reasons why the vampires
burn up in
the light of day: it is a metaphor for bringing myths into the
open and
exploding them. This is also what is behind the stake through
the heart
dusting: once your argument gets to the heart of the matter, the
myth is no
more.(This is just one interpretation of course.)
(Note the deconstruction of emasculator and sexual predator occurs
at the
same time because when the vampire is dusted, the emasculator/slayer
role is
no longer needed.)
Buffy uses a wooden stake. This symbolizes, I believe, Whedon's
belief in a
natural order to life. The vampires are an unnatural rebellion
against life,
unable to continue growing to adulthood; they become monstrous
Peter Pans of
adolescence unable to do what humans can. They delight in hurting
human
beings because they want to convince themselves that they are
superior to
them when in fact they are not. They are parasites. That isn't
to say that
the vampires all represent the same thing: Whedon uses specific
vampires to
express specific emotions or problems: for example the vampire
Sunday in ep
one of season four represents Buffy's fears about the new environment(Sunday
looks like Buffy; and her name implies that if Buffy doesn't get
her act
together she's going to end up without a working future, ie in
a perpetual
Sunday, the day traditionally without work.)
The patriarchal interpretation of the series is born out by the
big bads:
males as master, sexual predator(Angelus) or patriarchs(Mayor
and Adam.) In
the third season finale Buffy and her generation have to fight
the dic-tator
who would keep them as children, fight the idea they have been
given that
citizens remain children while those in power look after them
and tell them
what to do. Inherently the patriarchal system is flawed because
it creates a
hierarchy in which men attack one another to show that they are
manly men
and not feminine in the least, with those men seen as feminine
or, its
equivalent, weaker preyed upon. And women are vilified and powerless
because
they remind men that the world isn't made just for them, and that
the sexual
act does lead eventually to the death of the individual: we all
like to
think that we are immortal. Everything that is bad about the world
gets
blamed on women as daughters of Eve when in fact men and women
as human
beings are natural partners and friends. The only roles that women
are
allowed to play in such a society are whores and virgin/mothers,
servants to
men. The men are simply boys or sexual predators, who must be
kept in line
by an external authority. It is thus self perpetuating: you teach
someone
that human society is based solely on power, you then have to
keep that
person in line with force, the force of the ideas of duty, morality
or with
physical force. What you have to do to children to create such
a monstrous
society is to break their natural faith in themselves and others.
You have
to destroy the human as natural person and replace him or her
as citizen.
Once you do that you harness aggression, exert external discipline
and turn
all the men into soldiers. You then fight the next king or ruler
who does
the same, and you finish up with endless wars etc.
I know this description is too simplistic, but I think it offers
part of
what Whedon is criticizing. His basic theme is how do we grow
up to be
adults and remain human? Are we killed off by predator/vampire/myth,
or
worse internalize that myth(the blood of a vampire) and prey on
others? Or
do we struggle against these influences?
But, my patriarchal approach is too narrow. I don't think it extends
to what
Whedon has implied this season, and perhaps I've just been projecting
my own
concerns. Wolfram and Hart as the big bad on 'Angel' tends to
imply that
Whedon sees our struggle to be one against conceptualizing ourselves
solely
as animals(predators or herd animals). We are natural and live
in a natural
world, but we have choices greater than do other living things.
Certainly
the theme this year has been mortality, and I believe that Whedon
through
Buffy's death has put forward the idea that as we die anyway,
let's live as
human beings and not as predators(those who run away from life
and must live
off others) or herd animals(those who run away from death and
would
sacrifice the weaker of the herd for their own safety.) Buffy
accepts all of
herself, embraces all of herself as a human being, and that includes
death
as well as life. Yes Buffy could have been at the top of the food
chain; we
as human beings are at the top of the food chain, but is that
all we are?
Are we just the top bum and poo smellers? Or does our human consciousness
mean that we can be and do more?
The answer to that question is the series itself. It shows us
on a weekly
basis that we are and can do more. Every week it brings into our
homes the
message that human and humane and intelligent endeavours can be
done and are
being done. It is not just a series which has themes, but is itself
the very
message that Whedon is putting across.
So in answer to your question. No, I haven't analyzed earlier
episodes
except 'Anne'; but I have analyzed, in general, Angel's turning
into Angelus
in patriarchal terms: ie the patriarchal male who has developed
feelings for
the female, but gets what he wants: the night of sex, ie conquest,
who then
turns on the young woman with utter hatred because he believes
that she has
made him feel this way to get power over him(ie as a boy he cannot
take
responsibility because in a patriarchal system one does not take
personal
responsibility, instead one receives consequences meted out by
an authority,
and blames the woman as the devalued half of a binary opposition
between men
and women), and because to have these feelings means he's more
feminine and
thus less a man, ie she has attempted to emasculate him.
Specific episodes off hand: from a symbolic point of view 'Faith,
Hope and
Trick' is a marvel. But I like 'Gingerbread' because of that wonderful
parody of the all-American male hero rescue in which the rescue
weapon is
soft(water) instead of a fist; the males run away and then appear
only after
the damsel in distress has saved herself. Not only this but the
slippery
slide from parental(patriarchal) concern to totalitarianism is
charted with
Amy saving herself by becoming subhuman, and all this with the
central
supernatural metaphor, the false dead children demon, representing
Joyce's
anger that she's lost her little child Buffy and subconsciously
wants the
slayer to go away to get her back. Add to this the highlighting,
through the
Hansel and Gretel reference, of the fairy tale structure, and
the reference
to herd animals through the acronym MOO, and you have a mighty
fine episode.
Two last quick comments:
Joss Whedon isn't using the supernatural as metaphor simply because
it's an
imaginative and exciting literary convention, he's using it as
a metaphor
for the deconstruction of childhood myth. He has taken that which
children
take as literal and given it back its metaphorical meaning as
an expression
of human adulthood itself. The very basis of his series, the supernatural
metaphor, is an expression of his central theme: becoming a human
adult.
In regards to your topic about viewing the episodes several times,
sometimes
I do this, but reading the reviews and postings on this and other
boards has
helped me immensely. Had it not been for other people taking the
trouble to
put their thoughts to word, my understanding of both 'Buffy' and
'Angel'
would be a lot poorer.
Age.-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I missed something about
deconstruction. Spoilers: The Gift and Angel finale. -- Age, 11:59:18
05/27/01 Sun
When I was listing how Buffy is deconstruction of patriarchal
myth I missed
out the most important point, and one which shows how the season
finales of
'Buffy' and 'Angel' are linked to reinforce one another. Buffy
as a female
according to patriarchal thinking is evil. Therefore she could
never be the
messiah, the Christ. Nor for that matter could Cordelia in 'Angel'
as she is
female also.
The season finales of both series present women as messiahs, Christs,
Cordelia as a political messiah, and Buffy as the spiritual messiah.
Cordelia frees the human slaves of another world, making it more
human(humane); while Buffy saves 'our' world and humanity continues.
Both
sacrifice that which is dear to them: as has been pointed out
by others,
Buffy sacrifices that which earlier in the year she was afraid
to let go:
her life; while Cordelia sacrifices her princess dream and love.
It is made
explicit through prophecy that Cordelia is a messiah, but Buffy's
role as
Christ is built symbolically: firstly, Dawn, the representation
of Buffy's
humanity is anointed with a cross on her forehead by a minion;
secondly,
Buffy dives in the form of a cross.
Also, to reinforce the link between the two finales, they end
the same way:
Buffy goes through a portal and we end with a shot of her gravestone,
silently announcing her death; the Fang gang come back through
a portal and
we end with Willow silently announcing Buffy's death.
What I'm getting at here is that the season finales were still
deconstructions of patriarchal myth. By having females as messiahs,
the
whole notion of male dominance is turned on its head...or more
accurately
has its head chopped off. Cordelia chops the head off of Silas,
the
patriarch; while Buffy defeats despair shown by a male, Giles,(not
my idea
either) of the worldly view behind patriarchy by closing the portal.(In
doing so Buffy also outgrows her father figure, Giles, doing away
with the
need for any patriarchal structure.)
One last thing: I suggested in a reply in another thread that
Spike goes up
to save Dawn and fails because he represents love, but not humanity.
This
may be so, but it doesn't go far enough. I think Whedon was alluding
to
Spike's having killed the other slayers, alluding to the time
when he 'got'
to the other slayers. Dawn represents Buffy's humanity, and while
the
intention of the character itself is to help Dawn, the symbolism
is of a
vampire going up to 'get' Dawn, Buffy's humanity. What Whedon
is doing here
is showing that the symbol of the death wish, the desire to escape
from life
as represented by the vampire, cannot touch, cannot get to Buffy.
It seems to me that besides being brave, as Buffy suggests, living
in this
world and successfully raising the next generation requires love.
I know,
I'm stating the obvious. But time and again in these series we
see what
happens when the previous generation does not feel love, but rather
preys
upon the next generation, attempting to use them, rather than
help them
achieve their potential. I think the basic horror of this series
is that it
presents what happens when the previous generation wants to eat
its young,
instead of raising them, as the allusion to Hansel and Gretel
in
'Gingerbread' implies, or as Glory's wanting to use Dawn suggests.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
That was the epiphany, huh? Just
wondering, did you then go back... -- Anthony8, 19:43:20 05/26/01
Sat
I happened upon the series when it first came on the air expecting
it to be
a hoot based on the cheekiness of the title. I started to catch
the
mythological aspects right away, but not as deeply as I do now.
Unlike other
series, the writing, acting, and character development were so
well done
from the start, it had me hooked. I started taping it from the
beginning
because I couldn't watch it when it actually aired. Regrettably,
I didn't
keep any episodes until Season 4. I wish they would realize the
true
marketability of releasing the whole lot on DVD and VHS for those
of us who
don't subscribe to cable (Buffy reruns will be on FX next year,
not in
widespread syndication) and haven't retained a long-term video
library.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Wizard of Oz and the
episode "Nightmares" -- Q,
17:09:50 05/30/01 Wed
Whedon uses the meaning of the film
to help create the symbolism of his episode. Note that 'Angel'
uses the film
as an allusion too('Over the Rainbow'),
Your "Wizard of Oz" comprisons were interesting to me.
Every season after
the season finale I start at "Welcome to the Hellmouth"
and re-watch every
episode. I watched "Nightmares" last week, and was blown
away by it for the
first time ever. More on that later.
When "Fear, Itself" first aired, many people, myself
included, thought it
was a rather weak episode--a cheap knockoff of "Nightmares".
As the season
wore on though, it became apparent that it was a giant foreshadow
for the
season to come, and thus earned a lot more respect.
Nightmares did this for me on a much grander scale. I watched
it last
weekend and was amazed at the foreshadowing for season 5 I saw!
Were they
thinking that far in advance, rewatching season 1 for ideas for
season 5, or
is it a big coincidence? I don't know but consider:
A huge theme of the episode was Buffy's father's real wish to
become
absentee. A theme of season 5 was Buffy's father's absenteeism.
In
"Nightmares", we see Buffy's headstone and grave, an
*eery* foreshadow of
"The Gift", and to hear Giles speach at her grave sends
chills down the
spine now more than ever.
If I disected the episode more, I could find more paralels to
this season
I'm sure, but the only other thing I have time to mention is the
line Billy
says when waking from his coma "I had the strangest dream,
and you were
there...and you...", a direct quote from "The Wizard
of Oz", another thing
we saw referenced quite a bit at the end of the season. Very interesting
I
thought
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn; Spoilers for
'The Gift' and the Season.
-- fresne, 12:20:22 05/25/01 Fri
Okay, I've just got to say. This is utterly brilliant.
Bravo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer side of Buffy"
-- Jim, 20:34:01
05/24/01 Thu
[Although we know that Dawn can metaphorically be called "the
softer side of
Buffy," perhaps she is literally as well. ]
Funny, I don't see Dawn that way at all. While it may be true
that is how
Buffy saw Dawn, just like Dawn idolized Buffy and rarely saw Buffy's
weak
side, Dawn isn't "the softer side of Buffy" but an entirely
different
individual than Buffy.
Sure there are similarities. Buffy had a great influence over
Dawn, and they
were raised by the same parents, but I see a darkness within Dawn
that I
never saw with Buffy. Wouldn't call it evil, just dark.
Dawn isn't Buffy. Not a younger Buffy. Not a more innocent Buffy.
She is
Dawn. Buffy never kept a diary, or even thought about "things"
much like
Dawn does. Dawn is much more curious than Buffy ever was. If Dawn
does ever
get slayer like powers I think she would embrace them much more
willingly
than Buffy did. I can imagine her saying "cool".
Of the two, I would call Buffy more "soft". Dawn has
faced much more at her
age than Buffy did (at age 15 Buffy still had her mom, didn't
have to deal
with the death of her sibling, was just becoming the slayer. Dawn
saw much
more death in her few days with Glory than Buffy ever did).
Perhaps Buffy did transfer all her hopes and wishes into her image
of her
sister. That is tragically touching. Both Buffy and Dawn had an
image of the
other that didn't quite match up with reality.
One of the most touching scenes this season was the confrontation
between
Dawn and Glory.
GLORY (cont'd)
How do they do it?
DAWN
(suspicious)
Do what?
GLORY
(duh)
People. How do they function? Here.
Like this, in the world, with all this
bile running through them. Every day, it's ...
She runs her hand up and down, "rollercoaster" style.
GLORY (cont'd)
Whooo... you have no control they're
not even animals they're just these
meatbaggy slaves to hormones and
pheromones and their, and their... feelings.
(beat)
Hate 'em.
(beat)
I mean really, is this what the poets
go on about? This? Call me crazy.
But as hard core drugs go, human
emotion's just useless. People are
puppets, everyone getting jerked
around by what they're feeling - am
I wrong? Really, I want to know.
Glory waits for an answer. Dawn, holding her throat, doesn't say
a thing.
GLORY (cont'd)
Gonna bleed you either way.
DAWN
It depends on the person.
GLORY
So, you're saying some people like this?
DAWN
Some.
GLORY
Funny, 'cause I look around at this
world you're so eager to be a part of,
and all I see's six billion lunatics
looking for the fastest ride out.
Who's not crazy? Look around -
everyone's drinkin', smokin', shootin'
up, shootin' each other or just plain
screwing their brains out because they
don't want 'em anymore. I'm crazy?
Honey, I am the original one-eyed
chicklet in the kingdom of the blind
'cause at least I admit the world makes
me nuts. Name one person who can
take it here. That's all I'm asking -
Name one.
A small beat.
DAWN
Buffy.
This was so touching because it showed how much Dawn loves Buffy,
and how
much she looked up to her. Even after "Forever" she
still had this larger
than life image of her Big Sister.
It was also of course bitterly ironic. If Dawn only knew where
Buffy was at
that moment.
So, perhaps Buffy had this similarly unrealitic image of her little
sister.
As being everything that Buffy had wished for herself. As being
Buffy's
softer, more innocent half.
Dawn is a great person. But she is anything but innocent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Very minor quibble, but for what it's worth - Buffy
*did* keep a
diary. -- OnM, 06:35:03 05/25/01 Fri
Remember in *Ted*, what originally set her off to fight him was
that she
found him reading her diary, which he was going to use to blackmail
her
with?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> She had a diary in season one....... -- Rufus,
07:00:17 05/25/01
Fri
In the ep Angel in season one Buffy had what she thought was a
human Angel
stay the night...when she got home later in the day she thought
he had read
her diary and tried to cover for what she had said about him....he
told her
Joyce moved it when she cleaned the room...he was in the closet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: She had a diary in season one.......
-- Sue, 18:17:58
05/25/01 Fri
That is interesting, though Dawn had volumes.
Dawn is much more introspective than Buffy ever was. Buffy only
thought
about "things" when she had to.
Dawn isn't Buffy, as much as Buffy wants to think she is. She
is her own
unique individual, and of the two, I would say Buffy is the softer
one.
And whereas Buffy attracted evil no matter how hard she tried
to run from
it, Dawn seeks it out. Not to emulate it mind you, but out of
a sense of
curiousity and adventure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer side of Buffy"
-- Jen C., 22:11:47
05/24/01 Thu
I've been thinking that Dawn is the innocent part of Buffy, the
Buffy that
was never the Slayer and didn't have to experience the pain that
the last 5
years have brought her. Buffy could never go back to what she
was before she
was called, but she could let that part of her that would never
experience
it go on in her stead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer side of
Buffy" -- Steve,
23:56:04 05/24/01 Thu
Perhaps I am giving Dawn too much credit for being an individual,
but I
didn't see her as "innocent".
What do we even mean here by "innocent"?
Dawn is a great person, but comparing the two Buffy seemed "softer".
Dawn
was inexperienced, but eager, she constantly watched, wrote, and
then
reacted. She really wanted to understand the world around her,
and when it
attacked her (like when it took her mother from her) she wanted
to fight
back. I found the two's approaches to things totally different.
Buffy tried
not to think about things until she absolutely had to, whereas
Dawn tends to
obssess about things.
Dawn isn't Buffy. She doesn't act like Buffy. She doesn't think
like Buffy.
She is a great person in her own right, but don't make the mistake
of
thinking she is "bitty Buffy". Just like I am not my
brother (though we
might be similar in many ways), Dawn isn't Buffy.
Now Buffy might have this false impression of Dawn of being the
"little girl
Buffy wanted to be", but that impression was as false as
Dawn's impression
of Buffy as being the Big Sister who always stays strong regardless.
Still
both sisters' views of each other are sentimentally touching and
understandable.
It is time that we stopped seeing Dawn through Buffy's eyes. Dawn
is growing
up. Buffy could never accept that. Dawn is her own person not
the perfect
archetype Buffy set up in her own mind to fill her own needs and
desires.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- Max,
00:25:26 05/25/01 Fri
Another thing about Dawn is she seems to seek out evil.
Buffy always had evil thrusted upon her. She tried to run, but
they would
always be there.
Dawn sought out Spike. And when her Mother died, she sought out
the dark
arts. Dawn doesn't seek out evil to become it, but there is a
curiousity and
for a lack of a better word a desire to understand it.
Dawn is basically good, but she wants to seek life out. She doesn't
want to
be "normal girl" like Buffy did. Hanging out at the
mall, going to
cheerleader practice, flirting with Boys (though she has nothing
against
Boys), that's not Dawn.
Dawn reminds me a lot like Nancy Drew. Buffy on the other hand
would have
been perfectly happy if the only problem she had was deciding
which of the
many boys (and I am sure there would have been many boys) she
should accept
to take her to the prom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- Sue,
00:30:42 05/25/01 Fri
Dawn has an "edge" to her, that Buffy never did. No
of the two Buffy is
"softer side" gal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- OnM,
06:29:44 05/25/01 Fri
In other words, Dawn could have a bit of this Faith-like quality
to her?
That would really freak Buffy out if she became aware of it, wouldn't
it?
We still have those little clues that were dropped, but not resolved
this
year, like the klepto stuff, and as you pointed out, the desire
to 'touch'
evil out of curiousity, not a desire to emulate it, necessarily.
Perhaps just a mite of the 'Want, take, have' gene? We know Buffy
has this
gene, she eventually recognized it and pulled back, her inherent
moral
center stopping her before going too far. I suspect Dawn has this
same
center, and would pull back also, but Buffy would tend to react
in fear if
she thought Dawn being like Faith was even a remote possibility,
that the
'innocence' is not as pure as she thinks.
Just like any 'parent' would.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" -- Sue,
06:33:10 05/25/01 Fri
Dawn reminds me of Scappy Doo.
Let me at them!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" --
verdantheart, 06:57:50 05/25/01 Fri
Absolutely. Dawn likes to hang out with Spike. I don't picture
Buffy keeping
company with that sort of person at the same age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on Dawn being the "softer
side of Buffy" --
rowan, 17:31:44 05/25/01 Fri
Dawn's obviously has better taste than Buffy did at her age. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> :) -- verdantheart, 13:29:45
05/29/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow's darkness -- j, 10:41:53
05/24/01 Thu
Anyone else hoping to see Willow deal with the playing with the
Darkest
Magicks? Actually this is more than a hope, she has to deal with
this in
some form or another.
There must be consequences for her actions. Nightmares maybe or
even
temptation to keep using these dark arts (if you only knew the
power of the
dark side...)
Sure she was offered to take a position with that one demon (can't
remember
the name) and refused, but now she's tasted the darkness and used
it for her
own purposes (albeit for 'good')
evil has sharp teeth and never forgets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's darkness -- LoriAnn, 10:54:29 05/24/01 Thu
"evil has sharp teeth and never forgets"
Evil must be kind of like an elephant, which has long teeth and
never
forgets. Both start with "e" too. You may be on to something.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I hope so too -- Traveler, 11:49:44 05/24/01 Thu
If Buffy were to stay gone, I could easily see Willow taking over
for her
single handedly. As Buffy said, the witch is now the most powerful
scoobie.
I'm pretty much assuming that Joss is eventually going to do something
to
tone down that power, or at least make it less trustworthy, because
otherwise there is no need for a Slayer to protect Sunnydale.
After standing
up to a god, how could a measily vampire defeat Willow?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> "After standing up to a god, how could a measily
vampire defeat
Willow?" -- Manoon, 01:08:49 05/25/01 Fri
that probably says it all. Some posts have suggested Willow ultimately
being
so consumed by the darkness she has opened, that she becomes next
seasons
big bad
whereas I am unsure that would happen (to that extent anyway),
I dont even
know if i would like it or not. something will happen to willow
as a result
of tapping into the darker magic, but she will ultimately be saved.
probably
by Tara. role reversal, yep, I think I'd like that much more.
anyway, we'll
see!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: "After standing up to a god, how could
a measily vampire defeat
Willow?" -- Aelith, 05:44:43 05/25/01 Fri
Does any one else see Willow headed for a spin-off? There can't
be two
leader's on the show and Willow just showed an awfull lot of leadership.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Big Bad, Little Bad -- mundusmundi, 16:02:05
05/25/01 Fri
Usually, when it comes to Buffy villains, there are two Big Bads
-- or maybe
a Big Bad and a Little Bad. And sometimes it gets a wee confusing
as to
which is which, e.g., Angelus/Spike, The Mayor/Faith, Adam/The
Initiative,
and Glory/Doc. Frankly, I found Doc's limited screen time scary
as hell
(Joel Grey understands the power of subtle suggestion) and would
have liked
to have seen him integrated more in the Glory/Key arc. Better
luck next
season.
Anyway, if Willow ever becomes a baddie, she'll likely have some
sort of
mentor. Maybe Doc? Scary thought.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Big Bad, Little Bad -- Wiccagrrl,
11:12:49 05/26/01 Sat
I kinda doubt Willow will be the big bad next year- although,
I have a
feeling that the following season, which will likely be the last
of the
series, will have a core scoob turning bad (maybe vamped?) Could
be Willow,
with her "darkest magicks" Or (and I think I might like
this idea better)
could be Giles getting vamped. I mean, who would be a better foe
for Buffy
than the man who taught her how to fight the good fight in the
first place?
Would it be too close to the Angel/Angelus storyline? Possibly-
depends on
how it's handled, I guess.
As for this year, I don't know who the big bad'll be...but I think
it's
possible that, when Buffy comes back, she might not be herself
at first. She
won't be the big bad...but she might be the decoy-bad or little-bad
at
first. A lot will depend on how he comes back.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Big guns -- squireboy, 07:18:17 05/25/01 Fri
Willow's now a big gun. Big guns need time to charge up, reload,
etc.,
between firings. The Slayer is the one continuing the fight, soaking
up the
abuse, and wearing down the foe, while Willow is curled up on
the floor with
blood coming out of her nose.
I think Willow is fabulous, but I don't see her being able to
carry the good
fight all on her own. There are consequences to the power she
is
using/calling on. I don't think we've begun to see all those yet
either.
Valet Service - specluations
on next season -- wilder, 16:00:20 05/24/01 Thu
My apologize if this has already been touched on; I haven't had
a chance to
read all the below posts....
Now this theory might not work considering the two series are
spilt among
the two netowrks, but:
Doesn't that mystical valet owe Angel a life after the test he
went through
to save Darla? Is it possible that this was set up to give Buffy
a way back.
I can't see any Wolfram & Hart methods being used to raise the
slayer. And
we already have a moral dilemma behind using magic to bring back
the dead.
So, I'm having a hard time seeing how this is going to be resolved.
With the
way Joss usually does it, the method of Buffy's ressurection has
already
been established. And I doubt that is is going to turn into one
really long
dream sequence. Thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Valet Service - specluations on next season -- shelley,
17:12:29
05/24/01 Thu
I know the possibility of a crossover is limited, but as I posted
earlier,
Fox's Ally McBeal and ABC's The Practice had characters cross
over to each
other because they were both written by David E. Kelly. (And those
two shows
really weren't linked in any way other than Boston locale and
lawyer
characters.) So I would assume it's still possible in the future
for Angel
characters to be on Buffy and vice versa. Maybe a little more
tricky, but
possible. Just a thought.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Valet Service - specluations on next season --
rowan, 18:54:37
05/24/01 Thu
I thought it was interesting how in Joss' interview with TV Guide
(posted
below) he assured us that Buffy is indeed rotting in her grave
and in
another interview he referred to her "rebirth". Definitely
clues to how
she's coming back, but not ones that I can interpret! I mean,
there's
definitely a difference between resurrection and rebirth, for
example.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Valet Service - specluations on next season --
Solitude1056,
19:42:59 05/24/01 Thu
There's a petition going on to send to the WB & UPN to allow cross-overs.
It's actually stated quite diplomatically, and doesn't shove the
point that
we DEMAND cross-overs... just that the fans realize (and want
the networks
to realize) that sometimes a cross-over is a valuable storytelling
tool. You
can find it at www.slayage.com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
730 ( A little late in the game, but hey...) -- Lucifer_Sponge,
10:59:34
05/22/01 Tue
I don't know if this has been pointed out before... but 7 plus
3 is 10,
obviosly. So, ten plus the zero that's already there adds up to
100. And
tonight's the 100th episode. Anyone think I might have just stumbled
onto
what Joss meant by that little enigmatic set of digits?
~Sponge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: 730 Buffy/Faith conclusions -- Simplicity, 13:44:05
05/22/01 Tue
It is also 365 (the number of days in a year) X 2. It was said
two years
ago! I watched Graduation Day 1 and 2 this weekend. Did you notice
that when
Faith sees Buffy she says "All dressed up in big sister's
clothes?"
Chilling, now that Buffy might have to kill her baby sister.Also,
maybe
referring that Buffy has to become more like Faith to win. Faith
could kill
humans and seemed to enjoy it. Buffy has not been able to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: 730 Buffy/Faith conclusions -- cynthia, 22:04:21
05/22/01 Tue
I always thought that 730 meant 7 heros, Buffy, Giles, Faith,
Anya, Willow,
Xander and Spike. 3 bad guys, Glory, Doc and, in the end, Ben.
And 0 (as in
unknown or non-existing) Dawn (as she was decribed by Joyce as
not being
real).
I'm guessing that all the guesses might be true. LOL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Freaky OT number factoid... -- OnM, 16:24:49 05/22/01 Tue
Did you know that the multiples of 9 between 9 and 90 always add
up to 9 if
you sum the two digits?
As such: 09...18...27...36...45...54...63...72...81...90
Then 99 is the exception, after which:
108...117...126...135...144...153...162...171...180
Kewl, ja?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Kewl, ja? -- FanMan, 23:11:14 05/22/01 Tue
Ja.
Back to the show. I wonder how many meanings 730 was supposed
to have for
the writers?
Think fans have come up with two times as many meanings as the
writers
intended? Three? Four? At least four interpetations have been
very
reasonable.
Anyone know how many interpetations of 730 fans have come up with
in the
last two years? Only asking for a reasonable guess.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Freaky OT number factoid... -- Brian, 06:08:25
05/23/01 Wed
And two more additions equals 9:
99=18=9, 189=18=9, 198=18=9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Freaky OT number factoid... -- Maladanza, 11:32:42
05/23/01 Wed
"Did you know that the multiples of 9 between 9 and 90 always
add up to 9 if
you sum the two digits?
As such: 09...18...27...36...45...54...63...72...81...90
Then 99 is the exception, after which:
108...117...126...135...144...153...162...171...180"
This only works in base 10 -- try it in hexadecimal. However,
multiple of 15
work in hex (0F, 1E, 2D,...69, 78,...F0) -- although hex also
breaks down at
FF (255). In fact, the rule works for multiples of numbers one
less than the
base (so base 8 works for multiples of 7).
Not too surprising, actually. Consider that multiplying by 9 is
really just
adding alot of 9 -- or think of it as adding (10 - 1) -- i.e.,
you are
incrementing the tens digit by one and decrementing the one's
digit by one
each time, so the sum of the digits remains the same.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Neat! Makes perfect sense, never considered
other number bases.
Xtra Kewl! ;) -- OnM, 17:07:40 05/24/01 Thu
The Gift....sacrifice or escape
from duty...... -- Rufus, 16:25:44 05/24/01
Thu
Buffy started a normal girl, just a girl, who wanted to have a
normal life.
As the slayer that dream evaporated. Her duty was to kill to protect
the
world...at what price. Earlier in FFL she found out that it may
not be her
strongest or best opponent that may kill her but the lucky one.
One that
gets her in a moment when she is tired of it all. She was afraid
to die.
Spike told her that her friends and family kept her connected
to this world.
Now her strongest tie her mother has passed on. In the first scenes
Buffy
slays a vampire who doesn't know who she is. The boy she saved
said she was
just a girl. She was weary and a bit burnt out. She tells Giles
that if Dawn
dies she will quit as everything will have been stripped away.
Then we come
to the end of the episode and she realizes her gift and runs to
jump to her
destiny. Her words to Dawn are:
Buffy: "No, Dawnie, I have to. Listen. ......Now Dawn listen
to me. Listen.
I love you. I will always love you, but this is the WORK I have
to
do......Tell Giles...tell Giles I figured it out....and I'm OK.
And give my
love to my friends. You have to take care of them now. You have
to take care
of each other. You have to be strong. Dawn, the hardest thing
in this world
is to live in it. Be brave. Live....for me."
Buffy wanted a normal life, complete with the choice on how to
live it. She
understood that she killed to protect but never got the reason
why, until
she found her gift. She is the Slayer, she protects the world
from reverting
to the hell it started as. She is the Sacrifice so all can live.
She didn't
jump into the portal to escape a life not worth living but because
she
finally understood just how important it was to keep humanity
alive. She
knew what her work was. She knew that she had to go through the
pain to
realize that work. She loved Dawn and the world so much that she
gladly died
to save the world, not just her sister. She knew that she could
close the
portal, not just a quess. As surely as she knew it was right to
sacrifice
Angel in B2, she knew that it was her turn to sacrifice herself.
She had the
faith that the world was valuable enough to continue to exist.
She had the
courage to give up the life she had been so afraid of losing in
FFL. She was
doing her job.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from duty...... -- Anthony8,
18:48:24
05/24/01 Thu
Her sacrifice is the perfect gift because only the human individual
"Buffy"
is destroyed. "Buffy" the individual is the most dispensable
(I know there
is a better word out there)member of the SG because her role as
Slayer,
protector of humanity, will continue on in the next one to receive
The Call.
It is an interesting contrast to Angel's attempted sacrifice for
Darla in
"The Trial." There, he was willing to sacrifice his
person and role as
protector of the innocent for an individual who, it turns out,
cannot be
saved after all. Also remember that although Angel does submit
to potential
oblivion, he does so flinchingly (as the stakes fly towards him).
Buffy, on
the other hand, meets her end eyes open and with absolute clarity.
It's her
epiphany.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from duty......
-- squireboy,
20:35:11 05/24/01 Thu
Dispensable? The Slayer? No, "The Wish" proved that
valiant as the Scoobies
may be, they need the Slayer to pull them together and give their
cause a
focus or they would fail in the Slayer's task of holding back
the darkness.
I'm not yet resolved as to the nobility of Buffy's swan dive.
I think there
was a certain amount of Spike's "Slayer death wish"
there, and an
unwillingness to face the ongoing struggle with another life element
stripped away. I'm not entirely buying Buffy's sacrifice for Dawn
because
Buffy's (can we even say *irrational*) protectiveness of Dawn
is an
*ensorcelment*. Dawn isn't her sister. Buffy may be clutching
to her as a
sister now, but threatening to kill the Scoobies (when she can't/won't
kill
innocents like Ben)just screams to me the deep-rooted effects
of the monks'
spell and the lingering emotional damage of all the loss she has
suffered
this season.
Buffy stole Dawn's place. It was the Key's place to close the
portal with
her life, and Buffy grabbed it.
This Slayer isn't that dispensable. A new Slayer is much more
likely to be
an inexperienced, frightened girl like Dawn than a battle-hardened
vet like
Buffy. Darkness would likely profit from a Slayer trade-in.
Unless there was something else "figured out" in Buffy's
leap (ie. she knew
there would be a way back), Buffy's sacrifice is a bad trade for
the good
guys and Buffy is shirking her duty to do it, even considering
her fill of
the stripping away, and the sacrifice of others. Abandoning Light
to the
tender mercies of imprisoned Faith or some unprepared girl somewhere
isn't
noble at all.
I can't see a way past it being anything but selfish.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from duty......
-- Anthony8,
20:50:06 05/24/01 Thu
Whew! You're a tough room! I'm pretty sure, though, that it was
Joss
Whedon's intent to have Buffy's sacrifice be a noble one. But,
I'm
curious--under what circumstances, if any, would you think such
a sacrifice
would not be selfish?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from
duty...... -- Rufus,
20:58:12 05/24/01 Thu
You got me on the selfish bit too. I don't get how anyone can
see Buffys act
as selfish. But at other sites it's the same thing where some
people can't
get past the selfish bit.
In the beginning of the ep if you go to the shooting script where
there is a
bit of her words we never hear. She makes it clear she see's Dawn
as a
daughter. Her connection to Dawn is physical as well as just built
memories,
she may not have given birth to Dawn but she feels a physical
connection to
her that she can't ignore. That would explain further her protective
actions
in this episode. In the end of the episode she says she gets it
she
understands what her gift is about. I think we may not fully understand
what
she meant til next season. She called what she was doing her work.....it
gave me a feeling that she considered her work not finished. Did
she
understand something that the SG won't until she is brought back
to life?
Buffy instinctively knew she was doing the right thing, just as
in B2, I
trust that instinct.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from
duty...... --
squireboy, 21:15:04 05/24/01 Thu
Yeah, I'm tough on the Slayer, she's my hero after all. :)
I'm not as sure that joss meant for the sacrifice to be noble,
or at least
unequivocally noble. Death can be a gift *to* her, as well as
from her.
There are plenty of other clues about her seeking death, and joss
has never
been cut-and-dried about the major issues. Ambivalence is us.
Your question, is there a situation where I feel the sacrifice
is not so
selfish? Sure. The Key cannot seal the rift, only the Slayer can.
Or, the
Slayer must sacrifice herself, but the key will be destroyed anyway/return
to her reality/monks' spell unravels. Buffy's narrowing of her
focus from
her greater purpose (saving the world, sunnydale, even the scoobies)
to
entirely focusing on how important it is that Dawn carries on
(as her
legacy, her child?) seems to me an abandonment of all she has
fought for,
*and it isn't even real* (except that it has become somewhat real.
I'm not
disputing the existence of Dawn, only her legitimacy :)
Buffy has been drawn down into Spike's assertion that it is only
her
connections to the world that keep her in it (and taken it too
far in
believing that only her blood connections can keep her in it)
and I just
don't buy that her sacred duty is worth abandoning for an extended
magical
construct. (Okay maybe that's a little harsh, but you get my drift
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape
from duty...... -- Rufus,
21:25:58 05/24/01 Thu
I get what you mean but look at it this way......you have a new
form of life
that previously only had one known function now she is human.
In that
humanity comes an understanding and appreciation of the world
as it is. When
the earth started in the Buffyverse it wasn't paradise but a hell.
For some
unknown reason the demons lost their purchase(hold) on this reality,
they
were driven to other dimensions. In one of the other dimensions
there was a
hellgod Glory, shortly after she began the key was created. There
seems to
be a constant balance in power going on, one power answered by
another. I
think that perhaps the key was created as more than just the one
function we
see. This could be what the monks were working so hard for and
willing to
die for. When they made Dawn from part of Buffy there had to be
a reason.
Dawn isn't just the key, she is now part of Buffy, I think that
may be
important in the future. Buffy feels like Dawn is her daughter,
she would
die to protect her daughter. The monks are gone but they seemed
to know
exactly what they were doing in sending the key to the slayer....something
so important that the slayer would die to protect this new form
of life.
Something in what Buffy said about her work made me think that
she knew at
some level her work wasn't over.....just one leg of her journey
was.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice
or escape from duty...... --
squireboy, 21:47:14 05/24/01 Thu
Yup, I suppose part of my problem with it, is that it is too much
of a leap
of faith for my liking. I'm a rationalist. There is a fight still
to be
fought. Vampires will be rising tomorrow (and a new power, eventually)
and
the SG, even with Spike (who has an uncertainty about him) are
not up to the
task.
Unless there is something that Buffy figured out before the leap
so she knew
she was coming back somehow, or knew that Dawn was going to be
a new
uber-weapon against the Dark (every prophecy about the Key has
now been
fulfilled -- what's left?), the nobility of the act is absent,
for me.
I was unspoiled for the finale (thankfully) but I knew about the
move to
UPN. I have friends who are mature, intelligent, thoughtful, dedicated
viewers who didn't know, and they were devastated by the episode
and ending.
Cool way to go out, but thank goodness there is an escape clause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice
or escape from duty...... --
Rufus, 21:49:41 05/24/01 Thu
I really have to put my business side to rest when I watch shows
like Buffy
cause I like things to make sense and be fixable.....with this
show I have
to think. I still do treat it like a mystery to be solved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice
or escape from duty......
-- squireboy, 06:30:59 05/25/01 Fri
There is no fictional art without willing suspension of disbelief,
but part
of what appeals to me about BTVS is the writing is so consistently
good that
even with the hodgepodge stew of fantastical elements that is
this show,
there are vanishingly few "aw, come on!" moments. Things
always matter,
always have a later effect in the show.
I enjoy the mystery aspects of the show very much too, and it
will be
fascinating to see how Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy in S6 is
reconciled
with Buffy "rotting in her grave as we speak" (thanks
for that joss :(, but
I'm unhappy with the Slayer's sacrifice as we know it. It wasn't
for good
enough reasons, considering the consequences as we know them,
in my view.
I don't mean to flog away at this endlessly for those who are
bored with
this conversation :). I'm enjoying the discussion and it's helping
me to go
over the details of why I find the ending so unsatisfactory. Strangely,
it
would be easier to accept if it had been the end of the series.
It would
piss me off, but I appreciate the desire to go out with a bang,
and I accept
the inevitability of the Slayer's death (one good day). But if
we are going
on, in joss' amazingly consistent world, the good guys are going
to have to
play fatally short-handed unless/until the resurrection/rebirth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: I yield to your logic (somewhat)
-- Anthony8, 21:44:27
05/24/01 Thu
I get your point. This may sound cynical (but it really isn't),
but my
comments were based on the assumption that there is no such thing
as an
absolutely selfless individual (especially in the Buffyverse)
so it is only
the degree of selfishness that determines how noble a self-destructive
action is. I'm not as tough on my heroes because I identify with
them with
respect to my own weaknesses and faults.
There is an interesting book called "The Selfish Gene"
by Richard Dawkins
that hyposthesizes the genetic predisposition of all living things
to be
selfish (particularly in the commission of "altruistic"
acts). Some of my
personal philosophy and, consequently, my take on this thread
is in
agreement with the basic concepts presented in that book.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I yield to your logic
(somewhat) -- Rufus, 21:53:59
05/24/01 Thu
I agree that to survive as a species selfishness is a very good
trait to
have...it makes sense. In Buffy however only some of the characters
have
this trait....I wonder if as human beings we only became less
selfish when
it was clear that we were the top of the chain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I'll take door number one, Bob. -- Solitude1056,
21:51:50 05/24/01
Thu
Granted, all good points. But there's only three options faced
by Dawn and
Buffy: either Buffy dies, or Dawn dies. Or, both could hold on
for a few
more minutes and watch their world die along with them.
Setting aside Buffy's total insistence that her sister survive
the ritual,
there's also got to be part of the Monks' intent riding inside
Buffy's
decision. A Slayer is a creature that comes along anywhere from
every year
to every few years, depending on how long a single Slayer can
survive.
Buffy's held on for (apparently) a lot longer than most. Whether
her
replacement is Faith or another Slayer, there's still the assumption
that
another one will come along... (and the Monks probably knew this,
too.)
But there's only one Key.
Buffy didn't just sacrifice herself to "save the world,"
although I imagine
that's a nice benefit. She sacrificed herself to save a potentiality,
that
of the Key - who just happens to also be her flesh and blood,
latecomer
sister. In that sense - and not just because I have a sister -
I can relate.
If my sister could potentially have the power to open doors, in
better
circumstances than this one, sure... I'd make Buffy's choice,
too. Remember
Glory's line about "a vampire slayer? how common!" Buffy
knows she's one of
a long line... but there's only one Dawn.
In that sense, I don't see Buffy's act as selfish, done to relieve
herself
of experiencing more pain. Nor do I see it as selfish in the sense
that
she's leaving her only kin to pick up the pieces. I see it as
a true gift,
from one who knows her own potential, to one who has not yet realized
hers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Ack! Not Door Number One! . .. :)
-- squireboy, 07:02:40
05/25/01 Fri
Fascinating points and perspective.
I have a sister who I cherish too. If I had been the Slayer there,
I might
have chucked her into the portal myself, (Sorry Gail, I still
love you :)
although I maintain Buffy stole Dawn's appropriate sacrifice.
I guess I feel
that the whole thing is a bit too contrived. We know next to nothing
of
these monks and their knowledge and motives (unlike many other
mystical
entities that we know in great detail), but we are expected to
trust blindly
that their transformation of the Key into a human will make it/her
into
something so much more than what it was (a dimensional gateway)
that it is
worth losing the Slayer over and risking the earth.
The show isn't "Dawn, the Clueless and Apparently Powerless
(except as a
blood ritual) Brat."
Open what doors? In all of the Buffyverse experience to this point,
doors
lead to hell. All of them. Doors are bad. Guardians are set to
protect areas
around them, or at least minimize the damage. We haven't seen
any indication
that Dawn is some kind of harbinger of Heaven On Earth (with the
exception
of the crucifixion imagery). It seems a hell of a dice role, when
you don't
know you'll be back to deal with the consequences or clean up
the mess, for
once.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from duty...(way long)
-- Pen,
21:58:32 05/24/01 Thu
And yet...Buffy embodies the characteristic duality of every truly
humanistic hero -- self-sacrifice and the will to live. The connection
between Spike's powerful but facile interpretation of the slayer
deathwish
and the interpretation of Buffy's actual (well, until next season)
death was
hammered home throughout the last few episodes; yet, when crunch
time came,
we were presented with a sacrifice that had nothing to do with
despair or
fear or even just weariness. The writers were never subtle --
whether it was
Buffy in catatonia telling Willow she just wanted it to be over,
or Buffy in
the back of the Winnie talking about how tired she was, we were
led down the
path of some conflation between the deathwish Slayer of Spike's
worldview
and Buffy on the ropes while trying to save both the world and
Dawn (and who
believes she prioritized in that order?) But the Buffy we saw
in "The Gift"
didn't want to die. Escape from her duty? Perhaps. The rather
lowkey
declaration that if Dawn died, Buffy would hang up her spurs struck
me as
almost uncharacteristic of the emotionally charged Buffy who threatened
to
kill anyone who came near Dawn -- actually threatened the lives
of the
people who fought by her side, saved her life, suffered through
trials of
fire and fury with her. But the prospect of Dawn's death twice
brought her
to an anticlimax (including the catatonia where she said,
matter-of-factedly, approximately, "I would grieve, people
would feel sorry
for me." We see a side of Buffy that struggles to respond
to the greatest
challenge a hero must face: an implicit rather than explicit evil.
She can
fight Glory (well, sort of) but not an evil so banal and pervasive
that it
can categorized as mere unfairness. She detests the stakes she
must fight
for here because they represent perhaps the most modern sort of
evil she has
ever faced -- the existentialist evil that is less malicious than
impartial,
the evil that would drive otherwise good people to commit acts
that they
would suffer guilt for, but not regret per se. The Order of Byzantium
follows a credo that, to all appearances, carries out murder as
a last
resort, done only because it cannot tolerate the alternative.
Giles would
likely have killed her (as he did kill Ben/Glory) and one can
imagine that
Xander or even Willow would have found the strength in the end
(though it
might have broken them.) Even Glory doesn't seek Dawn's death,
exactly: Dawn
just happens to be in the path of what Glory does want. Dawn doesn't
deserve
to die, but her very nature makes innocence almost a crime that
must be
expatiated.
Against this, Buffy has only two certainties: 1) that she loves
Dawn; and 2)
that she, as a Slayer, could not kill, or allow the death of,
an human
being. She remembers her nature, as Giles points out to Ben, and
the impulse
that leads her to sacrifice herself in her sister's place is,
in many ways,
the exact same impulse that keeps her from killing Ben.
But in the end, it wasn't her duty or her slayer nature that sent
her into
the portal. Remember, she didn't even think about the possibility
she could
close it until after she had stopped Dawn from jumping and Dawn
began the
fateful protest that pounded home the importance of blood. No...if
Buffy is
a hero, she is the sort of hero that makes epics. There's no glory,
barely
even interest, in a hero that doesn't want to live anyway. The
suicide is
always pathetic, banal. There's no question of sacrifice in such
cases, only
surrender. Buffy wants to live. Perhaps she wants it all to be
over, but she
can hardly be faulted for that. In that way, she is the same as
the 16 year
old girl in PG who told Giles and Angel, "I don't want to
die," yet in the
end walks down to sure death after seeing Willow in pain. A humanistic
hero,
in a way that Frodo Baggins was, and James Bond never could be.
She's just a
girl, a person, an issue Campbell himself discusses, and while
she would die
to save the world, that wouldn't necessarily be her primary reason.
She dies
because she feels she has to to save what's important to her,
not because
she wants to or needs to. Duty has little to do with it, either
as something
to be followed or something to escape. That is the mark of a true
hero --
someone who acts for very human reasons in the face of inhuman
contexts.
That is what she has to offer against the existentialist world:
a death that
actually means something rather than merely symbolizing something.
It's the
very thing that Campbell did to the Jungian archetype -- brought
it down to
the level of the individual hero. In short...Buffy's death was
poignant
precisely because she didn't want to die and yet was willing to
sacrifice
herself in place of the scapegoat (which is a whole 'nother thread
-- the
reversal of traditional religious imagery.)
[Addendum] What makes this all the more compelling is the fact
that we are
hard-pressed to doubt that any other member of the Scooby Gang
(well, maybe
not Anya) would have done exactly the same thing. We should have
no
difficulty imagining Giles tossing himself off that ledge. But
if the
difference between them and Buffy is capsulized in Giles speech
to Ben. If
death is her gift, it is the gift she gives, not that she inflicts.
Perhaps
Giles is right, and that is why she is a hero -- she maintains
the surety of
right and wrong even in the face of ambiguity. Is she right? Would
she not
be of greater value (the question posed to Angel) alive than Dawn?
It
doesn't matter. As Angel demonstrated, such choices can be analyzed
endlessly by armchair philosophers, but in the end, only the hero
can make
the decision. And he/she will make the right decision by default...because
there can be no gainsaying it. What's the trade-off? A hypothetical
for a
reality? Nobility has nothing to do with it. She sacrificed herself
because
human life is precious -- every life. She can't kill Ben just
because he
might morph into Glory and go on a rampage in the undetermined
future. Giles
can because, as he admits, his ideals are of a lesser sort. Buffy
dies for
Dawn as she would die for a random stranger -- as she risks doing
every time
she rescues one from a vampire. Admittedly, Dawn is far more important
to
her...but it's a difference of degree, not kind.
Sorry for the length -- trying to avoid actual work that I'm supposed
to be
doing. Thoughts? comments? invectives? hysterical laughter? I
know there's
quite enough vagueness here to take this little monologue quite
apart. Feel
free.
*
*
*
*
************************************************************
"We band of buggered" hah! loved it. Wonder how long
Joss has been waiting
to use that particular pun in a show?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Gift....sacrifice or escape from duty...(way
long) --
freshwater, 07:02:14 05/25/01 Fri
Great points!
For me, the most important point you brought up was that Buffy
died for love
not duty. I didn't see the KoB as heroic, just dutiful. They had
a duty,
they did it, they died for it. Not that there can't be real acts
of heroism
within the context of duty, I just think that love is a higher
ideal than
duty. And that, in the end, duty must serve love, not the other
way around.
This is exactly what Buffy did, she died for the love of her sister
and
humanity, not just because it was her duty to protect them. "No
greater love
than this: to lay down your life for your friends" (or something
like that).
And, as you said, any of the SG would die to save the others (and
hasn't
even Anya been willing to die for at least Xander? I can't remember,
but it
seems like it). They are all heroes.
About the scapegoat thing. It's my understanding that the original
scapegoat
was a Jewish tradition of taking a goat, and in a religious ritual
placing
all the sins of the people on it. The goat would then go running
off a cliff
and die, taking the sins of the people with it (Christians believe
this is a
pre-figuration of Christ, taking on the sins of the world and
dying).
Anyway, my point is that this is actually very similar to Buffy's
act, not
necessarily a reversal of the symbolism. Buffy didn't take on
the sins of
the world, but she did take to herself their death. She carried
the burden
so those she loved wouldn't have to. And the very leap into the
portal was
very much like the scapegoat jumping off the cliff. It truly was
a
sacrifice. I will, however, also agree with others in this thread
that there
really is no selfless act. That in no way diminishes the beauty
of
sacrifice. The end and motivation to which the actions are directed
define
the beauty of the act. Buffy died because she loved her sister
more than
herself, that is a great gift.
And while I'm at it, I've got to strongly disagree with those
who keep
saying Dawn isn't really Buffy's sister, that Buffy should get
over it, it's
just the spell, etc. Is being physically born of the same mother
the only
way two people can be sisters? I think that's just a little too
narrow a
view. An adopted sister can be far more a sister than two biological
siblings separated at birth. A true and dear friend can be a sister
far more
than a biological sibling. So what difference does it make how
Dawn got to
be where she is? Buffy loves her. The love is real. If we want
to get all
existential again: the memories of Dawn's life, in as much as
they are
mental objects, existing in everyone's minds, are real objects,
they exist,
even if they were created by the monks and not normal experience.
Dawn's
essence is shaped by her reality. The memory objects are her reality,
her
essence comes from those memories. She is Buffy's sister. Every
possible
piece of empirical evidence would confirm that, but the only point
in this
whole discussion is that Buffy's love is real, and she died for
the one she
loves, and that's, by my definition, heroic.
-freshwater
Joss & Shakespeare -- Shiver,
19:41:53 05/24/01 Thu
I have always loved the use of Shakespeare and references to Shakespearean
works in both BtVS and Angel. When Spike and Giles commented that
Buffy's
speech (I'll kill anyone who goes after Dawn) was "no Saint
Crispin's Day
speech", it made me dash off for my big Shakespeare tome,
dusty on the
bookshelf.
The quote is part of a larger speech, from Henry V, Act iv, Scene
3 often
referred to as the St Crispin's Day speech:
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires:
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more, methinks, would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Joss & Shakespeare -- rowan, 19:48:45 05/24/01 Thu
When Spike told Buffy he would protect Dawn "till the end
of the world" my
first thought was that it echoed the line "from this day
until the ending of
the world". Imagine my surprise when one scene later, Spike
referenced this
speech.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Joss & Shakespeare -- Shiver, 20:20:40 05/24/01
Thu
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
Does this signify that Joss plans to allow Spike to remain an
integral part
of the gang - he fought with them, he did his best to protect
Dawn; he
recognizes Wilow's power and defers to her in a leadership role
when Buffy
is not there. But could Spike & Giles speaking lines together
be an
indication that Giles & possibly Xander even might be ready to
allow a
little slack for Spike henceforth?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Joss & Shakespeare -- rowan, 20:24:07 05/24/01
Thu
I hope so. I interpreted the reference to that scene in Henry
V as a
reference to the bonding of the SG and specifically to Spike's
inclusion.
Also, one of Buffy's last acts (well, at least in her first incarnation)
was
to reinvite Spike into the Summers home. That's got to carry some
weight
with the SG.
I think the SG will have a very different (more welcoming) attitude
towards
Spike next season, and will view his actions as evidence of some
attempt at
"redemption", with an underlying fear of what might
happen if the chip
fails.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Joss & Shakespeare -- Anthony8, 20:32:00
05/24/01 Thu
Did you notice that Xander started warming to Spike up a little
in "Spiral?"
He helped him light a cigarette and somehat affectionately asked
him "have I
told you how much I dislike you today?" Come to think of
it, he was pretty
sympathetic regarding the loss of Spike's "favorite toy"
in "Intervention,"
as well. The writers really know how to throw in those little
subtle
touches, don't they?
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Joss & Shakespeare -- Wisewoman, 20:26:53
05/24/01 Thu
This thread just reminded me of one of my favorite lines in "The
Gift," when
Giles and Spike are quoting the speech and instead of "we
band of brothers"
Spike says, "we band of buggered!" LOL ;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Hey, Rowan....the Shooting Script is up...........
-- Rufus, 21:01:52
05/24/01 Thu
It shows at the end where Spike reacts to Buffys death. She is
someone he
loves and he feels like he has failed her and Dawn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Hey, Rowan....the Shooting Script is up...........
--
squireboy, 06:45:10 05/25/01 Fri
Rufus, url please? Or email if necessary? Please?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Here you go...........:):) -- Rufus, 06:56:57
05/25/01 Fri
No problem.........
http://www.mustreadtv.com/buffyscripts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Here you go...........:):) --
squireboy, 07:12:26
05/25/01 Fri
Thanks a bunch! Allow me to buy you a virtual cup of coffee .
. . :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Hey, Rowan....the Shooting Script is up...........
-- rowan,
13:53:56 05/25/01 Fri
I read it yesterday. Did you notice, Rufus, the stuff that they
decided not
to use? For example, they pared down the scene in Buffy's house
between
Spike and Buffy. Spike had a couple lines after "Til the
end of the world.
Even if that happens to be tonight." that went something
like "No one gets
near the Little Bit." There was also some reference in the
planning session
to user the SuperSlayer again.
I thought all the cuts (he,he) were excellent choices. It really
pared down
the scenes to the bare emotions. Joss is like a surgeon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Hey, Rowan....the Shooting Script
is up........... -- Rufus,
14:38:15 05/25/01 Fri
What they did in the end was perfect. I also noted that out of
all her
friends she asked Spike specifically to take care of Dawn. She
knows that
Giles loves Dawn but would kill her to save the world, but Spike
would keep
the promise til the end of the world. Buffy hasn't killed Spike,
she may be
disgusted by him at times but when he was tortured for her in
Intervention
she saw that even though a monster he had a loyalty that she may
not get
from the others, as they don't feel the same love that Buffy does
for Dawn,
and Spike does for Buffy. She may never "love" him but
I think she sees
something in him she can trust.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Thanks so much for posting this! I've been looking all over
for the full
quote. (n/t) -- Olwen, 21:01:44 05/24/01 Thu
Did Buffy get what she wanted?
-- Greg, 20:58:32 05/24/01 Thu
Not that Buffy didn't have to do what she did, because she did.
And not that
we shouldn't honor her for her sacrifice. for we should.
But in a way, of all the characters, in the end, Buffy seemed
to be the one
who got of easy from this confrontation.
I have the highest respect for Buffy. She made a huge sacrifice.
She gave up
everything for her friends. She died at 21. She never had a chance
to get
married. She doesn't get to be around her friends anymore. Finish
school. No
Angel. No, I am not trying to minimize her sacrifice here, for
it is huge.
But death also frees her from her slayer duties. Frees her from
her grief
over her mother. All that pain and worry.
It is left to others to pick up the pieces. Dawn for one, losing
her Mother
and her big sister in one year and next year she is probably going
to have
to slay her Vampire Father (poor Dawn).
They did such a good job protraying how Joyce's death effected
those around
her. I realize that they didn't have time to do that for Buffy
this year,
but next year I hope they are just as effective protraying how
Buffy's death
effects the others. Especially Dawn and Spike.
I think Dawn is going to feel a lot of guilt. She is going to
think "why
when I knew I was bleeding didn't I just jump off the ledge before
Buffy
could stop me." It should have been me, not her. I killed
my sister.
Spike is going to blame himself for not stopping Doc. Doc is probably
still
alive. Perhaps the first episode will deal with Dawn and Spike
dealing with
their survivor's guilt by hunting down Doc, and pounding his bones
into a
fine power like Buffy did with the Master.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Did Buffy get what she wanted? -- Solitude1056, 21:10:32
05/24/01 Thu
It seems reasonable to think that Spike would blame himself for
not stopping
Doc. And it might seem equally reasonable to think that Dawn might
blame
Spike, as well. But she's not written that way, so I suspect that
Spike will
not be able to forgive himself until the two characters are able
to relate
to each other, echoing Buffy & Dawn's interaction after their
mother's
death. If Dawn forgives Spike for not saving her, then in a way,
he's freed
to forgive her for not saving her sister in return. Then again,
that's what
friends do for each other, and Spike & Dawn are not only bound
now by common
origins (in terms of being something other than what they started
as) but
also in terms of being the two circling closest, and most central,
to
Buffy's task when Buffy died.
There is always someone left, to pick up the pieces.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Did Buffy get what she wanted? -- Greg, 21:16:13
05/24/01 Thu
"And it might seem equally reasonable to think that Dawn
might blame Spike,
as well. But she's not written that way."
Perhaps Dawn will be angry at Spike. That anger though really
misdirected
rage that she has about herself.
Why didn't she jump? She would think. Why did she allow Buffy
to do what she
should have done?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Because her sister/mother gave her a job to
do........... -- Rufus,
22:18:38 05/24/01 Thu
Dawn was willing to jump...I was glad of that cause it meant that
the monks
had sent her to the right place when they sent her to Buffy. Dawn
valued
life and humanity and understood what would be lost if the portal
wasn't
closed. Buffy understood that this was the time to give her gift....she
knew
as much as she knew in season 2 that it was the right thing to
do. Buffy
left Dawn with instructions to take care of the others. Buffy
talked about
her work...and I had the feeling though she would die that her
work wasn't
over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Did Buffy get what she wanted? -- rowan, 13:49:58
05/25/01 Fri
I don't know. This whole thing worries me. Spike and Dawn really
only have
each other, in some ways, and I don't honestly want to see alot
of
dissension there.
I think that Spike will blame himself and Dawn will blame herself,
and they
will help each other get over their guilt. I didn't get a sense
when Doc
tossed Spike off the platform that they were anything except grieved
and
terrified (and it was evident then that Doc would bleed Dawn before
Buffy
arrived).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Did Buffy get what she wanted? -- Sue, 18:12:16
05/25/01 Fri
Deep down Dawn won't blame Spike.
She will blame herself.
Even though it wasn't her fault.
At the moment Doc threw Spike off the platform Dawn was grieved
for Spike
and terrified. She didn't blame him.
But who knows how she will feel tomorrow.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I think she did -- Manoon, 01:50:50 05/25/01 Fri
I think that as an individual, Buffy received such a powerful
gift from
Dawn.
Buffy had been having such profound internal conflicts about what
being the
Slayer meant - ie. that she felt it was causing her to lose her
humanity,
her ability to feel, to love, she was being consumed by the darkness
and the
death rather than her life...
...then along comes this cheeky little girl who you cant really
help but
like (that's us), and her true identity and origins are revealed
to Buffy.
Which reconnects Buffy back to her humanity, she achieves the
feelings of
sisterhood, then motherhood, and all the powerful emotions which
come with
them (emotions which the SG were not enough for). She's no longer
empty,
conflicting (or if she is, much less so) despite the awful consequences
of
Dawn's presence, she is never anything except happy and unconditionally
loving of her little sister/child
Which makes it easier for me to understand her decision to sacrifice
herself. It's because Dawn made her alive again.
(anyway, I know what I am trying to say, not sure if I have articulated
it
very well... let me know!)
It took Giles to defeat Glory
-- Max, 21:23:04 05/24/01 Thu
Think about that, all you opponents of Total War, this summer.
War is Hell. You can not refine it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: It took Giles to defeat Glory -- Pen, 22:35:20 05/24/01
Thu
What Gile's act demonstrated more than anything else was what
sets Buffy
apart from the other slayers. Giles performed an essential function,
the
task that, gruesome and ethically questionable though it might
have been,
needed to be performed in order to preserve the Slayer's victory.
The dirty
work, the simple act of murder which absolved the slayer of both
responsibility and blame. She's the hero, he's -- as Willow observes
in
"Buffy versus Dracula" -- the sidekick, the practical
Sancho alongside the
visionary knight. Borges posits an ending to Don Quixote where
Quixote kills
a man, a living flesh and blood human, and either descends into
a
neverending spiral of madness or wakes up from his peculiar delusion
wracked
with guilt. Giles -- as do the rest of the Scooby Gang in their
own ways --
preserves Buffy from the necessities that might cost her the ideals
and
faith that make her a hero.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: It took Giles to defeat Glory -- Max, 00:07:36
05/25/01 Fri
Angel, on the other hand, might need to once again "go dark"
if he ever
hopes to win his war with Wolfram and Hart.
By the way, now that the season was over what was the point of
Angel setting
Darla and Dru on fire?
I was all for it when I thought it was to serve a larger purpose
(like
scaring the hell out of Wolfram and Hart) but since nothing came
out of the
act it does seem wrong.
Was it just Angel being cruel? Cruelity for personal pleasure
is most always
wrong.
I still say that the true epiphany was when Angel walked out of
the wine
cellar, locking the door behind him. That was when he realized
what he had
to become to even have a chance to defeat Wolfram and Hart.
Holland Manners sure served Wolfram and Hart when he distracted
Angel away
from his true calling. That fake epiphany saved Wolfram and Hart
from their
worst nightmare and put all of humanity at great risk.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Should it have taken Giles to defeat Glory? -- Manoon,
01:35:41
05/25/01 Fri
"Giles -- as do the rest of the Scooby Gang in their own
ways -- preserves
Buffy from the necessities that might cost her the ideals and
faith that
make her a hero."
some people might disagree, and find Buffy's inability to make
this decision
(talking about killing Ben), unheroic...
she's the Slayer, the chosen one, if this season has been about
her getting
more in touch with her Slayer roots, then isn't part of accepting
being the
Slayer making the harder decisions that no-one else is capable
of making?
just a thought anyway, not saying is what I believe, I'm more
thinking out
loud...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Guess So. -- Max, 06:27:18 05/25/01 Fri
Her not killing Ben is what makes her special.
What makes her good.
We need more people in the world like that.
But we also need people in the world like Giles who are willing
to put all
ethics and morals aside for the sake of the larger good. Who are
willing to
give up their soul and do evil for the the sake of total war.
War is Hell, you can not refine it.
It was interesting how both Wesley and Giles went Section One
in the season
final. This is probably because they were both trained as Watchers.
No, I think Buffy did the right thing in not killing Ben. She
isn't like us.
She's better.
But I am also glad that Giles was there to do what needed to be
done.
It took both Buffy's act of love and Giles' act of evil to save
the world.
That says a lot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Guess So. -- squireboy, 06:42:18 05/25/01
Fri
Giles suffocating Ben was the thing that rang truest about "The
Gift" for
me. It had to be done, and Giles is of the sort that does the
things that
need to be done, unpleasant as they may be. The Scoobies are kids,
almost
finished playing at being adults, and becoming adults. Although,
Xander
might possibly have done what needed to be done too.
I don't see Giles' act as evil at all. Ben isn't really an innocent.
He may
technically not be a demon, but he houses a hellgod, and his own
choices put
the world and all of reality in deepest peril.
I like Buffy's choice about Ben because it shows her perpetual
willingness
to offer a chance at redemption (like Faith) and Buffy's willingness
to
clean up the mess again, if necessary. I like Giles' choice too.
Hellgods
are extremely unlikely to come to a redemptive state :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Guess So. -- Jessica, 17:23:08
05/25/01 Fri
Ben isn't as innocent as he likes to pretend, he did call the
Queller to
kill all the crazy people and he was willing to let Dawn and the
rest of the
world die to stay alive. Giles did the right thing he knew that
Buffy
wouldn't kill Ben and couldn't kill Ben if she was to stay herself.
In the
magic shop when Buffy told Giles about what the guide said that
death was
her gift and that meant that been a slayer meant been a killer
Giles told
her he didn't think so, when Buffy didn't kill Ben, Giles knew
that she
still was a hero and true to who she as always been, a person
that uses her
heart and that can give people a second chance, a person that
puts the ones
she loves before herself and that will do everything in her power
to protect
her family and her friends.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Guess So. -- Sue, 18:25:15 05/25/01
Fri
"I don't see Giles' act as evil at all."
The act of killing a human is evil. Especially someone like Ben
who was
basically a victim in all this.
But it seems to be true to defeat evil, one must use evil.
Or to put it another way Giles' ends were just, but his means
were ruthless.
If he ever decides to give up being a watcher, I am sure there
would be a
position at Section One available for him.
So much for Angel's epiphany!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> She's Not like Us -- Max, 06:44:25 05/25/01
Fri
Buffy was special. She was Good. There are no words to describe
how good she
is. It is important that we have people in the world like that.
Otherwise the world would be a very dark place. She brings the
world light.
But Giles has his purpose in this world as well.
Giles, squatting over Ben.
GILES
Can you move?
BEN
Need... a minute... She could have
killed me.
GILES
No she couldn't. Never. And sooner
or later, Glory will re-emerge and make
Buffy pay for that mercy, and the world
with her. Buffy even knows that, and
still she wouldn't take a human life.
Because she's a hero, you see.
She's not like us.
BEN
Us?
War is Hell.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not like Us -- Solitude1056,
08:29:31 05/25/01 Fri
Giles was right: he and Ben are cut from the same cloth.
Ben was willing to let Dawn die, so that he could live. And Giles
was
willing to let Ben die, so that everyone else would live. (That
is, going on
the basic assumption that it's an either-or choice, given Glory's
likely
choice to come back for vengeance. Just as it was Ben's basic
assumption
that it was an either-or choice, and it didn't occur to him that
simply
stalling the ritual might be enough.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not like Us -- squireboy,
09:02:54 05/25/01 Fri
But Giles didn't just let Ben die -- he killed him. He *acted*
They aren't
the same. Ben is a weasel, loser bad guy and Giles is a hero.
A hero doing
the dirty work, but a hero nonetheless.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not like Us
-- Solitude1056, 16:35:45
05/25/01 Fri
Winner or loser? History, it's said, is judged by the victors...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not
like Us -- LoriAnn, 07:17:00 05/27/01
Sun
But what has this to do with good or evil?
That saying is usually used to condemn history as we know it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not like Us
-- Sue, 18:09:32 05/25/01 Fri
Ben is a weasel?
I don't think so. He tried to do his best.
But he wanted to live. It was either him or Dawn.
I can't blame him for his decision.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not like Us
-- Malandanza, 21:09:11 05/25/01
Fri
"But Giles didn't just let Ben die -- he killed him. He *acted*
They aren't
the same. Ben is a weasel, loser bad guy and Giles is a hero.
A hero doing
the dirty work, but a hero nonetheless."
What makes the scene most chilling to me is that Ben had saved
Giles' life.
Do you think Giles would have killed Dawn if Buffy had not realized
that she
could substitute her life for her sister's?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not
like Us -- squireboy, 21:57:44
05/25/01 Fri
I don't think Giles would have gotten the chance. Dawn was prepared
to make
her own sacrifice before Buffy took the Nestea plunge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: She's Not
like Us -- Greg, 22:02:59 05/25/01 Fri
Yes,
And he would sacrifice Buffy as well if he had too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Should it have taken Giles to defeat Glory?
-- Pen, 09:33:52
05/25/01 Fri
In a sense, I agree, actually. The hero isn't necessarily the
one who
sacrifices his/her life. Indeed, one can argue that the greater
heroism lies
is sacrificing one's ideals, one's beliefs and sense of self.
Dying may be
drastic, but, to state the extremely obvious, at least one doesn't
have to
live with the consequences. Perhaps a true hero would have killed
Ben even
at the extreme cost of losing herself, her sense of self-worth,
in the
process.
But then there's the higher standard. Can one be a hero and act
on lesser,
more pragmatic principles at the same time? Would not the act
itself be the
very thing that contraindicates heroism in Buffy's terms? I mentioned
in
another post the idea that James Bond may be a hero in some ways
-- he's
saved the world, civilization, countless nubile big-breasted women
-- but he
could never be the epic hero that Buffy is because he acts not
on ideals but
on necessity. Put a bullet through the bad guy before he launches
the
nuclear missile. Take out the henchmen before they stop you from
preventing
the villian's master plan. Do whatever is necessary. For him,
those aren't
tough choices at all. There's no particular virtue in making a
choice for a
course of action when it goes against everything you believe in.
Remember,
traitors and hypocrites are possibly the most reviled sinners
of medieval
Hell. Nor is there virtue in making the same choice when it seems
logical,
even proper from your perspective. In this, Buffy made the most
difficult
choice of all -- not succumbing to the path of practicality. Ideals
are hard
things to live up to when the path of least resistance seems to
be screaming
for you to follow it. And Giles, in a sense, is every bit as much
a hero. He
may be a killer, but he's not a willing one. He didn't kill Ben
because he
enjoyed it. He probably didn't even see it as a natural thing
to do, as
James Bond would. For him, it was a tragic necessity, and it is
the trauma
of those two words that clearly define him as a hero.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: It took Giles to defeat Glory -- Singed Cat, 19:16:19
05/26/01 Sat
"You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever
count on having
both at once." --LL
buffy -- imjc, 21:35:44 05/24/01
Thu
I would like to point out to all the posters.
That perhaps we need to see Buffy in a new view or rather a more
accurate
view. We can't classify her as just a Slayer. Like Faith or Kendra,
Or
Nikki, etc.
She's beyond them. I see Buffy as outside the box, Faith and Kendra
are all
in.
She has broken the rules of death before. (And many other rules)
Buffy to me seems like the flaw in the system of the way THINGS
were/are
supposed to function.
However, that flaw is the one thing "doing" what the
system intended to do
in the first place. Making the flaw aspect not a flaw. (Anyone
get what I'm
saying)
So Basically I just would like to point out that. We can't place
Buffy at
the same level of speculation as the rest of the characters. She
is the one
character IMO that has no real solid rules. Like i.e. Joss could
make her
grow white wings and fight a demon for like one EP and then end
up saving
NSync from some random vamp.. You know.
Hopefully y'all got my point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> She is a regular fly in the ointment of traditional CoW
rule......:):):)
-- Rufus, 22:03:34 05/24/01 Thu
Buffy is something new....something that can't be tamed and pressed
into an
acceptable slayer package...she is so far out of the box that
even the
council gave up trying to contain her. Buffy asked questions about
her duty,
how to do her duty, and who was the boss of her. She was a 90's
form of
Socrates and was too powerful to give hemlock to. She rocks the
boat of
convention. Just wait til she comes back...what the heck will
the CoW do
with that rebirth?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: buffy -- squireboy, 07:41:49 05/25/01 Fri
I get and accept at least part of your point, but it's not totally
open-ended. Buffy is special, but she can't be in an entirely
different
category than all the other characters or there is no suspense
or drama. The
writing in this show is wonderfully consistent. There are always
consequences for everything (it's so great!). Things, even Buffy,
have a
consistency and logic about them and growth comes at a certain
rate and with
a certain price. (I am worried about Willow). Buffy growing wings
(for
example) is something that would start to drag the show, as unbelievable
as
it is, out of its realm of believability (for me at least). For
me, the
strength of the slayer concept, is that she could be any 16 year
old girl
with some bestowed and undiscovered powers and that she isn't
all-powerful
and all-knowing and that she has to deal within her limitations
(expanded
from ours as they may be).
Yes, she's special, but if all bets are off, then the dramatic
tension is
gone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: buffy -- Humanitas, 10:29:56 05/25/01 Fri
The last advice Merrick (Buffy's first Watcher) gave her seems
to have taken
root deep in her consciousness:
Merrick: You do everything wrong.
Buffy [sobbing]: I'm sorry...
Merrick: No. Keep doing it wrong. Don't play our game.
Ever since, Buffy has questioned the rules, and broken them whenever
possible and necessary. That doesn't mean that she can grow wings,
but it
does mean that she always looks for the third option. In the case
of 'The
Gift,' the third option was her own death.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: buffy -- Jessica, 17:04:09 05/25/01 Fri
I agree Buffy is special, she's the first slayer to have died
and come back,
she doesn't follow the rules, she is as survived a few apocalypses
and
defied the force of evil, she fell in love with a vampire and
received help
from another, she is unique and true to herself and she puts the
ones she
loves before herself. The fact that she is unconventionnal is
the reason she
as survived for so long and the reason she will come back again.
Go and sin no more... -- OnM,
07:13:01 05/25/01 Fri
Unfortunately, have to get ready for the working world now, but
had a great
time perusing the board this AM. Thanks to all for, as usual,
your
stimulating commentary! :)
Something from my Little Brain for you to ponder in the meantime:
As you may well know, I've been positing the idea for some time
now (over a
year, actually) that Buffy's ultimate destiny is to become some
sort of
Kwisatz Haderach, a messiah if you prefer.
In Max's, and other posts below, significant comment has been
made as to
Giles' role in killing Ben/Glory, that it was both necessary,
and also
allowed Buffy to keep the idealism she needs, and how that idealism
is
important to retain.
I very much agree, and I think both Giles and Buffy did the right
thing.
However, here's a concept based on the messiah point of view.
We all know that Buffy had many opportunities to kill Spike, but
something,
some inner instinct-- we still aren't sure what-- kept her from
doing so.
Now, as Spike's journey into 'what he is now, not how he started'
has
reached a point where Buffy's sparing him *makes sense in retrospect*,
was
it wise for Giles to not show mercy to Ben/Glory, as was clearly
Buffy's
intention?
In short, did his actions defeat a greater plan that was in progress
by the
PTB, and that Buffy instinctively *knew/ without knowing* when
she showed
mercy? Or did the PTB intend for things to happen exactly as they
did,
including Giles' actions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Go and sin no more... -- Masquerade, 09:02:42 05/25/01
Fri
The problem with having a world-view that contains the idea that
there is a
"greater plan" that we humble humans aren't privy to
is that we can't let it
change our actions. We must still act our conscience, act as the
people we
are, and not try to second-guess God/the PTB's. For one thing,
we aren't
Them, we don't know what they know. For another, to assume we
do is to give
justifications to our acts they probably don't deserve. So we
need to act as
if there is not a greater plan. And if it is, it will unfold as
the greater
powers see fit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Go and sin no more... -- WatcherBaz, 12:34:39
05/25/01 Fri
These are very Tolkienesque thoughts:
"It was Pity that stayed his hand...pity and the desire not
to strike
without need....."
Bilbo, then later Frodo and Sam, spare Gollum, and we later find
that only
Gollum spares Frodo from a final failure and the ultimate triumph
of Sauron.
or as put by another (paraphrase, and I'm sorry, but I can't recall
the
correct attribution):
'There is a higher power governing our fate, rough-hew them though
we may."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Sin and Redemption -- Traveler, 12:36:20 05/25/01
Fri
In the Whedonverse, the PTB DO tell you what they want, e.g. Cordy's
visions. Besides which, even if they weren't given to her by the
PTB, Buffy
certainly has good instincts. I doubt she ever thought that Spike
would
reform, but she allowed him to live and he HAS reformed in many
ways.
Probably Buffy knew that Glory would seek revenge, but chose to
allow her
(and Ben) to live. Now, we'll never know if Glory would have tried
to gain
vengence or not. It's something I'm really pretty curious about.
Glory was very egotistical and enjoyed tormenting others. But
if you think
about it, she was nothing compared to Angelus. He was an "artist."
Glory was
just a bully. I wonder how Glory would have reacted to the knowledge
that 1)
she is forever stuck in Ben's body and this plain of existence
and 2) she
was beaten (thoroughly!) by a mortal. At the end, she was rather
pathetic as
her worldview was stripped away by Buffy's hammer. For the first
time in her
immortal existance, her life was held in someone else's hands,
and she had
been spared. Would that change her? Also, she seemed to be integrating
with
Ben somehow into a more complex being, one that was capable of
feeling guilt
and empathy. Would that process have continued? Again, we'll never
know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- rowan, 13:40:05 05/25/01
Fri
This is a very thought-provoking thread. One almost suspects that
trying to
anticipate future developements might result in deteriorating
into total
inaction.
I think with Spike, Buffy has had many opportunities to stake
him, and
consistently comes away not doing it. But with Ben, she only had
to make the
choice once. So, for us to really judge whether Giles' was "hasty"
we would
have to have some opportunity to see Buffy in the same situation
more than
once.
My gut tells me that Ben had no higher purpose and that his story
(and
Glory's is done).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- LoriAnn, 12:30:34
05/26/01 Sat
Ben was human. Do we kill humans based on what they might do in
the future?
If that were the case, death chambers would be even more active
than they
are now. In fact we would probably end up profiling people: if
many people
with certain traits do evil, we'll get rid of all people with
those traits,
and we'll never have to worry about that evil again. That would
be for the
greater good, wouldn't it?
Buffy did what we should all hope we would have the strength to
do: she
showed mercy. What might the ultimate outcome have been had Ben
and Glory
survived? Buffy didn't know, Giles didn't know, and we don't know.
All we,
as human beings, can do is try to love, have mercy, and turn the
other cheek
while we're at it. That doesn't mean lay down and die to make
evil's course
easier, but it doesn't mean become evil either.
Giles acted like religious zealots often have. Apparently, his
religion,
Watcherism, tells him it is his duty to save the world; moreover,
he must
save it at whatever cost. What is the cost of murder, and what
Giles did was
undoubtable murder? We can try to fool ourselves by the "greater
good"
argument, but that only really works when the person losing the
life is the
one who decides to sacrifice for the greater good or, perhaps,
if the action
is unavoidable.
If I were Anya or Spike or Angel, I wouldn't go to sleep around
Giles. By
the
they-did-it-once-they'll-do-it-again-and-think-of-the-bad-stuff-I-can-keep-from-happening
argument, Giles would have just as much reason to kill any of
them as he did
to kill Ben. If Xander dumped Anya, what would she do? No matter
what
happens, what will Spike do? If Angel ever has a perfectly happy
moment
again, what will happen to the world? He tried to end the world
before; kill
him now, and we won't have to worry about it again.
After all, murder in a good cause is. . .. It's still murder,
just as much
as if it were in an evil cause.
Many have posted that we need a little evil, too, not just all
good. Don't
we have enough evil already? Fighting fire with fire is a poor
metaphor
because in the right hands a small fire will stop or control a
larger.
However, an evil act only ads to the quantity of evil in the world.
Look at
all the people who think others are evil and deserve to die. We
see it in
schools, in offices, in families. Years ago a young woman was
forbidden by
her mother to see a particular boy friend; I was acquainted with
the boy.
The girl decided her mother was evil for ruining her life in this
way and
talked the boyfriend into killing evil-mom in a bloody and painful
way. He
did. Who decides who is evil? Should this pair have been given
the key to
the city for fighting evil or put away for a long, long time?
They were
sentenced to prison and are probably still there.
Evil is never justified.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- Rufus,
16:11:46 05/26/01 Sat
I don't see Giles as a zealot, he has taught Buffy restraint.
He didn't kill
Ben for what he felt Ben could or would do in the future, he killed
Ben
because he contained Glory, who Giles knew would want pointless
revenge
against a world that wouldn't worship her. She would destroy all
to get even
with Buffy. You may not think what Giles did was right, but I
think he made
a hard choice based upon his experience with Glory. He did what
he did to
make sure that the people he loved would be safe from future harm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> The mysterious will of the PTB's -- Masquerade,
13:49:37 05/25/01
Fri
"In the Whedonverse, the PTB DO tell you what they want,
e.g. Cordy's
visions."
I don't think the PTB's have ever, through Cordy or Doyle's visions,
told
anyone What to do. They simply point out a situation, and leave
it to Angel
and the gang to figure out what needs to be done. Can anyone think
of a
situation where Angel was clearly told What he was supposed to
do through
his friends' visions?
Angel is not told, and there have been mistakes, e.g., killing
the good
demon in the Season 2 opener. They give him info, and he makes
the choices.
Usually, it's a no-brainer, sometimes, it's not. Most times, figuring
out
what the PTB's are pointing out is the first mystery.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The mysterious will of the PTB's --
VanMoodyGrad, 05:32:10
05/26/01 Sat
If we assume that the visions are messages for Angel, then I would
classify
those visions as clear messages on the most part. Even in the
example you
gave about him killing the demon warrior for good, Cordy later
said there
was some evidence for understanding that Angel was supposed to
help him.
I would also assume these visions are pretty straight forward,
again on the
most part because Cordy is given times, dates, and of course the
visual
picture and emotions of persons being attacked.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The mysterious will of the PTB's
-- Masquerade, 11:41:39
05/26/01 Sat
Actually, the only evidence in the ep that Angel was supposed
to help that
demon and not kill him was the woman's word that the demon was
her
protector. When Angel relayed that information to Cordy, she said,
"Oh, so
you were supposed to help him! Thanks for the obscure visions!"
My question was not what we can "assume" based on the
visions, but the
content of the visions themselves. Flashes of images, someone
being
attacked, a name a place, sometimes not even any hint of danger,
just a
person or a place. In no vision has there been instructions, "and
you should
save this person's life". That part has always been assumed
based on Doyle's
words that the PTB's are good and just want to make things right.
Hence, my point is, that the visions themselves do not ever tell
Angel
explicitly what to do. They show him a situation, and he has to
decide for
himself what is right.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The mysterious will of
the PTB's -- Anthony8, 20:34:05
05/26/01 Sat
I agree. Isn't one of the most important things about "Good"
is that it does
not force or manipulate a person to do anything. It seems to me,
that, by
definition, even instructing someone to do something is not good
because it
reduces or eliminates the element of freewill. One must do the
right thing
because it is the right thing to do not because a higher power
compels you
or even suggests that you do so. "Evil," on the other
hand, is by its
nature, an ends justifies the means based creature. Manipulation
and
coercion are its tools. If the PTB employed the same methods they
would be
selling "their" collective souls to the other side.
They would seem at a
disadvantage, but the conviction that comes with freewill I believe
is an
intangible that offsets the possible handicap.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- change, 16:19:39 05/25/01
Fri
I think there is a problem with letting Glory survive. Even if
she gave up
on trying to use Dawn and did not seek revenge on Buffy, she still
has to
feed. So, letting her live means that more innocent people would
lose their
sanity to her. The way Giles explained it to Ben, it sounded like
he was
mostly concerned about Glory coming back for revenge, but I think
that would
have been the least of the issues with letting her live.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- Malandanza,
20:40:41 05/25/01 Fri
"I think there is a problem with letting Glory survive. Even
if she gave up
on trying to use Dawn and did not seek revenge on Buffy, she still
has to
feed. So, letting her live means that more innocent people would
lose their
sanity to her. The way Giles explained it to Ben, it sounded like
he was
mostly concerned about Glory coming back for revenge, but I think
that would
have been the least of the issues with letting her live."
I think Glory was gone back to that dark place in the mind that
she
mentioned to Tara and I doubt she would have wanted to return.
What would be
waiting for her? Her minions were slaughtered -- any that escaped
would have
had their faith shaken (seeing one's god defeated is enough to
make one
agnostic). Glory was at her most powerful before this ritual and
she was
still defeated -- this was her one shot. (Maybe the minions will
switch
their allegiance to Buffy -- imagine the Scoobies staking out
Buffy's grave
in an effort to keep the "hobbits with leprosy" from
turning it into a
shrine :) one of the things that I have liked about BtVS, is that
Joss and
the writers often make me feel sorry for the villians (there are
exceptions,
of course: The Master, Angelus and Adam, for example).
But I think the important part of Giles' talk with Ben was directed
at Ben,
himself. Giles, like Dawn, understood that Ben was the real monster.
He
killed Ben for Ben's crimes, not Glory's -- killing Glory at the
same time
was just a bonus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Sin and Redemption -- LoriAnn,
21:45:19 05/26/01 Sat
Which crimes did Giles know Ben had committed?
Buffy's Perfection (long) --
change, 07:46:23 05/25/01 Fri
I really like BtVS, but as anyone who has read some of my previous
posts
knows, I'm a little concerned with the show's recent direction.
I think
Buffy is becoming too good a hero. The problem with this is that
it makes
her character less realistic. Real people are not perfect, they
are not
either all good or all bad. Real people are a mix of strengths
and
weaknesses, of good and bad. Buffy is becoming too pure to be
a realistic
character.
Take a look at how the other characters on BtVS are protrayed
as an example
of what I mean. The other characters have their problems and flaws,
and
that's what makes them interesting. Giles is not just an encyclopedia
of
arcane knowledge, and not just Buffy's perfect father figure.
He has his
dark side (the Ripper persona), he is shown to be weak when it
comes to
standing up to the CoW, and he is protrayed as a bit of a slacker
(he didn't
work for a year). Willow is becoming morally ambivalent. She has
been shown
as being willing to learn and use any magic (i.e. knowledge) regardless
of
the consequences, including the "Darkest Magic". She
even went off on her
own quest for vengeance. Anyone besides me think she's going to
be next
year's big bad? Xander is protrayed as an underachieve. He seems
to be one
of the smarter ones in the group, but never tried hard in school,
and has no
interest in college. Of all the characters in the show, Dawn has
the most
right to be a two dimensional one. She was created by monks less
than a year
ago. She has had very few real life experiences of her own. However,
even
her character has its interesting quirks. She's protrayed as self
centered,
bit of a thief, and has a tendency to blurt out stupid things
about Cuba and
the CIA (what kind of Monks were they?). My point is that interesting
characters have both good points and bad points, and that the
supporting
characters on BtVS have all been drawn up this way.
Now consider Buffy. The original Buffy also had her flaws. She
was self
centered like Dawn and wanted a normal life instead of a Slayer's
life. In
PG, she was afraid to die to save the World. After Becoming, she
runs away
from home and abandons Sunnydale and the SG. When she gets telepathy
in
Earshot, she uses it to cheat in class and to try to read her
lover's
private thoughts. She is also almost seduced to the dark side
by Faith in
Bad Girls. Things like this are not bad. They are what make characters
interesting. They also make them more realistic. What high school
student
wouldn't use telepathy to cheat? Who wouldn't be afraid to die?
But, this is
what is missing in the new Buffy. In this last year, Buffy's biggest
mistakes were giving up for a while after having been beaten a
couple of
times by a god who seemed to be unbeatable, and being emotionally
distant
from Riley when her mother was dieing. Can you really blame Buffy
for that?
Are these really failures? I'm not saying that Buffy should be
evil, or that
she should be weak. What I'm trying to say is that she is becoming
too
perfect. Human beings are not perfect. We all have our failings.
But, the
writers have been taking that away from Buffy over the last year.
Consider Buffy's sacrifice. I don't have a problem with the idea
of Buffy
sacrificing herself to save her sister. I think that is something
that most
people would do. However, it would be hard. People don't want
to die, even
to save their loved ones. People are afraid of death. However,
this is not
how the new Buffy felt. As soon as she realized she could save
Dawn by
committing suicide, she immediately did it. She had no indecision,
and no
fear. It appeared to me that she almost smiling when she jumped.
Again,
sacrificing yourself to save a loved one is something I agree
with. My
problem is with Buffy's lack of human fear and uncertainty. She
is becoming
too heroic.
Buffy's sacrifice had a great deal of Christian symbolism in it.
Dawn, as an
innocent, was a Christ figure. They even had her hands tied so
that she was
in a cruciform position. At the end, Dawn decides to sacrifice
herself in
order to save mankind from the demons that will be released from
the other
dimensions (i.e. save mankind from descending to hell). Instead,
Buffy stops
Dawn and sacrifices herself instead. So, now Buffy has sacrificed
herself to
save the Christ figure. Does that make Buffy one better than Christ?
Can
anyone see what I mean when I say that Buffy is becoming too perfect?
Look at the debates on this board. The harshest comments I've
found so far
are: (1) Buffy's sacrifice was selfish because she should have
sacrificed
her sister so that she could be around to protect Sunnydale, (2)
Buffy's
sacrifice was not a big deal because there is only one key but
the slayer
will be replaced, and (3) Buffy sacrificed herself in part because
she had
developed a death wish after years of killing demons and vampires
(is this
another way of saying she wanted to atone for her sins?). Does
this sound
like a debate about a real person?
I am for Buffy being a hero. However, being a hero does not mean
that you
are never afraid, or that you don't have your own problems. It
means that
you overcome your fears and your problems to do the right thing.
This is
being taking away from the Buffy character.
I really like BtVS. I hope that the writers bring back some of
the old
Buffy. Buffy has died and will now be resurrected. Maybe that
will change
her and bring back some of her humanity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- squireboy, 08:25:40 05/25/01
Fri
Excellent post! You articulated some of the things I've been trying
to say
about my discomfort with "The Gift". Just because I've
only typed some of
the negative things you noted above, doesn't mean I thought those
were the
only problems, they were just the ones I wrote about. :)
Buffy being "too heroic"? I guess that's one way of
expressing it. It isn't
the way I was coming at it, when I said I see her sacrifice as
selfish. I
don't think this Slayer is disposable. I see her detachment from
the
world/her duties and "cocooning" with Dawn as a great
failure. The world
needs her badly. What has she left us with? It just doesn't add
up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- Kerri, 09:06:08 05/25/01
Fri
I completely disagree! I understand what you are saying, but I
think that
this year we have seen more of Buffy's flaw's then ever before:
we see her
losing battles-both physical and emotional ones. She can't beat
Glory. But
more importantly her soul is damaged by everything she went through.
When
Buffy is talking to Giles she says that when she sacraficed Angel
she knew
it was right, but she doesn't have that anymore. In other words
Buffy has
lost her faith in good triumphing over evil, she doesn't see the
point in
trying. We also have seen Buffy's flaw of shutting down after
her mother's
death.
In the end Buffy realises her role as a slayer, and person, and
importantly
a sister which gives her the courage to die. I think this year
has shown
Buffy's imperfection anf fears, and by doing so has made her an
even more
realistic character.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- Pen, 10:16:56 05/25/01
Fri
Interesting. Not merely because I think you make some valid points,
but
because I've actually had the opposite reaction on many occasions
of late.
The younger Buffy was flawed, but we could forgive her for that.
"I'm a
teen! I've yet to mature!" she says to Giles, and we understood
the truth of
that. But what has troubled (not so much troubled, really, as
interested) me
in later days has been the escalation of certain flaws, particularly
those
associated with the Slayer. Her immediate reaction to virtually
anything is
a threat of violence...from "Please don't be suggesting what
I'd have to
kill you for suggesting" (Intervention) to "Look at
her like that again and
she'll be the last thing you ever see" (Spiral). And numerous
others over
the years. She is willful, often incapable of dealing with the
possibility
that she might be in the wrong, arrogant, overly emotional at
times
(judgement call, though), doesn't forgive easily, has a vast capacity
for
denial, tends to be self-centered when her friends are clearly
asking her
for some empathy, has a certain capacity for blind panic that
even the SG
didn't exhibit, et cetera, ad infinitum. Part of this (I posit)
may come
from her assurance that she must suffer the burden of Slayerhood,
thus can
get away with a certain antisocial behaviour. Part comes (again,
I posit)
from the fact that she has clearly matured far beyond most people
in many
ways -- the constant facing of the death and saving of the world
will do
that to you -- but perhaps at the expense of other areas that
us mere humans
must develop. And she even recognizes some of her flaws. She understands
that she will never be Willow's intellectual equal. She knows
that her
mother, and even Giles, were/are far more emotionally stable.
She realizes
she was too blind to see that Spike's behaviour was moving toward
the
direction of ameliorating some her entirely-justified treatment
of him. She
even realizes that Xander may have some wisdom to offer (such
as during and
after Riley issues.) She is clearly on the ropes by the end of
the season
and admits it, as painful though it might be. She doesn't merely
admit Glory
is too powerful, she admits, implicitly, that she might actually
be weak in
a sense. So her final sacrifice -- which, mind you, she didn't
go to happily
-- cannot be judged in a vacuum. She went quickly...but Dawn moved
every bit
as quickly. Anya threw herself in the path of a load of bricks.
Tara
sacrificed her sanity -- from my perspective, almost worse than
dying. Spike
would have died to save either Dawn or Buffy (geez, the Hellbitch
tortured
him near to the point of, well, dust, and he just taunted her.)
None of them
even (as far as we can tell) contemplated doing anything else.
Buffy did
what was in her nature.
Buffy, too good? I suspect that, if I had never watched the show
and were
somehow drawn into TV-land and met her, I'd find her the slightest
bit
difficult to take in some ways. Which isn't to say that, after
5 years (4
1/2, actually), I am not extremely fond of the character.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- change, 16:56:01
05/25/01 Fri
You make some interesting points.
> But what has troubled (not so much troubled, really, as interested)
me in
later days has been the escalation of
> certain flaws, particularly those associated with the Slayer.
Her
immediate reaction to virtually anything is a
> threat of violence...from "Please don't be suggesting
what I'd have to
kill you for suggesting" (Intervention)
> to "Look at her like that again and she'll be the last
thing you ever see"
(Spiral). And numerous others over the
> years.
I hadn't really thought of her as threatenning violence all the
time. I
suppose you could draw that conclusion. At least some of her threats
are
meant as jokes though (in Intervention for example). However,
the idea of
her Slayer aspect taking over her personality is interesting though.
It
would tie in nicely with Buffy vs Dracula.
As far as her being willful and arrogant, I think that comes from
having to
assume the leadership role in the group. From my point of view,
I think that
Giles should really be the leader of the SG. This is what the
CoW trained
him to, and he has more years of life experience than any of them.
He is
just too weak a leader to do it and so Buffy has had to step in.
To me,
Buffy's willfulness and arrogance are a natural consequence of
this. As
Maggie Walsh said, Buffy is lacking a strong father figure.
> she has clearly matured far beyond most people in many ways
This is one of my big problems with the way Buffy is written.
She is too
mature. I know that being the Slayer has forced her to grow up
fast, but she
is still only 20 years old. I just don't feel that she acts like
any 20 year
old girl that I know.
> So her final sacrifice -- which, mind you, she didn't go
to happily --
cannot be judged in a vacuum.
This is my other big problem with Buffy. I think she did go happily
to her
sacrifice. I rewatched that scene. She looks like she is in a
state of bliss
when she jumps off the tower and into the portal. When she talks
to Dawn
just before she jumps, she sounds calm and at peace, not like
a scared
twenty year old about to die. I know that part of the point of
the scene is
that Buffy has learned to accept her role as the slayer and the
need to do
her work (which in this case involves committing suicide), I just
think she
is just too accepting of it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- Solitude1056,
17:41:33 05/25/01
Fri
I interpreted the look on Buffy's face (just before she jumped)
as the joy
of someone who'd finally found a purpose again, after feeling
like she was
in "the dark night of the soul" and had lost any sense
of purpose. Whatever
else Buffy's flaws, she's always been a character who needs something
to do
- even if that doing is usually of a violent type - and she needs
a reason
to do it. Between everything else this season, she'd lost any
internal
understanding of why she was fighting what seemed to her to be
losing
battles, that she couldn't win. This was one choice she could
actively
choose, and thus still win, somehow. Not a perfect win, but no
tragedy is.
Her insistence on "doing" is a flaw, but it seems to
me that if Buffy had
let her sister jump, then Buffy would've felt herself a failure,
because
it's her role to be the one "to do." Standing by and
watching someone else
"do" is no more and no less than what she experienced
with her mother's
illness and death. Buffy's still a hero in my book, but she's
also one with
flaws, and that just makes the tragedy of the forced choice all
the more
powerful.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) --
LoriAnn, 06:38:44 05/27/01
Sun
Earlier in the ep Buffy told Giles that she knew exactly what
she had to do
when she stabbed Angel to save the world, but she didn't know
what to do
anymore. Her "joy" was absolute certitude that she both
knew what the right
thing to do was and that she was doing it. She says as much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- change, 16:30:37
05/25/01 Fri
I disagree with you as to what constitutes a flaw. I don't think
it is a
flaw to lose a fight to someone who is an order of magnitude stronger
than
you are. I also think that shutting down emotionally for a while
after a
loved one dies is a natural thing to do. Buffy never lost any
of her belief
in the need to fight evil. She just didn't see how she could win
this
particular battle against an opponent as powerful as Glory.
And when Buffy said she didn't have the same certainty she did
when she
sacrificed Angel, I think she was talking about sacrificing Dawn.
I wouldn't
want her to be ready to do that, and, as it turned out, she didn't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Perfection ? -- Sue, 18:07:25 05/25/01 Fri
"The problem with this is that it makes her character less
realistic. Real
people are not perfect, they are not either all good or all bad.
"
Buffy wasn't perfect, but that said, there are people out there
who are more
good than the average person. I have been fortunate to meet some
of them.
So therefore, I do not believe Buffy being good makes her character
less
realistic, for there are real people out there like that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- Maladanza, 22:26:58 05/25/01
Fri
"Consider Buffy's sacrifice. I don't have a problem with
the idea of Buffy
sacrificing herself to save her sister. I think that is something
that most
people would do. However, it would be hard. People don't want
to die, even
to save their loved ones. People are afraid of death. However,
this is not
how the new Buffy felt. As soon as she realized she could save
Dawn by
committing suicide, she immediately did it. She had no indecision,
and no
fear. It appeared to me that she almost smiling when she jumped.
Again,
sacrificing yourself to save a loved one is something I agree
with. My
problem is with Buffy's lack of human fear and uncertainty. She
is becoming
too heroic."
I had a problem with Dawn's willingness to sacrifice herself.
Look back over
Glory's speech to Dawn:
GLORY(to Dawn): Oh, no, sweetie baby, I'm talking about the ritual.
'Cause
you know, I bleed you, the portals open, but once you die, they
close. The
faster you die, the better for your sorry species. I'm bettin'
Buffy knows
that. And since you're not really her sister--
-- I'm guessing she isn't gonna show. And if she does... it might
not be to
save you.
Dawn should have been worried when Buffy found out she was bleeding
-- I
would have liked to have seen Dawn recoil in terror at her sister's
approach, as if Buffy were a monster to be feared.
But for Buffy to sacrifice herself for her sister does not require
me to
strain my imagination. She is not Prophecy Girl any longer, she's
a hero.
Buffy had decide before they ever reached the sacrifice spot that
she would
either save Dawn or let the world end -- and she had had a presentiment
that
she would lose against Glory. The Deathwish realized gave her
an inner peace
-- whatever happened, she was prepared.
Why was Buffy ready to destroy the world (by her inaction and
by her actions
-- she told her friends she would kill any of them who approached
Dawn)? My
feeling is that Buffy has a quarrel with God. She has sacrificed
and
sacrificed for the good of humanity, fighting against the legions
of
darkness in nearly hopeless battles, but no matter how much she
gives, TPTB
want more. So Buffy rails against God -- she sacrificed Angel,
that was
enough, they cannot have Dawn, too. And a just God would not demand
any more
from her -- and if God is unjust, what is she fighting for? why
not let the
universe end? But she has an epiphany at the last minute -- and
realizes
that there is another way out. Why shouldn't she have looked peceful?
She
had already come to terms with sacrificing herself and all of
creation
rather than sacrifice her sister.
I see Buffy as more of a Jonah character than a Christ figure
(the second
half of Jonah's story was always more intriguing to me).
At first, I disliked Buffy being killed off when the writers will
just bring
her back, but I think what has been missing from Buffy is the
spiritual
element. It always seemed a bit unlikely to me that people who
deal with
evil on a daily basis (and use crosses and holy water to repel
vampires)
never set foot in a church/temple/whatever. I understand that
there are
pragmatic reasons for avoiding faith (pick a religion and you
alienate all
the others; plus, it's cool to be agnostic) and I wouldn't want
to see
Buffy/7th Heaven crossovers, but I do think that the the writers
will
explore this area next season (they'll almost have to -- if they
bring Buffy
back). We'll have a better idea of what the afterlife is like
in the
Buffyverse -- will it be the vaccuum experienced by Darla (or
not
experienced, I guess) or will Gunn's traditional view of Christianity
be
closer to the truth (Gunn (to Wesley): We die horribly and painfully,
you go
to hell and I spend eternity in the arms of Baby Jesus)?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- change, 05:03:28
05/26/01 Sat
> I had a problem with Dawn's willingness to sacrifice herself.
Look back
over Glory's speech to Dawn:
> Dawn should have been worried when Buffy found out she was
bleeding -- I
would have liked to have seen Dawn recoil
> in terror at her sister's approach, as if Buffy were a monster
to be
feared.
Actually, I didn't have a problem with Dawn being ready to sacrifice
herself. It is consistent with the story so far. Dawn has been
been feeling
guilty for Glory's attacks on the SG. Sacrificing herself would
be a way to
atone for them. She has also known that she would be used bring
an
apocalypse and would feel some responsibility for that. Then Glory
told her
that the portal would close as soon as she died. The thing is,
Dawn had time
to process all of this and to decide to sacrifice herself. Buffy,
on the
other hand, didn't realize that she could close the portal until
10 second
before she did. That's the difference between Dawn's willingless
to
sacrifice herself and Buffy's. Dawn felt responsible and guilty
for the
apocalypse and had time to come to terms with the idea of sacrificing
herself to stop it. Buffy, on the other hand, wasn't responsible
for it,
shouldn't have felt guilt for it, and never had time to really
come to terms
with the idea of sacrificing herself to stop it. Note that when
I say
sacrifice, I mean committing suicide to stop it, not being willing
to fight
to the death to stop it. Buffy definitely planned to fight to
the death to
stop Glory, but that is a different thing than committing suicide,
and IMO,
requires a different thought process.
> I wouldn't want to see Buffy/7th Heaven crossovers
Neither would I.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection -- Maladanza, 13:00:54
05/26/01 Sat
"Actually, I didn't have a problem with Dawn being ready
to sacrifice
herself. It is consistent with the story so far. Dawn has been
feeling
guilty for Glory's attacks on the SG. Sacrificing herself would
be a way to
atone for them. She has also known that she would be used bring
an
apocalypse and would feel some responsibility for that. Then Glory
told her
that the portal would close as soon as she died. The thing is,
Dawn had time
to process all of this and to decide to sacrifice herself."
I think Dawn spent the few hours before the ritual hoping and
praying that
Buffy would show up rather than contemplating self-sacrifice.
When Glory
came for Dawn, to have her carried to the tower, Dawn screamed
for Buffy,
and again, while the fighting was going on, she called out Buffy's
name.
This suggests to me that Dawn had not come to terms with her impending
death
and that she was clinging to life as desperately as she could.
Furthermore,
Dawn is a creature with a moral compass -- humans have a soul
that
predisposes the towards good, demons have something similar that
predisposes
them towards evil, but a soulless creature like Dawn (unless the
monks also
manufactured a soul for her) has only her experiences to guide
her. At 14,
with only the last six months being real, that is not much to
go by. I doubt
there are many 14 year olds whose thought processes are sophisticated
enough
to contemplate sacrificing themselves for the sake of humanity
while chained
to a tower and awaiting death.
"Buffy, on the other hand, didn't realize that she could
close the portal
until 10 second before she did. That's the difference between
Dawn's
willingness to sacrifice herself and Buffy's. Dawn felt responsible
and
guilty for the apocalypse and had time to come to terms with the
idea of
sacrificing herself to stop it. Buffy, on the other hand, wasn't
responsible
for it, shouldn't have felt guilt for it, and never had time to
really come
to terms with the idea of sacrificing herself to stop it. Note
that when I
say sacrifice, I mean committing suicide to stop it, not being
willing to
fight to the death to stop it. Buffy definitely planned to fight
to the
death to stop Glory, but that is a different thing than committing
suicide,
and IMO, requires a different thought process."
Buffy believe in WotW that she was responsible, that she had failed,
that
she had, in effect, killed her sister. She shouldn't have felt
guilty, but
she has a history of blaming herself for events beyond her control.
Now
consider Buffy's final battle with Glory: Glory was beaten long
before Buffy
stopped swinging the hammer. Buffy's mission was to stop the sacrifice,
not
to "fight Glory to the death," and not to engage in
witty banter after Glory
had fallen. How late was she in saving Dawn? 30 seconds? Do you
think it
would not have crossed her mind at that moment that she could
have stopped
the ritual if only she had been just a little bit faster?
I think Buffy had spent considerably longer than 10 seconds coming
to terms
with sacrifice -- she was willing to sacrifice her friends, herself
and the
world. By contrast, I think Dawn had about 30 seconds -- she was
expecting
to be rescued at least until Doc pulled out a knife, and probably
until he
cut into her flesh (although 30 seconds is probably enough time
make a rash
decision -- thinking too long might have weakened her resolve).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection -- Rufus, 16:07:56
05/26/01 Sat
You made an assumption that Dawn was a souless creature....we
don't know
that. We also know from what Joss has said recently that the soul
is a
direction the souled are predisposed to travelling in, not a guarantee
they
will head in the right direction. Dawn seemes to have a moral
compass
pointed in the same direction of her sister...no surprise if Dawn
is in fact
created from part of Buffy. When she could see that the portal
was beginning
to open, Dawn instinctively went to do what she thought her sister
would,
save the world. This is why I continue to say that the monks were
so smart.
They also said that Dawn is now human, so I assume that she has
a soul. If
the bad guys can recreate Darla complete with a soul, then why
can't the
guys working for the forces of good construct a human, using human
DNA,
complete with a soul? Dawn didn't think she just moved to close
the portal.
I think the monks made her out of the best stuff in making her
part of
Buffy, giving humanity the best chance against Glory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection -- Malandanza,
11:01:05 05/27/01 Sun
I've been having some technical difficulties trying to post this
response,
so forgive me if it is a duplicate post.
"You made an assumption that Dawn was a soulless creature....we
don't know
that. We also know from what Joss has said recently that the soul
is a
direction the souled are predisposed to traveling in, not a guarantee
they
will head in the right direction. Dawn seems to have a moral compass
pointed
in the same direction of her sister...no surprise if Dawn is in
fact created
from part of Buffy. When she could see that the portal was beginning
to
open, Dawn instinctively went to do what she thought her sister
would, save
the world. This is why I continue to say that the monks were so
smart. They
also said that Dawn is now human, so I assume that she has a soul.
If the
bad guys can recreate Darla complete with a soul, then why can't
the guys
working for the forces of good construct a human, using human
DNA, complete
with a soul? Dawn didn't think she just moved to close the portal.
I think
the monks made her out of the best stuff in making her part of
Buffy, giving
humanity the best chance against Glory."
I meant to say the Dawn lacks a moral compass rather than she
has a moral
compass -- fortunately both you and change figured that out :)
I have more of problem with the monks being able to create out
of nothing a
soul for Dawn than a material body. I don't believe that W&H created
a soul
for Darla -- I think they restored her former soul (although I
have nagging
doubts about exactly what the spell entailed -- particularly,
if they
restored her human body with her human soul, why did she have
her vampire
memories?) If Dawn is a soulless being, she is more likely to
do good than
demons and vampires who are predisposed towards evil. If a soul
is a
consequence of being human, and develops over time, Dawn has not
been around
long enough to have developed much of a soul.
You said "the monks made her out of the best stuff in making
her part of
Buffy." How about this for an odd theory: the monks took
a slice of Buffy's
soul to animate Dawn when they created her. Thus, Dawn is more
a part of
Buffy than would be a creature of mere flesh and bone. And, perhaps,
Buffy's
flirtation with darkness this season is not a result of the direct
influence
of the First Slayer, but of a weakening of her own moral compass
as a result
of the monk's interference.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection -- change, 17:17:29
05/26/01 Sat
> Furthermore, Dawn is a creature with a moral compass -- humans
have a soul
that predisposes the towards good,
> demons have something similar that predisposes them towards
evil, but a
soulless creature like Dawn (unless the
> monks also manufactured a soul for her) has only her experiences
to guide
her. At 14, with only the last six
> months being real, that is not much to go by. I doubt there
are many 14
year olds whose thought processes are
> sophisticated enough to contemplate sacrificing themselves
for the sake of
humanity while chained to a
> tower and awaiting death.
I don't know of any reason to assume that Dawn does not have a
soul. The
Monks said that she is human. To me, that implies that she has
a soul.
I think that teenagers tend to be more idealistic than older people.
They
don't have as much life experience to understand pain. They tend
to think of
themselves as invulnerable. I think a 14 year old could contemplate
sacrificing themselve to save the world, especially if they had
time to come
to terms with it.
> Buffy believe in WotW that she was responsible, that she
had failed, that
she had, in effect, killed her sister. She
> shouldn't have felt guilty, but she has a history of blaming
herself for
events beyond her control. Now consider
> Buffy's final battle with Glory: Glory was beaten long before
Buffy
stopped swinging the hammer. Buffy's mission
> was to stop the sacrifice, not to "fight Glory to the
death," and not to
engage in witty banter after Glory had
> fallen. How late was she in saving Dawn? 30 seconds? Do you
think it would
not have crossed her mind at that moment
> that she could have stopped the ritual if only she had been
just a little
bit faster?
I think one of Glory's powers was nearly instantanious healing.
In previous
fights, whenever Glory was hurt or slowed down, she recovered
within a few
minutes or seconds. In the Gift, after Willow zapped her, Glory
said whe'd
be back to full strength in a few seconds. I think Buffy had no
choice but
to keep pounding Glory continuously until she killed her. If she
had stopped
for a few minutes to save Dawn, Glory would have recovered. I
think the only
reason she stopped was because Glory morphed into Ben and she
couldn't kill
Ben because she was human. Given that, I don't think Buffy would
have felt
guilty about continuing the fight with Glory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- LoriAnn, 07:12:54
05/27/01 Sun
One, regarding your idea that she "never had time to really
come to terms
with the idea of sacrificing herself," thought is instantaneous;
more than
that, we visually went over the thought process in seconds, and
these were
not new concepts to Buffy because she has been sacrificing herself,
one way
or another, for five years.
Two, there is a distinction between suicide and sacrifice; it
is one of
intent. Buffy didn't commit suicide; she closed the gate that
the blood of
the key had unlocked. Her death was a byproduct of saving the
world. This is
a distinction that moralists make.
Although Buffy does have some flaws; she works toward overcoming
them. We
don't need heroes who reflect what we are because we have plenty
of what we
are already. We need heroes who show us what we could be, what
we can be,
heroes who hold up a light rather than a mirror. Glory is a mirror
of the
venality of human beings: whatever I do is alright because that's
the way I
am. Buffy is a light that shows we can be more than that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's Perfection (long) -- Sue, 09:44:49 05/26/01
Sat
"I had a problem with Dawn's willingness to sacrifice herself.
"
I had no problem with that. I think most of us would do the same
in such a
situation.
Reflections on the Gift (Long,
no really) -- fresne, 10:05:55 05/25/01 Fri
Needless
To
Say
There
Are
Spoilers
There are about a dozen threads I could tie this post into, but
that would
require a slicing and dicing of my thoughts and it takes me too
long to
organize them in the first place...
You know before I say anything, I really have to mention how much
I have
enjoyed this season. Sure there were things I would have changed,
but
overall this has been an incredibly thematically coherent season
and once
again I am awed at just how much events evolve over the course
of a season.
We never end where we began.
There have been some powerful episodes this season. And as OnM,
suggested in
an earlier thread, "...you could form a trilogy of *Fool
for Love*, *The
Body/Forever* and *The Gift*, and if you think about it, they
essentially
tell the whole story of the season." And they do in a wonderful
progression.
In Fool for Love, Spike tells Buffy that the other slayers died
because they
had a death wish. Because they wanted it. They grew weary. They
lost their
ties to the world. And in that split moment, they let go and Spike
slipped
in. (And as I write that line, I have to say, am I blind that
I didn't
notice that Spike was talking about sex, the little death, as
much as death
in that scene. That final gasp. That look of peace. Hmmm...but
I digress.)
Each of their deaths was a defeat. In all of the Watcher books
that Buffy
reads, the Slayer's final moment was unrecorded. Lost. A defeat.
One
imagines that perhaps the Watchers didn't record those moments
because the
force that killed the Slayer killed everyone else too.
And then we have the Body/Forever. Ties are broken. Grief and
worry weigh
the Slayer down. Sisters bond in a moment of common grief.
And then and then. The Gift. Buffy's gift. Death. She can give
her death.
Interestingly Buffy's death is both an example of and a total
reversal of
the Slayer Death wish. (All hail the evil genius Joss) Buffy is
weary in The
Gift. The Appocolyses just keep coming. She has lost her way.
She has lost
clarity in her calling.
And because she is in a crisis of faith, because she can no longer
trust
logic, which dryly dictates Dawn must die, she clings to instinct.
Defend
her sister, her child, someone worth fighting for.
She draws her line in the sand and says enough is enough. No more
compromises or emotional sacrifices. She's been down that road.
Not again.
That's why the episode resonates so much with Becoming. It's the
same point
on the circle, just at a different point in the gyre.
And then standing above the world, she has her epiphany. Buffy
thinks
outside the box. Its not Dawn dies or the world ends. Pick option
C. Don't
hold back. Give. She finally regains, or perhaps gains for the
first time
that sense of clarity about who she is and what she must do. "But
this is
the work I have to do. Tell Giles I... I figured it out. And I'm
okay."
Buffy dies not because she's let go or can't go on, but because
thought and
instinct have become one. She figures it out. Buffy dies because
of, not due
to a lack of, ties to the world, to Dawn. Because Buffy is full
of love.
Which is why for me, Buffy's death is a sort of victory, not a
defeat. Glory
does not achieve her objective. Buffy won that fight. Buffy achieved
her
objective. Dawn's life is saved. If Buffy has to die to achieve
her goals,
(Because to paraphrase Wesley, if you try and save everyone, you
end up
saving no one.) then that is an action that she freely makes.
She leaps into
the air to fall into the light as the sun rises.
Contrast that to Ben's death. Unwilling to act on another's behalf,
he lies
broken in the dirt, in shadow, unable to move, his breath stopped.
Because
if blood is life, so is breath. That's why names have power. Spoken
vows
have significance. Now I don't think that Ben was a tarred black
villain. He
just made certain choices, which had consequences. That's life.
That's
death.
Two people lying broken on the ground. Blood/Breath. Light/Dark.
Female/Male. Both reluctant siblings to someone, something, not
related to
them. Both making choices that result in their death.
Ben chooses to live at the expense of Dawn's life. Buffy chooses
to die for
Dawn.
Flesh of her flesh. Blood of her blood. How incredibly Eucharistic.
It was impossible for me to watch Buffy's sacrificial fall, without
thinking
of Cú Chulainn tied to his tree, or the Mayan maid falling
into the well, or
(since these things should always be a triptych) Christ on his
cross.
I really don't want to push the Christ thing too much, however...Christian
symbolism is so engrained in Western Culture that you cannot have
a
character sacrifice their life for the good of another without
evoking an
echo of Christ. How much more so in a show where characters wield
Crosses as
weapons. Keep in mind that that was a choice on Joss' part. Ann
Rice skipped
it. Heck Stoker has Vampires wandering around in daylight. The
Vampyric
canon is nothing if not flexible.
After I saw Buffy's sacrifice, I thought of Anya's ill omened
bunny rabbit.
A bad omen for Anya. The world will end. Someone will die. Given
that I
associate rabbits with Easter, I found it a hopeful omen. Buffy
sacrificed
herself. She died. But it is a death associated with promise.
Rebirth. Hope.
Love.
All of which is why I wouldn't have a problem if Buffy came back.
She died
because that was what she had to do. Where she had to go now.
Consider again
her words before she jumps.
Actually what I would like to see for the season opener would
be a spiritual
journey for Buffy in the (a?) realm of the dead. Perhaps have
the current
Buffy walk through earlier scenes from the series (we have the
technology).
That way new viewers could be introduced to the show thus far
and yet scenes
could serve an overall thematic purpose. Perhaps have characters
serve as
spirit guides. It need not be static. The Underworld has its threats
too.
(Have I mentioned that I'm fascinated by stories of the Underworld?
Cases in
point http://pw1.netcom.com/~fresne/waiting.html and
http://pw1.netcom.com/~fresne/anticipation.html)
And yet unlike the Christ sacrifice, a life for a whole world,
Buffy died
really for one individual. Yes, she saved the world, but to my
mind she
jumped to save Dawn.
Actually, the entire episode was about individual connections
and sacrifice.
Anya cared if Xander or herself survived. Secondarily the others.
She pushed
Xander out of the way of the falling bricks and could have died.
Willow tells Buffy that she has been concentrating on spells to
help Tara,
which may secondarily help defeat Glory.
Spike cheerily expected to die helping Buffy and promised to protect
Dawn
until the end of the world. Interesting, that Spike made the same
climb as
Buffy up the Leaning Tower of Babel. He made the same fall as
Buffy, but he
fails where she succeeds.
Giles...hmmm...well hmmm. Giles is stuck with the world view.
Telling Buffy that
she must sacrifice Dawn to save the world, again. Saving the world
at the
cost of personal honor. Polishing his glasses before quietly doing
what must
be done. Of course, since he knows that Buffy would be the first
to die when
Glory recovers herself, perhaps that is a personal sacrifice for
an
individual as well.
And while Buffy's un-pep talk before the final battle isn't exactly
the St.
Crispin's day speech,
"We few... we happy few, we band of brothers - for he who
sheds his blood
with me today shall be my brother, be he ne'er so vile this day
will gentle
his condition." Henry V.
Spike and Giles cannot mention it (humorously riffing on it) without
bringing into play a resonance that fighting beside someone, making
the
personal sacrifices transforms people into brothers. Into sisters.
Into
family. In the appropriately named Blood Ties, Buffy held her
bleeding hand
to Dawn's hand and they mixed blood.
In the Gift, Buffy redeemed the promise inherent in that action.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, no really) -- rowan,
13:44:35 05/25/01
Fri
"And in that split moment, they let go and Spike slipped
in. (And as I write
that line, I have to say, am I blind that I didn't notice that
Spike was
talking about sex, the little death, as much as death in that
scene. That
final gasp. That look of peace. Hmmm...but I digress.)"
Whenever someone tells me that Buffy is not attracted to Spike,
I always
point to FFL for precisely this reason. Not only was Spike the
master of his
domain (no, no, I didn't mean to get Seinfeldian)....I mean not
only is
Spike the master of double meaning, but Buffy also responds to
it. It's a
very sexual episode IMHO.
"Actually, the entire episode was about individual connections
and
sacrifice. Anya cared if Xander or herself survived. Secondarily
the others.
She pushed Xander out of the way of the falling bricks and could
have died.
"
Yes, it was a huge ep for Anya. I for once really felt that she
loved
Xander. And her sacrifice of pushing him out of the way and letting
the
debris fall on her answered all of Willow's questions about whether
Anya
would "hurt" Xander in the end (at least for me).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, no really) -- Solitude1056,
16:32:43 05/25/01 Fri
Yes, it was a huge ep for Anya. I for once really felt that she
loved
Xander. And her sacrifice of pushing him out of the way and letting
the
debris fall on her answered all of Willow's questions about whether
Anya
would "hurt" Xander in the end (at least for me).
I felt this was answered, for me, back in Triangle. To quote:
OLAF
CHOOSE! ANYANKA OR THE WITCH! ONE OF YOUR WOMEN MUST DIE!
Xander looks at Willow and Anya. They look back at him. There
is a
beat where it looks like he will have to choose.
XANDER
No! You are one crazy troll! I'm not choosing between my
girlfriend and my best friend! That's insane troll-logic!
ANYA
Go Xander! I love you!
Olaf laughs jovially.
OLAF
HA HA! GOOD FOR YOU! YOU ARE A LOYAL MAN!
Olaf takes Xander's arm and cheerfully snaps Xander's wrist.
Xander gasps in pain. Willow and Anya blanch.
WILLOW
Xander!
OLAF
NOW CHOOSE!
ANYA
Olaf! No!
XANDER
(through his pain)
I won't choose!
OLAF
THEN YOU SHALL BE THE ONE TO DIE!
Olaf moves in close to Xander, his hammer raised for the killing
blow.
ANYA
Choose me! Choose me to die!
Just don't take him!
Olaf and Xander both pause and look to Anya.
ANYA
Don't take Xander!
Anya may have flaws but she's made it clear through word 'n deed
that she
loves Xander. Each Scooby's got a heroic side... it's just that
we've always
gotten to see Buffy's in big flashy moments. The rest of the heroics
are in
sudden pops!, moments that flash by without too much notice, but
they're
there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, no really)
-- rowan, 18:08:27
05/25/01 Fri
Actually, I had forgotten about that. Thanks for reminding me.
So that's
twice this season that Anya tried to sacrifice herself for Xander.
Because
Anya's diction is so stilted, I think that's one of the things
that makes it
difficult for me to sense the emotion behinds her words.
I do love Anya though. She cracks me up. The bunnies. Wow. I'd
love to see
an all bunny episode. Maybe related to wedding preparations. What
happens if
she gets pregnant? There will have to be a "no stuffed bunny
rule."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Metaphor for pregnancy = "the rabbit
died" ... would Anya think
it an omen? hm! (n/t) -- Shiver, 18:35:58 05/25/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Bunny factor -- Rufus, 18:46:51 05/25/01
Fri
Anya has always found bunnies so frightening. I did wonder what
would happen
if she were to become pregnant. At first babies were tiny pink
things to
give away for money in the game of Life. Then after Joyce died
she got the
connection between babies and the continuation of life. I thought
with the
badly timed sex they had and the fact she found that bunny, anything
could
happen now.
Anya has been very clear about how she felt about Xander and she
proved
herself in Triangle then again in The Gift. Buffy may be the showy
hero but
the others experience triumph in other ways more closely linked
to their
private lives.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, no really)
-- gingerbob,
03:21:10 05/27/01 Sun
"Each Scooby's got a heroic side... it's just that we've
always gotten to
see Buffy's in big flashy moments. The rest of the heroics are
in sudden
pops!, moments that flash by without too much notice, but they're
there."
Buffy is "The Slayer"- though she is human, she is also
a 'superhero', with
all the privileges and baggage that accompanies that. The rest
are just
people. I include Spike, most human of vampires. In other words,
Buffy is
"the chosen one", while the others (except possibly
Giles) have come to the
gang of their own free will. All have their talents or special
abilities,
and all have their weaknesses.
To quote Spike, "I'm not Good, and I'm OK." We all rise
above ourselves, or
our own estimation of ourselves, from time to time. Perhaps that's
what
heroism is all about.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Reflections on the Gift Spoilers for the Season. --
Age, 19:44:32
05/25/01 Fri
Spoilers obviously for 'The Gift' and for other episodes of season
five.
How can you turn defeat into triumph? How can you make what you
can't
change, like mortality, into something that is yours?
Coming up to the season finale I wondered how Buffy would defeat
Glory
because besides representing Buffy's attachment to predatory power,
for most
of the season she's been the symbol of what Buffy can't defeat
or slay, like
death. If you can't defeat Glory or slay her, then you have to
fuse with her
in some way, make her your own. Whedon has Buffy do this by getting
her to
subdue Glory without killing her, ie symbolically overcoming her
attachment
to predatory power, and then when Giles kills Ben, the invincibility
aspect
of Glory gets symbolically transferred to the portal that opens
up(Buffy has
failed to stop what Glory wanted, her invincibility has been transformed
into inevitability.)Buffy then 'fuses' with this symbolic aspect
by taking
the journey Glory should have. In not stopping the portal from
opening Buffy
didn't defeat Glory; to close it again she had to take Glory's
place,
becoming one and making her own that which she could not slay
or defeat:
death.
The 'fusion' is not the same as the one Ben does with Glory; Ben
acquiesces
to Glory, becoming one of the herd that would kill another to
have his life
and so much more. The 'fusion', the accepting of that which cannot
be
changed, is done on Buffy's terms, not on Glory's. She makes the
inevitable
her own. Between the time she learned about how the other slayers
died(equating death with failure) Joyce died, deconstructing that
myth.
Death is just death and something that comes to us all. It is
not failure,
it is a part of life we cannot change. But, it's our part of life
that
cannot be changed, it is part of our journey, and we can make
it what we
want. When Spike kills the other slayers he takes that from them,
or perhaps
the other slayers give up their deaths to him?
So, I think you are right when Buffy's death turns the death wish
of the
other slayers on its head. She turns something that has been seen
as
negative into something positive by embracing that aspect of her
life as her
own. As you point out, Buffy's death comes from her love and ties
to the
world. She gets a gift by being able to die as an expression of
that love
and those ties.
Your study of Ben and Buffy crystallized the following for me.
You point out
the differences in their choices and their deaths. You highlight
the
antithetical parallel between the two. Ben's death is like the
death of the
other slayers, taken from him by Giles, a failure, and is meant
to contrast
with Buffy's. Ben doesn't want to die; his refusal to accept the
inevitable
and make it his own is one of the choices he makes. As pointed
out, he dies
anyway. I think that's the point Whedon was making, and certainly
was making
with Joyce's death. We die anyway, so let's live as human beings
while we
are alive.(Vampires 'mix' death with life and lose their human
'souls', ie
they become humanoid animals of a sort. Unable to face change
and
responsibility they stay as perpetual teenagers and, like parasites,
live
off those who remain human. Vampires do not live because they
will not face
dying. They attempt to have others do their living and dying for
them. They
want to be the exception to the natural law, but they are in a
natural world
and so to maintain their strength they must take from the living,
ie they
must be predators. Perhaps even Spike's killing of the other slayers
is a
form of predation, taking from them even their deaths?)
As you point out the symbolism of the bunny points to renewal
and of course
resurrection. Dawn as Buffy's human identity was anointed by the
minions. If
you notice, buddhist images and unicorns have been used at key
moments in
this season: when Dawn discovers she's the key; when Buffy in
that same
episode discusses Dawn; in Buffy's dream when she gets over her
guilt; in
the Magic shop in the season finale. The unicorn is the animal
that would
not go on the ark and perished according to legend. It refused
to be part of
a herd: it represents the idea of not losing oneself for the sake
of gaining
the world. It is obvious that Buffy acted in this way. The Buddhist
imagery
perhaps points to the inevitability of change and to the idea
that death and
life are simply aspects of our journey. And in the Christ(anointed
one)
image there is a reiteration of these ideas together with the
notion of
resurrection.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Choices -- Kerri, 09:34:34 05/26/01 Sat
Joyce had life taken from her.
People who are killed by vampires/demons have life taken from
them.
Even the slayers had their lives taken from them(although they
had a death
wish-in a way their lives were taken by their calling).
But Buffy changed that: She didn't have her life taken-she gave
it.
The spirit guide told Buffy-love, give, forgive.
Buffy was able to take death-the inevitable-and make it her own.
She was
able to take something she had no control over-her own mortality-and
possess
it.
Buffy's life was not taken-she gave her life-thus giving her control
over
her life and her death.
Buffy always felt she had no control over her life-in many ways
it was
guided by destiny. Her calling, when she died in Prophesy Girl-being
the
subject of a prophesy.
But now Buffy has control. She is able to give her life for the
one thing
she cared for most in the world. Buffy chose to give her life
for Dawn, for
love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Choices -- Age, 11:57:05 05/26/01 Sat
Whedon presents two ways of embracing the aspect of ourselves
which we can't
change and which usually we tend to want to forget: our mortality.
On the
one hand there were the other slayers who embraced death as an
escape from
life. This is the symbolic meaning behind Spike's having beaten
them: just
as the other slayers used death as an escape from life, vampires
do the
same(it's just that vampires represent death in life.) On the
other hand,
there is Buffy who realizes that her mortality is hers, and embraces
all of
herself, and uses it to express her love. It is this sense as
human beings
of embracing all of what makes us human that Whedon may be pointing
to, and
which includes death. We live and die each moment as individuals
when we
breath in and out, and we live and die as members of the human
race
everytime a new generation comes into being. Death is as much
a part of who
we are as life is. If we shrink away from either, running away
from death we
become herd animals willing to sacrifice the weak for our safety;
if we
shrink away from life, we become predators, vampires who leech
off others.
This is probably the reason for the buddhist and christian imagery
and myths
I mentioned in other postings.
Buffy embraces every aspect of herself through her death, not
as a death
wish, but as an expression of her love, as an expression of her
humanity.
From that act comes the dawn of a new day, humanity continues.
Buffy gives a
gift, but in doing so she gets a gift. It works both ways, and
perhaps
expresses the idea of our interconnectedness.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Choices(Sorry, Spoilers In above posting
and in this one.)
-- Age, 12:20:39 05/26/01 Sat
This is probably why Whedon had Spike go up the tower to save
Dawn, but
failed. Spike represented love, but not humanity. He has not yet
embraced
every aspect of himself; so, he could not have saved her. Also,
of course,
Dawn represents Buffy's humanity.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, I guess) -- Anthony8,
19:05:39
05/26/01 Sat
I think those people who view the Buffy character as merely a
comic
book-type superhero who fights supernatural villains will have
a hard time
accepting any Buffy resurrection. Those of us who see the series
as a modern
expression of The Hero Cycle, however, realize that her death
and rebirth
are necessary for the cycle to reach completion. The cycle has
been
described in-depth in a number of threads on this board.Joseph
Cambell's
"The Hero With A Thousand Faces" that summarizes The
Hero's Adventure:
I believe that the following excerpts from Joseph Campbell's "The
Hero With
A Thousand Faces" give us a hint as to where JW might take
us next year:
"The two worlds, the divine and the human, can be pictured
only as distinct
from each other--different as life and death, as day and night.
The hero
adventures out of the land we know into darkness; there he accomplishes
his
adventure, or again is simply lost to us, imprisoned, or in danger;
and his
return is described as a coming back out of that yonder zone.
Nevertheless--and here is a great key to the understanding of
myth and
symbol--the two kingdoms are actually one. The realm of the gods
is a
forgotten dimension of the world we know. And the exploration
of that
dimension, either willingly or unwillingly, is the whole sense
of the deed
of the hero. The values and distinctions that in normal life seem
important
disappear with the terrifying assimilation of the self into what
formerly
was only otherness. As in the stories of the cannibal ogresses,
the
fearfulness of this loss of personal individuation can be the
whole burden
of the transcendental experience for unqualified souls. But the
hero-soul
goes boldly in--and discovers the hags converted into goddesses
and the
dragons into the watchdogs of the gods."
"...This brings us to the final crisis of the round, to which
the whole
miraculous excursion has been but a prelude--that, namely, of
the
paradoxical, supremely difficult threshold-crossing of the hero's
return
from the mystic realm into the land of common day. Whether rescued
from
without, driven from within, or gently carried along by the guiding
divinities, he has yet to re-enter with his boon the long-forgotten
atmosphere where men who are fractions imagine themselves to be
complete. He
has yet to confront society with his ego-shattering, life-redeeming
elixir,
and take the return blow of reasonable queries, hard resentment,
and good
people at a loss to comprehend."
Whew! You paint the picture. You connect the dots. If JW holds
firm to the
cycle he's been following for th past 5 seasons, we have a lot
to look
forward to.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> It's said, "as above, so below." -- Solitude1056,
21:30:40 05/26/01
Sat
And as I've always been taught, the hero cycle involves a circular
path
through two halves - the here-world & the there-world, and the
steps through
each are similar. refusal of call, refusal to return; finally
listening to
call; assistance with calling, assistance to return; etc. As above,
so
below, as inside, so outside. We're beginning the second half
(I'd guess),
which means Joss has a lot to squish in if he's going to end the
cycle in
another 44 episodes!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: It's said, "as above, so below."
-- FanMan, 00:42:05 05/27/01
Sun
Sarah is awsome, but I really doubt she will continue the show
beyond year
seven. If Joss is using some hero cycle formula he will either
have to sqish
in parts or end with Buffy still alive and life goes on...
Maby some Messia thing or getting rid of all demons are other
options.
If it is getting rid of the demons I think it will be Dawn not
Buffy, though
Buffy would certainly do her part.
SuperSlayer from Primevel doing a soul union with the KEY? Wow
now there is
a thought.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Reflections on the Gift (Long, no really) -- SingedCat,
05:31:05
05/27/01 Sun
Fresne, that was a grerat article. It tied alot of the episode
together for
me-- well done!
Especially the part about her not wanting to compromise any more.
She stands
by what she can and cannot do -- that Dawn must not die.
I maintain that Ben did not die because he was a bad person. He
could have
fought Glory all the way for all Giles knew (And if he had he
would have
caused her to miss her mark) But he was part Glory, and she part
him. That
in the end explained both his choices-- and why Giles killed him.
I wonder if he'll seek absolution. Somehow I don't think so.
Qestions about Buffy popularity
-- FanMan, 13:08:43 05/25/01 Fri
Is there any entertainment of any kind with as many web sites
devoted to it
as Buffy/Angel?
Star Treck and Star Wars are much more popular than Buffy, however
when I
entered them as keywords for searches I got less than fifty web
sights each.
Buffysearch.com has 3325 sites listed currently and that is how
I found this
site.
Oppinions on if Buffy will remain popular for decades like the
Star Trek?
Think Buffy will have spinoff shows and become a mainstream hit
show? Giles
show does not count if it will only be ten eps or so. I mean entire
shows
with multiple seasons like Star Trek: The Next Generation, Deep
Space Nine,
Voyager, New searies coming up, multiple movies, huge book
selection......and whatever the future holds for fans as long
as it is a
moneymaker it will continue.
Any other views on demographics and popularity?
Very few shows are as impressive on multiple levels; I hope that
even if
Buffy and Angel end at season 7&5 other directers will get insparation
from
Joss and give us complex involved and not too cheesie plots.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Observations on Buffy popularity -- LoriAnn, 11:39:54
05/26/01 Sat
I certainly hope that Buffy will catch on with mainstream audiences
for the
reason you mention: complex meaning on multiple levels. Yet, that
is seldom
what the mainstream audience wants. Notice the posts here; although
many,
maybe most, are well thought out and, whether I agree with them
or not,
interesting, there are also many posts that boil down to Buffy
Rules, Buffy
Sucks, not enough fights, or Joss didn't do what I wanted. That's
the norm
on other posting sites, and judging from what I see in the realverse,
for
most people, that is also the depth of analysis of everything:
totally
subjective.
So to reiterate, the mainstream audience doesn't want depth and
certainly
not objective truth or any kind of moral standard. If that's true,
and I
hope it's not, but fear it is, Buffy will never have a mainstream
audience
unless it becomes a straight action/comedy with little subtext
or nuance.
By the standards of most TV networks, Buffy has never been a success.
Anywhere but some cable channels and the WB and UPN, Buffy would
have been
cancelled a long time ago. ABC, NBC, and CBS often cancel good
series with
audiences double or triple Buffy's because the shows don't take
their time
slots. We've been fortunate that there are now smaller networks
that settle
for a smaller niche audience because they have such a difficult
time getting
the larger audience; this is true even of Fox. If it weren't for
the niche
nets, Buffy might never have made it to the air, or if it had,
would never
have made it past the first season.
Will Buffy be around for a long time? It will probably keep a
cult following
for a long time.
We're very fortunate to have the opportunity to watch a program
that is so
well written and well acted that also has some depth and thoughtfulness
about it as well as action, humor, and pathos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Observations on Buffy popularity -- vampire hunter
D, 12:57:52
05/26/01 Sat
You know, when Star Trek first cameout, it, like Buffy, wasn't
poular with
mainstream audiences either. It too had deep subtexts to its plots,
but only
appealed to a smaller niche audience (again, like Buffy), and
suffered in
the ratings for it. But here we are, 35 years after NBC's first
attempt to
cancell it, and it has become THE biggest Sci-Fi franchise of
all time. Just
think about this when considering Buffy's long term poularity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Bigger is certainly not always better -- OnM,
15:23:02 05/26/01 Sat
LoriAnn makes many good points, one of the best being:
*** "There are also many posts that boil down to Buffy Rules,
Buffy Sucks,
not enough fights, or Joss didn't do what I wanted. That's the
norm on other
posting sites, and judging from what I see in the realverse, for
most
people, that is also the depth of analysis of everything: totally
subjective." ***
This will never change, for the simple reason that people have
entirely
different wants and needs from their chosen entertainment. Many
people
approach TV (or movies) the same way they approach a meal at a
resturant--
if it's tasty, and reasonably priced, they ask no more. If the
resturant has
polite staff, a nice ambiance and rarely gives you food poisoning,
that's a
bonus, but it isn't a requirement.
There are also those at the other far end of the expectation spectrum,
who
will only exclusively attend the very finest, most hoity-toity
ultra-expensive resturants because they are trying to show off
how superior
they are to the rest of the proles. Each to their own, but sometimes
all I
want is a decent hamburger, and I don't apologize for that.
Entertainment-wise, I try to be accepting of a wide variety of
material, as
long as it is reasonably intelligent and meets my interests content-wise.
Some mind or eye or ear candy is just fine, as long as it isn't
actively
trying to insult my intelligence. This is why I very much liked
the original
Buffy movie, which I know that many persons do not. The usual
reason given
for this is that the movie is NOT layered and metaphorical like
our beloved
normal Jossverse is, so we put it down.
But the movie, IMO, is perfectly good for *what it was*, which
was a
humorous, light-hearted romp. It's heart was in the right place,
even if the
studio or whoever rained on Joss' parade and kept it from being
better.
As for internet discussion forums, each board sorts out it's own
kind of
residents, and fortunately cyberspace is vast and accepting, so
you can
almost always find a home of kindred spirits somewhere.
Finally, as to vamp D's notes on the Trek franchise, it speaks
for itself. I
enjoy most of the Trek stuff, certainly not as passionately as
I do the
Buffyverse, but again, it's a pretty good hamburger. It certainly
will be
around for a long, long time. I think in due course, BtVS and
Angel will be
also, but I doubt they will ever be as widespread in the popular
consciousness as Trek. This is as it should be, they are different
shows,
aimed at different viewers, even though there is some overlap.
One isn't
inherently superior to the other, it depends on what you are looking
for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Bigger is certainly not always better
-- FanMan, 17:41:49
05/26/01 Sat
Bigger is certainly not always better.....I remember reading an
interview
with Joss where he said that if he had a huge budget he might
get lazy; go
for special effects as the easy alternative to plot. Yaaaaah!
I am glad he
does not have a huge budget!( funny in an ironic way...grin)
Regarding fiction books in the Buffy genra. When are there going
to be some
that are set in the collage years of the show? I love the show,
but the
books set in the high school years are targeted for teens more
than
me....sigh.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Observations on Buffy popularity -- Anthony8,
18:09:36 05/26/01
Sat
Keep in mind, that the one Trek series (of the three,soon to be
four, newer
series) that dealt with deeper themes, "Deep Space Nine,"
is regarded by the
majority of the die-hard Trek fans as the illegitimate member
of the family.
It wasn't pure in their estimation because it had a dark edge
(like real
life itself) that did not comport with the utopian view of the
future they
believed the show's creator, Gene Roddenberry, had intended for
the
franchise. Personally, "Deep Space Nine" is the only
one of the spin-offs
that bears repeat viewing. Still, I couldn't see it inspiring
the depth of
discussion we have here (on this board, at least). I'm not dissing
the other
series--for me they are still high quality and thoughtful entertainment
compared with 99% of what's always been out there. BTVS, however,
is in a
different league.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Observations on Buffy popularity --
FanMan, 18:25:22
05/26/01 Sat
Really if Buffy never becomes a mainstream hit is fine with me.
I do hope
though that the current generation of near collage age people
have at least
a few who get insparation from Joss, and become the next generation
of
directors producers and writeters. Come on hollywood! Give us
a little more
quality programs like Buffy instead of lame formulas.
OKAY that was a rant(grin)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Qestions about Buffy popularity -- cjc_36, 22:45:33
05/27/01 Sun
I tried posting on the Fandom buffy board this very topic: How
big's this
Buffy thing gonna get?
With the mythology Joss has crafted, it can go on and on and on,
like some
battery bunny Anya would no doubt be terrified of.
One could go back in time with Slayers-from-the-past anthologies,
go forward
(like the comic Fray by Joss coming sometime soon), delve into
more seeming
'volatons' of the current mythology-- One I'd like to see is this:
some old
woman who was the one person allowed to give up Slayerness w/o
dying.
Then there's the watchers, the Council and any antecedents. Why
are they
there? Who was the first Watcher? Does watching over Slayers go
back to
Rome? Ancient Egypt? China? Celtic tribes? Or further back, before
written
records existed? How brutal were earlier methods? Did they actually
kidnap
Slayers in waiting and subjugate them to harsh regimental training?
Anyway, I'm hoping for a long and lush existence for the universe
of the
Slayer. Other series' involving a new Slayer, say, in 20 years--
I'm not
sure about that. But the concept can live on in movies and books
and comics
forever.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Qestions about Buffy popularity -- Cleanthes, 15:31:26
05/29/01 Tue
I have lots of search engines in my search folder. Some do a good
job of
tallying sites, and others have weird methods of scoring that
make it
impossible to say anything.
On AltaVista , a search of the string "Star Trek" yielded
696,480 sites.
Searching the string "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" yielded
77,547. Searching
just "Buffy" I got 381,077 - but, of course, some of
these sites won't have
anything to do with the TV show.
HotBot [http://hotbot.lycos.com/Default.asp] does a better job,
IMO, of
giving exact results of for search strings. I think it measures
web presence
for various actors pretty well, as long as their name is searchable.
(eg.
"Madonna" is not searchable because her name and a name
for the Blessed
Virgin will be lumped together).
Some results:
Sarah Michelle Gellar 91,100
Alyson Hannigan 11,900
Amy Acker 47 (Now's the time to be the first to put up an Amy
Acker shrine
page - the field's wide open!)
Others for comparison =
Less popular than SMG:
Hillary Clinton 78,900
Adolf Hitler 63,800
Nicole Kidman 62,500
More popular than SMG:
Sandra Bullock 103,200
George W. Bush 289,000
Britney Spears 472,900
Jesus Christ 980,400
I figured it out! -- FanMan,
21:31:23 05/25/01 Fri
Although it will probably never be explained in the show, something
has
puzzled me. Why are the Slayers only female? The simple and also
true answer
is Joss wanted a show where the HERO is actually a HEROIN(sp?)
This does not
provide any logical closure to why in so far as how the Buffyverse
works. It
seems like if the fictional earth of the show has 5 to 6 billion
people
there are some males with morals and love equal to Buffy.
The only option that I have been able to come up with is that
slayers tap
into the power of a godess or perhaps the first slayer evolved
into
something similar after her death: the spiritual journey like
posts have
mentioned Buffy is on while she is dead.
I have come up with a simpler answer that does not require as
much mind
stretching. Instinct of the female in regards to speicies survival
is
different than males. The masculine solution to danger is primarily
offensive and leads to hostility. The female love and mothering
instinct is
defensive and seeks the least violent resolution to a danger.
Outright war
with the demons could happen if you had an agresive hostile male
slayer who
became a leader of something like the Initiative. Only a female
who
literally loves unconditionally becomes a Slayer. Love even your
enemies and
kill them only if it is necisary for the survival of family/humanity.
Well I welcome clarification of what I am trying to say...
Ps. This fits with the message of the Guide: your love is blinding
wich is
why you pull away from it. Love, give, forgive.
Buffy is flawed and she has shown anger and hostility. Never hate
though. Do
you think her love is unconditional?
She would still love freinds/family in a more personal sense,
I mean a
subconcious instictive careing about all life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I figured it out! -- FanMan, 22:44:15 05/25/01 Fri
I figured I might as well add: Buffy is better than us, Buffy's
perfection,
and how Buffy is softer or gentler than Dawn as has been mentioned
in
previous posts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I figured it out! -- John Burwood, 00:56:59 05/26/01
Sat
May I suggest a variation on the theme of why Slayers are always
girls. If a
teenage boy acquired such strength and fighting prowess inmost
primitive
societies, is it not more likely that they would early be talent-spotted
as
potential warriors and heroes to wage wars and lead armies and
may be even
become kings -most kings began as great war leaders. With such
alternative
career options how many would be content to prowl the dark places
hunting
for demons. A teenage girl with that strength would more likely
be treated
as an outcast - there would be few societies in history who would
easily
accept a girl as a war leader, and most girls would have been
brought up as
achild to neither expect nor want to. The chances were, therefore,
that
girls would be much less likely to be distracted from their holy
mission. A
shrewd piece of thinking by the PTBs, perchance?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I figured it out! -- Avatar 2001, 07:45:57 05/26/01
Sat
The female of the specie tends to be more dangerous than the male
because
they possess a higher threshold of pain and stronger protective
instincts.
Also they lack testosterone this male hormone increases the strength
an
endurance of an individual but it has a draw back, in stress filled
conditions (like a fight or battle) it reduces mental capacity
resulting in
a slower and more flawed decision making process (not what you
want we a
split second can save or doom the world).
In a sane world men would ride sideways.
PS: I'm a guy but that's the truth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I figured it out! -- Diana Michelle, 18:55:32
05/26/01 Sat
When the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
he will shout to scare the monster, who will often turn aside,
but the she-bear thus accosted will rend him tooth and nail.
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.
- Kipling
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I figured it out! -- dy, 09:04:33 05/26/01 Sat
Buffy is a metaphor. The least can be (or become) the greatest.
In our
society, who is considered more trivial than a teenage girl.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: -- darrenK, 11:13:03 05/26/01 Sat
Why women--really teenage girls-- are the only Slayers has very
little to do
with science and biology (or some of the previous posters opinions
on such.)
But, it does have everything to do with mythology and storytelling.
Most specifically, women are Slayers in Joss' stories as a way
to subvert
the usual expectations for how a story about a warrior would work.
It gives
him a lot of room to slice open (metaphorically speaking) our
expectations
for teenage girls and create a web of social commentary on our
own society's
gender roles.
It also allows for a lot of humor about shopping, dating, fashion,
and
death.
If Slayers were big Hercules size men, it wouldn't be that interesting
when
they fought other large Hercules type men. It would require a
LOT less
imagination to see such a hero winning such a battle. Besides
we can watch
this on the WWF.
Buffy's world has plenty of male warriors--Angel, Gunn, Riley,
Giles, etc.
but I think that the post about women with power being outcasts
and men with
power becoming Kings probably hit it right on the nose.
Just to add a little mythology before I hit the send button, it
should be
noted that for the whole of human history, writers (in some cases
Bards)
have subverted expectations in just the same manner.
This is the reason David is so small and Goliath is so big. Or
that Achilles
was living among and dressing as a woman before being found by
Ulysses. But
perhaps my favorite, and the one most applicable to this post
is the story
of Athena. She is the war god, but so is Mars (a HE, which is
why this story
is important). When Mars fights, he screws up everything, kills
his allies,
cities burn. Mars' children are Pestilence and Damnation. Athena
on the
other hand is the goddess of wisdom as well as war. Her battles
are settled
judiciously, her followers prosper and live to fight another day.
Do any of you want to imagine the TV show Xander the Vampire Slayer?
Neither
do I.
Done. dK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re:I figured it out! -- FanMan, 17:29:32 05/26/01
Sat
Thank you for the replies.
As I originally posted the correct answer is that Joss chose to
have a
female HERO. My speculation was in regards to the Buffyverse and
the
simplest most logical reason. IE not requiring the phrase: it
is the way
things are, or TPTB choose, both equivilant to realverse phrase
of "it is
GOD's WILL"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: -- Anthony8, 17:53:07 05/26/01 Sat
I would also propose that in the Buffyverse, the slayer's power
pre-dates
the patriarchal religions that generated many of the male-as-hero
legends
that we know very well today. After all, her power seems to exist
as
counterbalance to those vestigial dark magicks and demonic hybrids
that were
left here when the pure demonic powers, in Giles words, "lost
their purchase
on this reality" and were forced to retreat into other dimensions
to make
way for the mortal animals. We know, anthropologically, that the
earliest
religions were centered around the power of the female to give
life. Later,
that reverence for the Goddess and Mother Earth was supplanted
with the
villification of the female in order to justify the institution
of a male
dominance and hierarchy in all human affairs.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re:Rily's Lesbian Alliance! -- FanMan, 18:18:41
05/26/01 Sat
Equality of religion. Gaia counters the patriarchy of christianity.
Respect women. Equality for women. OOOOOOH I think I will go join
Rily's
Lesbian Alliance(grin)
Seriously I beleive in equality and I respect women as equals.
Good points A8!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re:Rily's Lesbian Alliance! -- Anthony8,
19:24:38 05/26/01 Sat
I really don't align myself with any sort of extremism. Did that
post sound
militant? ;) I surely didn't intend it that way. There's definitely
a pure
beauty to be found in symmetry and balance. Unfortunately our
society is not
anywhere in the vicinity not just with respect to gender, but
race, national
identity,class--you name it. It may seem like we've been moving,
but I keep
thinking that in terms of social progress "this should be
'2001' and it's
more like 'A Clockwork Orange.' And you know what? The whole purpose
of
mythology, even in its most modern and pop culture expressions,
is to move
us past the external barriers, enlighten us and enable us to bestow
our own
Boons on society. Ooops--too deep for me--must-get-back-to
the-lighter-side...
Stream of consciousness--mini Movie of the Week recommendation.
Note the
parallels between Spike and Alex the Droog in "A Clockwork
Orange." Just a
thought.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re:Rily's Lesbian Alliance! -- FanMan,
19:47:57 05/26/01 Sat
No you were not being militant. Just some sillines from me. I
am not
militant; I simply consider all humans as my equals, in a metaphorical
sense
not absolute sense. You can only be equal if you ACT equal; asking
or
demanding equality implies that it does not exist YET.
A8 You were starting to sound like OnM and that is a compliment.
I am no
longer confused about this question of why slayers are female
that I started
and thak you for adding insight to my original idea.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Why the slayer is female -- SingedCat, 19:32:08 05/26/01
Sat
I think The Slayer is female because the first Slayer happened
to be female.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The female of the species is the deadlier... -- rowan, 16:00:38
05/27/01
Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I figured it out! -- Rufus, 20:25:50 05/27/01 Sun
If you have the boxed set of the first season there is an interview
with
Joss before Welcome to the Hellmouth and the Harvest. He talks
about his
love for horror films and noted that there was always this blonde
girl who
would end up dead. The idea for Buffy came from the idea of what
would
happen if the blonde girl not only fought back but won.
Classic Movie of the Week - May
25th 2001 -- OnM, 22:22:16 05/25/01 Fri
*******
Is that a dagger, or a crucifix I see
You hold so tightly in your hand
And all the while the distance grows
Between you and me
I do not understand
At my request / He'll take me in
In that tenderness / I am floating away
With no certainty / Nothing to rely on
Holding still / For a moment
What a moment this is / Oh for a moment
I'll forget in / A moment of bliss
____________Peter Gabriel, from *The Blood of Eden*
*******
"Haven't we already Deja'd this Vu?"
____________Willow Rosenberg
*******
It's those damn synchonicities again. I had decided quite some
time back--
like several weeks ago at least--
that this week's Classic Movie was going to be director Wim Wenders
*Until
the End of the World*. I
mean, every year of Buffy, come season finale time, we roll out
This Year's
Apocalypse and Buffy and the
gang do their thing. However, in no previous year that I can recall
did one
increasingly non-vampirish
vampire fellow use the exact words 'Until the end of the world'
in his
verbal response to another character.
Then, while perusing this board earlier this very week, I find
that there is
a Shakespeare tie-in also, St.
Crispin et al. Sheesh! My mind would boggle, were it not already
completely
boggled-out by the events of
Tuesday eve. So it goes...
I've really wanted to recommend this flick for a long time, it's
such a
great favorite of mine, and it was the
film that first introduced me to Wenders, but the obvious tie-in
with the
BtVS season-enders pretty much
precluded doing so until now.
What you will find to be rather interesting should you elect to
rent this
film, is that the 'End of the World'
is *not* the central theme of the movie. Instead, it's a point
that
everything else moves around. It isn't the
destination, it's the music for a 'dance around the planet', as
one of the
characters aptly puts it near the end
of the story. This is typical for Wenders, who seems to prefer
to describe
things--people, places,
emotions-- by the space around them. The whole movie is long,
rambling,
almost like a dream of
consciousness, but it doesn't ever seem long, you almost immediately
get
swept into the flow and after that
all you can do is stare in fascination.
The lead character in 'Until...', Claire Tourneur, is played by
Solveig
Dommartin, who has acted in several
other Wenders films. I don't know if they have any relationship
beyond the
professional one of
moviemaking, but she could certainly be his muse, her acting style
is so
much in tune with Wender's unique
cinematic visions. At the beginning of 'the End' she plays a woman
wandering
the globe, in search of no
destination in particular, only journeys. The stories of these
journeys are
often narrated by Claires' most
recent serious lover, Eugene Fitzpatrick, played by the estimable
Sam Neill
in a wonderfully understated
performance. These narrations also seem more like journeys themselves,
they
weave in and out of the film
sometimes harmoniously and sometimes in counterpoint-- or as if
in layers,
not sequences.
As might be expected, Claire's (seeming) aimlessness leads to
chance
meetings with a series of eccentric
and highly charismatic individuals, and gradually a destination
forms,
except we have no idea where it
actually is, or for that matter, what it actually is. If this
sounds
confusing, don't worry.. Negative space,
remember? The filmmakers keep drawing the space around the destination,
and
all of a sudden, without
realizing it, there you are.
The other lead role is played by William Hurt, who meets up with
Claire
while on the lam from a variety of
pursuers. I won't spoil you by telling you the specifics, or the
space will
get too positive too soon, and this
would not be a good thing. Suffice it to say that Hurt's character,
Sam
Farber, is on a quest to do a good
deed, hampered by the self-serving actions of others who have
their own
agenda, and that he eventually
succeeds, but as always no good deed goes unencumbered by sorrow.
Does this
sound familiar? Of course,
apocalypse, remember?
Going by memory, I pretty much thought that the main tie to BtVS
was the
apocalypse theme (and the
magnificent and atypical tangent Wenders takes it on), but when
watching it
again last night and tonight
prior to writing the column here, I was struck by how many other
aspects
resonated with the overall theme
of Season 5. I admit that this is somewhat surprising to me, but
it's there,
there's no denying it, just like the
excerpts from Gabriel's 'Blood of Eden' that I quoted above suddenly
seem to
have meanings beyond what
I thought of before. There is love, there is loss, there is duty,
there are
recriminations, there are battles,
there are victories, there are people lost in dreams.
Not being a hero, I can't offer you death, but as movies go, this
is a
pretty decent 'Gift'. I hope it'll do. If
not, we'll have a rebirth next week!
E. Pluribus Cinema, Unum,
OnM
*******
Technical extravaganza (sort of, low budget variety):
*Until the End of the World* is not available on DVD, according
to the IMDB,
but I was pretty sure that I
remember seeing it a few weeks back when I was video shopping.
I didn't pick
it up since I own a copy on
laserdisc (also the review copy), but of course you can ask the
store
personell to check-- they may have
updated info that isn't on the IMDB yet. For sure, the film is
available on
VHS.
The film was released in 1991, running time is 2 hours & 38 minutes.
Aspect
ratio of the theatrical release
is 1.85:1, and the soundtrack is in standard Dolby Surround. By
the way,
lots of great tunes in this flick!
Wenders is extremely hip when it come to the use of contemporary
music, and
it is used very effectively.
Cast members include: Solveig Dommartin, William Hurt, Sam Neill,
Chick
Ortega, Pietro Falcone, Ernest
Berk, Christine Osterlein, Rüdiger Eddy, Mitchell Vogler,
Adelle Lutz, Ernie
Dingo and numerous others.
*******
Coming Next Week: Since we are now at the end of BtVS Season 5,
I have it in
mind to do a little
summary of the films I've recommended so far, nothing fancy, just
a way for
those of you who are recent
readers of the board here to catch up with some of my previous
choices
without having to dig through
pages of archives. (I look back from here at the end of May and
I can't
hardly believe that I've been doing
this every Friday night since February!! Of course, I'm nuts,
so that
explains some of it... ;) We've got a
long summer ahead, and I also want to do a little poll and ask
for some
input and your thoughts on my
Classic Movies. As always, thanks so very much for indulging me,
and see you
soon. Peace!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - May 25th 2001 -- FanMan,
22:33:51
05/25/01 Fri
Coolness and much congrats on your moment of synchronicity!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - May 25th 2001 -- Anthony8,
00:21:09
05/26/01 Sat
You know, I rented this movie about 8 years ago at a local but
now
Blockbuster made defunct video store that specialized in hard
to find tapes
and haven't been able to find it ever since. Talk about "Apocalypse
Now!"
being a film where the journey's the thing! "Until The End
of The World"
takes you on a real odyssey! "Blood of Eden" is one
of my favorite songs
and, from what I can remember, was used to great effect in the
movie (wasn't
it the scene where they are walking across the desert dragging
a airplane
door?). The soundtrack for the film is still available and doesn't
include
"Blood of Eden" on it. Go figure.
You should check out Peter Gabriel's video compilation "All
About Us." It
has a nice visual interpretation of the song among others. As
much as "The
Gift" brings to mind "Blood of Eden," the Peter
Gabriel song that came to my
mind was "Mercy Street" off of the "So" CD.
It deals with
self-doubt/depression, the transient nature of our reality, isolation,
yearning for a return to childhood innocence and parental protection,
and
the achievement of final peace through suicide of a woman named
Anne
(actually, poet Anne Sexton). Since one good lyric deserves another:
Looking down on empty streets all she can see
Are the dreams all made solid, are the dreams all made real
All of the buildings, all of the cars
Were once just a dream in somebody's head
She pictures the broken glass, pictures the steam
She pictures the soul with no leak at the seam.
Let's take the boat out--wait until darkness
Let's take the boat out--wait until darkness comes.
Nowhere in the corridors of pale green and gray
Nowhere in the suburbs, in the cold light of day
There in the midst of it, so alive and alone
Words support like bone...
Dreaming of Mercy Street--wear your inside out
Dreaming of mercy in your daddy's arms again
Dreaming of Mercy Street--swear they moved that sign
Dreaming of mercy--in your daddy's arms.
Pulling out the papers and drawers that slide
Tugging at the darkness word upon word
Confessing all the secret things in the warm velvet box
To the priest he's the doctor, he can handle the shocks
Dreaming of the tenderness, the tremble in the hips...
Of kissing Mary's lips.
Dreaming of Mercy Street--Wear your inside out
Dreaming of mercy in your daddy's arms again
Dreaming of Mercy Street--swear they moved that sign
Looking for mercy in your daddy's arms.
Anne with her father--he's out in the boat
Riding the water, riding the waves on the sea.
"Mercy Street" by Peter Gabriel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Wonderful choice, A8! Thanks! -- OnM, 14:49:30
05/26/01 Sat
You just happened to mention one of my all time P. Gabriel faves,
and you're
so right, it fits *The Gift* nicely, certainly in the mood it
creates even
if the story is just a bit different.
That line "She pictures the soul with no leak at the seam"
is just so sad
and so real, it's enough to make you weep just reading it, and
even more so
when he sings the song in that sad, wonderful voice he commands
so surely.
You are also right that 'Blood of Eden' is played during the scene
when they
are hiking through the desert. I won't say more so as not to spoil
others
who haven't see the film yet, it's a powerful scene.
My statement that the film is available on VHS was based on info
from the
IMDB, which I always check on if the title is one I haven't aquired
just
recently. I try not to recommend a film that has been discontinued
from
video availability (and haven't so far).
Next trip out to the video store, I will check on whether *Until...*
is out
on DVD yet. The visuals are just stunning in this film, and the
widescreen
really adds significantly to the overall effectiveness of the
cinematography. The laser version is excellent also, but of course
is likely
to be impossible to find nowadays. I'm very fortunate in that
there is a
little video shop right here in my hometown that carries a large
collection
of used laserdiscs for sale or rent, as you might guess, I'm a
regular
there!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> OnM: Loved to see your suggestions. -- curious, 12:28:22
05/27/01 Sun
>>Since we are now at the end of BtVS Season 5, I have it
in mind to do a
little
summary of the films I've recommended so far, nothing fancy, just
a way for
those of you who are recent
readers of the board here to catch up with some of my previous
choices
without having to dig through
pages of archives.
OnM. Please do. I don't get to spend alot of time here *sigh*
and would love
to see your recommendations. Especially since you seem to like
the non
mainstream films and artistic ones too. Speaking of which, have
you seen the
remastered version of "Vertigo" on DVD. I think this
was Hitchcock's finest
work and the epitome of his philosophy of "Pure Cinema."
Looking foward to seeing your suggestion. BTW I think I heard
mention of
Kubrick's "2001: A space odyssey" being re released
on big screen this year
but sadly not in 70mm as hoped. Can't wait.
I'm going to find "End of the World" this week :)
Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Brian,
09:48:00 05/26/01 Sat
Is it either/or, or both?
And where does this leave Angel's epiphany?
I personally think we need both Buffy's way and Giles's to protect
us
against evil. We need good to fight evil, BUT it takes evil acts
as well.
We need Mother Theresa. But also need General Sherman.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Max, 10:38:56 05/26/01 Sat
And how about Wesley sending his men to certain death.
Sherman would have been proud.
War is Hell, you can't refine it.
Bring Back Angel Noir. His "epiphany" was lame.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Wiccagrrl, 10:48:16 05/26/01
Sat
I do think we need both. We need people like Giles, who can do
the things
others can't or shouldn't. But we also need the ones like Buffy,
who can
hold onto the idealism. They're both important. And, in a way,
both heroic.
I think Giles is wrong- I think he is a hero. Because he was able
to do what
had to be done.
As far as Angel, I think that he just couldn't have continued
to function as
"total war" Angel for long. It was eating him up. Unlike
Buffy, whose
humanity wouldn't have allowed her to cross a certain line, Angel
could- but
he seemed (to me, anyway) to find himself being swallowed up by
the
darkness. Giles made the hard choices because it was the only
way to protect
the world and protect Buffy. In the end, Angel was getting dangerously
close
to a place where he didn't give a crap about the world, and how
do you fight
for the greater good if that's where your head is at? If you've
lost sight
of what you're fighting for?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Rufus, 13:20:06 05/26/01
Sat
If you look back to past shows it's Giles that preaches restraint.
He
sometimes holds Buffy from doing the impulsive thing, and shows
her that
revenge for sake of it is pointless. What he did was something
he had to
consider for awhile. This is one time he realized that if the
god could get
back from her dark room she would destroy for the sake of revenge.
He killed
Ben to make sure that never happened.
As for total war Angel. Wolfram and Hart represents the evil in
us all. If
you use evil to defeat them you just make the problem bigger.
You become
evil and it's a one way trip. When your opponent can never die
you have to
make them play your game, not engage in becoming what they want
you to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Max, 15:35:07
05/26/01 Sat
I think Wesley and Giles proves that you must use evil to defeat
evil.
And just because you use evil, become ruthless, it doesn't make
you evil as
long as your ends were justly serving a higher cause.
Being evil is worst than doing evil.
-Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Or as they say in Section "Our ends are just, but our means
ruthless"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- FanMan,
18:12:37 05/26/01 Sat
Xander said "What about Ben? we could kill him instead, we
could kill an
innocent" Everyone stared at him in auckward silence. Giles
had plenty of
time to consider that option, Ben proved he was not innocent when
he came to
Buffy in Spiral: he could have simply driven away when he saw
the Knights,
and it is a surity that he knew why they were there, the Key.
It was Giles
or Spike and Spike was busy trying to protect Dawn. Giles did
not just spare
Buffy from that hard moral choice, he spared all of the scoobies.
Giles did a good act by not even asking someone else to get the
blood of a
partially innocent victim on their hands. He could have delegated
that
option, but he took the full responsibility for himself.
Giles is good, but he is willing to be ruthless for just cause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Max,
01:33:12 05/27/01 Sun
Ben came to Buffy because he knew that she needed his help.
To save Giles.
Ben was mostly innocent. He did attempt to sacifice Dawn to save
himself,
but he was right in saying that it was either him or her.
I think what both Giles and Wesley did throws Angel's "epiphany"
out the
window. I say let's get Angel Noir back so he can again engage
in Total War
with Wolfram and Hart.
Personally I think he should turn the children of the lawyers
into vampires.
Then they wouldn't feel save not even at home.
And I have some ideas what he should do to Lila as well. As a
warning to the
others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's Way or Giles'? -- Cleanthes,
18:48:30 05/26/01 Sat
I think this 'evil to defeat evil' concept misses the point of
General
Sherman. Did Sherman enslave people to fight the Confederacy?
Did Sherman start the total war, or did Moseby?
See, there remained a difference. When Sherman marched across
Georgia, he
made Georgia howl, AND, he brought the Jubilee, the flag that
makes you
free.
A moral line need be drawn regardless of the need to take necessary
utilitarian measures, or else it's better to give up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> It's not a perfect world, children. That means us. (nt)
-- Singed Cat,
19:29:51 05/26/01 Sat
Buffy 's "clean" death
-- Cynthia, 19:09:21 05/26/01 Sat
Having just finished a second viewing of The Gift. I was wondering?
Why is she so spotless?
She's just gone though an energy portal, supposedly filled with
incredible
power, and fallen from a height of least a hundred feet, so why
isn't she a
piece of pulp?
A woman in my high-rise building commited suicide by jumping from
the 18th
floor. The impact left an impression on the concrete so deep it
had to be
cleaned by professional building cleaners with a high-pressure
water pump.
Any guesses?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy's "clean" death -- Diana Michelle, 19:15:39
05/26/01 Sat
Plus she fell face first and somehow landed on her back.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy's "clean" death -- Anthony8, 19:50:18
05/26/01 Sat
You wanted maybe they should have shown just a cashmere sweater,
leather
pants, some boots and five gallons of lifelike gore spread all
around?
;)Though probably very realistic, it would have made the scene
sickeningly
horrifying rather than sad. Probably would have offended the censors
too.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy's "clean" death -- FanMan,
20:01:08 05/26/01 Sat
How many times have you seen Buffy with more than a little scratch?
Sarah
has a germ phobia and that might be why you do not see her get
real dirty in
the show. Sarah is also the main character, lots of makeup. Maby
she just
has as part of her contract that she doesn't have to do major
gory injuries.
It would be easy for her to negotiate that considering she is
THE STAR of
the show.
Of course the simpler answer is it is PG. Why do you think the
vampires turn
to dust instead of leaving yucky rotting corpses?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Salyer = tough body -- jc, 22:58:54 05/26/01 Sat
Why is she so spotless?
Buffy is a Slayer. Built tough, we saw her fall from the tower
half way when
fighting against Glory. And she stood up and was still kicking
Glory around.
We've seen Buffy get run over by a car, jump out of tall buildings
etc. We
see her being totally fine after such situations. Her body is
TOUGH. That
comes with the Slayer package.
Also note that the rate at which she fell was lessened by the
portal. When
Buffy jumped the impact force was lowered. The portal was at least
a good
half way down the tower. So that could also help to explain why
her body was
not "pulp."
Spike also fell from the platform where Dawn was (with no portal
to lessen
his fall). He didn't get all "pulp."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Salyer = tough body -- Cynthia, 04:52:28 05/27/01
Sun
I wasn't expecting pulp actually. It's just that all the other
characters
show visible signs of having been in a fight.
I don't know whether Geller's "germ phobia" is actually
an issue. Or even
the censors. I'm trying to look at it from the standpoint of what
it means
relation to Buffy's "return". Having a non-damaged body
would certainly make
things easier, no?
As far as we know, Buffy's buried, but is her body decomposing?
Hummm. The
only thing we are sure about is that what makes Buffy Buffy is
no longer
there, so that we can only preceive her as dead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Salyer = tough body -- Sam Raimond, 18:52:56
05/28/01 Mon
Maybe Slayer bodies don't decompose as fast as regular people
either, that
would make her ressurection easier too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Out, out, damn spot! -- mundusmundi, 06:26:54 05/27/01
Sun
Besides what everyone else has said, I think it's also meanto
to be
symbolic/psychological. Buffy's death is "pure," in
the sense that it's
meant to be seen as having purified her. This also may be why
she's wearing
white, in addition to the lack of "pulp."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> That was my thinking exactly, but you got here first!
;) -- OnM,
08:12:16 05/27/01 Sun
Also remember her peaceful expression. Everyone around her is
battered and
bloody and emotionally wrecked, especially Spike. Buffy is clean
and
peaceful because she is, as Giles said, "Not like us. Buffy's
a hero".
Her apparent 'purity' is also relevent to her eventual rebirth,
methinks,
although of course we will have to wait and see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Her beatific smile, good observation! :) (N/T)
-- mundusmundi,
10:06:52 05/27/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Her beatific smile, good observation!
:) (N/T) -- rowan,
15:59:16 05/27/01 Sun
Well, she is a Slayer after all, and I think we've seen other
examples where
she's taken a big fall without much injury (earlier in the ep
she fell from
1/2 way up the tower with no visible injury).
Plus, in several interviews, Joss said he wanted a good looking
corpse. He
also said she is rotting in her grave even as we speak, so apparently
Slayer-strength doesn't extend to keeping you free from worms.
:)
Opinions on a bet-- Buffy & Spike(spoilers
for next season) -- SingedCat,
05:52:48 05/27/01 Sun
OK, I've been showing the episodes to a friend this past 6 months,
and we've
gotton into some great discussions. Way back in winter he said
he didn't get
why Buffy didn't feel anything romantic for Spike. (Well, he's
only seen
this season and last season episodes) I offered some background,
and he said
he still thought Buffy would feel something for him. I said it
would never
happen. We made a 'gentleman's wager', and clarified it-- in order
for me to
lose, Buffy has to betray some romantic feeling for Spike-- even
unwilling
romantic feeling will do.
So far we've agreed that this hasn't happened. But I thought I'd
open it up
to the Board and see what you think.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Oh, here's the spoiler-- -- SingedCat, 05:55:27 05/27/01
Sun
And, since Joss says SMG will be back next season somehow as Buffy,
we can
speculate if this wil *ever* happen.
I do concede the possiblity of affection, by the way. Just not
romantic
love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> It will never be romantic love... -- OnM, 09:04:57
05/27/01 Sun
Spike said it himself in *The Gift*. He has accepted that Buffy
will never
see him that way, but he has gained a measure of respect from
her because of
the sacrifices he made for her and Dawn.
He will discover, if he hasn't already, that this is actually
better. Her
actions have stated that in Buffy's mind, he is no longer 'beneath
her'. I
think this is/was more of a personal victory than having her return
his
love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Maybe not but... -- Nina, 12:02:12 05/27/01
Sun
I think the matter is closed for Spike. He received more than
he expected.
He got the absolution, the respect and Buffy "saw" him.
I don't see him
trying to look for anything next year. What I do wonder about
is if for the
next two years something will happen to Buffy herself. I don't
say next year
(too soon). Probably only friendship. But after a while, when
there will be
no more black and white, maybe she will be able to feel something
else. And
maybe not. It could go either way. I don't think it matters at
this point.
Spike himself acknowledged it.
As for David Fury's comments that they could never allow Buffy
to feel
anything for Spike because it would diminish her as a hero, I
don't see that
as a real issue. The line between good and bad has really been
erased with
"The gift". Tara called Giles a killer, Dawn called
Ben a monster, the
grandpa looking Doc is in fact a monster. The debate is not about
the label
you have on your forehead (souled vampire/evil vampire/good guy
/bad guy)
it's about the actions you take. I think "The gift"
show that completely.
Ironically, Buffy rejected Spike and thought about dating Ben.
Ben was the
monster and Spike was revealed to be the ally. Now if Buffy and
Spike end up
together it will be because JW find it an important plot devise.
He won't
use it if it's pointless. It all depends what's in store for Buffy.
Does she
has something to learn from such a relationship or not.
Personally I am quite happy with the status quo. Respect on both
sides is
all I could hope for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Maybe not but... -- Rufus, 13:14:49
05/27/01 Sun
The romance aspect.....hmmmmmmmm.....never say never. In the Buffyverse
"weird love is better than no love".
I see no romantic leanings in Buffys attitude towards Spike, but
with Joss
one never knows, in the last ep he showed us monsters come in
many packages,
some of them not obvious to the naked eye. But that's the nature
of
monsters, they aren't always what we are looking for. If there
is ever a
romance with Buffy and Spike it would be well explained before
anything
happened. I say let's get Buffy breathing again before we try
to send her on
a date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Okay, I'll take the bet... -- rowan,
13:51:29 05/27/01 Sun
Okay, I'll be the one to go out on a limb.
I think we're 1/2 way into a two year story arc which will end
with a
romantic relationship between Buffy and Spike. During the first
year, the
goal was to establish Spike's feelings and rehabilitate him enough
so that
Buffy could establish a professional and personal rapport with
him (without
the fans going bonkers at the sudden "change").
If you notice, around the time of the Crush episode, there was
alot of talk
about how terrible this storyline was, that Spike was a stalker,
obsessed,
that it violated the canon for her to have feelings for him, it
would never
happen, etc...but by The Gift, I think almost every fan accepts
the
genuineness of his affection and the writers have turned the tables
on us to
the point that Buffy has actually entrusted what she loves most
(Dawn) to
Spike's care (on multiple occasions, too).
I expect that the second year of this arc will focus on Buffy's
developing
feelings (without the pressure of Spike's, since he has willingly
put them
aside to accept the professional/personal relationship on her
terms). Since
Buffy has so firmly put Spike in his place (romantically), any
attempts to
change the status quo will, interestingly, have to come from her.
Why do I think Buffy has feelings for Spike? First, there was
alot of care
taken to demonstrate some sexual tension between the two in FFL.
Second,
Buffy would not have encouraged someone who had romantic feelings
for her by
giving him a kiss like the one in Intervention. Third, Buffy entrusted
Dawn
to Spike. Fourth, she did not contradict Spike when he said, "I
know you'll
never love me"; instead, she hesitated, as if unsure what
to say.
The seeds of affection are there, boys and girls. Buffy's biggest
mental
obstacle will be getting around the idea of Spike being able to
love her
without a soul when Angel couldn't and dealing with feelings about
a second
vamp. She's already 1/2way there, because she's accepted that
his feelings
are genuine for her and Dawn.
What was Crush? Ep 15? I'm expecting something around ep 15 next
season that
will show us that Buffy returns Spike's feelings. It will be interesting
to
see if Spike will still think the relationship is a good idea
or if he'll
make Buffy sweat it out for a while.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Really good points --
curious, 14:36:51 05/27/01 Sun
and I wish I could say more but you guys are making my brain hurt
now. Too
much typing in one day.
But I think you're right about Buffy's main obstale but I also
think that
Buffy's relationship is merely in its infancy. She's only just
begun to
respect him as a person rather than seeing him as a monster, but
with Joss,
who knows where this will lead. Personally, I'd like to see a
deep
friendship come out of it based on respect and understanding between
2
people with very unique problems.
Most of all, I agree with Rufus' last statement.
>>I say let's get Buffy breathing again before we try to
send her on a date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Okay, I'll take the bet...
-- mundusmundi, 15:10:47
05/27/01 Sun
Dunno about true romance - that seems to be Angel's department
- but a
sexual fling at some point wouldn't surprise me, especially if
Buffy comes
back angry and out-of-sorts and estranged from her merely mortal
friends.
(Who wouldn't be?) That she & Spike now share something else in
common -
death - will doubtless create some new dynamics in the relationship,
but how
much or how far who knows. Should be veddy interesting....:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Okay, I'll take
the bet... -- darrenK, 17:06:28
05/27/01 Sun
While I don't want to speculate on whether there will be a romantic
relationship, I will say that Joss has been planting the seeds
of this arc
since Season 2.
"Spike, my boy, you have to work from the inside, to kill
this girl you have
to love her..."
--Angel to Spike in Becoming 1
Did anyone notice that the sun is rising at the end of the Gift,
but Spike
isn't smoking? Is that an oversight? Hmmmm...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Okay, I'll
take the bet... -- Rufus, 17:36:53
05/27/01 Sun
He had to crouch in the shade. The sun was up and he was having
the worst
day in his undead life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: OomM
forshawdowing something? -- Nina,
17:53:09 05/27/01 Sun
I've had this idea in my head for a long while, but nothing seemed
to tell
me that it could be right. Here are my ramblings on the meaning
of Spike's
dream:
The dream begins with Buffy barging in (like she will do up until
"Crush")
After their short conversation where they banter as usual, Spike
grabs Buffy
and plants a kiss on her lips. This looks like "Crush"
when Spike forces his
love on Buffy. Chains her, forcing her to listen to him. Buffy
in the dream
backs away in horror, putting her hand over her mouth. She does
the same in
real life. She is horrified by his admittance of love and closes
the door of
her home to his face. Then in the dream there's a pause. She's
thinking. And
slowly she puts down her hand. It could fit with the absolution
she gave him
in "Intervention". Other pause in the dream sequence:
they look at each
other. That could be a long period of time when it's status quo
(next year).
They both keep their distance, but Buffy is not horrified anymore.
Then she
is the one to make the next move. Slowly she comes to him and
finally kisses
him.
If the dream is a prediction of their future together, we could
say that
what's to come is a period of acceptation and status quo where
they both
remain single and then after a while Buffy will make the first
move when she
is ready and when Spike doesn't expect it anymore.
If not... well the dream was just a normal dream! :)
By the way, I loved your analysis Rowan!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
OomM forshawdowing something? -- MKS,
20:14:45 05/27/01 Sun
Great ideas. I would love to see a relationship develop between
the two.
Spike is certainly one of the most interesting characters on the
show (if
not THE most interesting), and it would really stink if he left
the series
for any reason (or even went to Angel). I'm willing to wait for
a
Buffy/Spike relationship to further develop. In five years this
series has
never failed to keep me intrigued, and the potential to keep me
guessing is
one of its best traits.
And what does OomM mean?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Initials for the ep. Out of my
Mind.......... -- Rufus, 20:22:28 05/27/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Initials for the ep. Out of my
Mind.......... -- MKS, 07:27:30 05/28/01 Mon
Thanks. Of course I got that about a minute after I posted...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Opinions on a bet-- Buffy & Spike(spoilers for next
season) --
london, 14:05:16 05/27/01 Sun
There is no way Joss will have Buff and Spikey sharing romantic
time with
eachother.Although Spike is my fav character he is not broody
and mysterious
enough,we know too much about him and his purpose in "death"
is to love Buff
from afar.I hope in episode 6 he becomes a part of the gang but
how to
explain this will not be easy ie,does he keep the chip inside
his head,does
he get a soul or will the powers that be sort this problem out
for us? We
will just have to wait and see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Opinions on a bet-- Buffy & Spike(spoilers for
next season) --
rowan, 15:52:13 05/27/01 Sun
"There is no way Joss will have Buff and Spikey sharing romantic
time with
each other."
You'd better watch out -- sometimes I'm sure that Joss surfs the
web looking
for comments just like this so that he can prove people wrong.
:)
All I ask is that you consider the change in Spike's feelings
towards Buffy
from OoMM through Crush, and the change in Spike's relationship
to Buffy &
the SG in Crush through The Gift. In a few short episodes, we've
gone from
"Buffy will never treat Spike like a friend", "Spike
is a soulless demon
incapable of real love" and the "SG will never accept
Spike" to the exact
opposite position.
In fact, I even go so far as to say that they are more likely
to have a
romantic relationship than a strictly sexual one. A sexual relationship
would be too obvious from the chemistry between them. It's more
fun for the
writers to manuever them (and us) into a position where they want/need
a
romantic relationship.
Plus, let's face it, Spike is a relationship kind of guy. He was
with Dru
for ages. After a little time with Harmony (and who can doubt
but that she
was a weak substitute for Buffy), he's looking for another soulmate.
He no
longer fits anymore with his demonic soulmate, so now he's in
the market for
another.
I do agree with Rufus, though - let's get the girl out of her
grave first
before we try to hook her up with someone (remember my prediction
-- episode
15!).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I'll write episode 15 on my hand......:):):)
-- Rufus, 16:29:22
05/27/01 Sun
Anything that happens on Buffy has been worked out long in advance.
Remember
the scene I quoted in Blood Ties that was used in the Gift. It
was the only
way it could have gone given the information I was shown. The
only thing
missing was Buffy refering to herself as a mother(Dawn being made
from part
of her). If you go back carefully through the episodes you can
get an idea
of where it may go.
Look carefully at The Crush and remember what was said about stalkers.
One
thing I consider in stalking is how much of a threat is the person
that is
doing the stalking? With Spike he clearly loved Buffy but approached
it from
a demon perspective(worked for Dru). But when the sun goes down
it was clear
that Spike was no threat to Buffy. He backed off when she told
him to, and
even though he didn't leave town, he left her alone. He ceased
being a
stalker. The next move was up to Buffy alone. It was up to her
to decide if
Spike could be trusted as more than a pathetic hanger on. Buffy
decided that
she needed Spike, wierd love and all. What Spike had to learn
he did in
Intervention. He said to Warren that he heard that it was better(Buffybot)
than the real thing. He played with his toy only to feel empty
and bored.
His true test of feelings came when Glory stuck her finger in
his chest. He
went through torture and possible death because he wanted to spare
Buffy the
pain of losing Dawn. He learned that though a nice dream the Buffybot
wasn't
real only his actions on behalf of Buffy were. This was the true
turning
point for Buffy herself. She was ready to finish Spike off, but
his actions
showed her that he was genuine in his feelings. It may have been
expressed
in a wierd way, but it was still love.
Now we get to the Gift. Out of everyone, Buffy asked Spike to
take care of
Dawn, not any of the SG, Spike. She reinvited him into her home
letting go
of the barrier of distrust that had been put there in reaction
to his
behavior in Crush. In her own way Buffy already loves Spike, as
a friend.
She has shown the ultimate trust in charging him with the safety
of the
person she loves the most, Dawn.
I try not to endorse ships of any kind because they can divide
the fans into
hostile camps. As I see it, ships sink and sail away. But if you
ask me if
Buffy and Spike may have a relationship I have to tell you, it
isn't
unthinkable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Very nice said! -- rowan, 09:25:53 05/29/01
Tue
I agree...I try not to get too locked into the romantic relationships,
too,
since so much can happen that prevents them or changes them. Plus,
I figure
the writers are pretty much creative enough to get us fans to
follow them in
any direction (despite what we may think is now impossible). I
just see the
"signs of the times" so to speak and think this one
is in the writers'
minds. Although I do have concerns, since Buffy's boyfriends all
come with
an expiration date.
I think one interesting element is that Joss has remarked on several
occasions (and especially recently with the move to UPN) that
Buffy and
Angel must move on. I'm wondering as time goes by here if the
writers are
reintepreting what once was viewed as "soulmates" as
more of a "bittersweet
first love". If that's even partially true, then Buffy is
really still
waiting for her first really adult love (sorry, I don't think
Riley really
counts, with all due respect to Riley fans).
Hmmmm....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Opinions on a bet-- Buffy & Spike(spoilers
for next season) --
MKS, 20:21:31 05/27/01 Sun
Also, it's well known that in many cases, sexual tension (will
they/won't
they, etc.) plays much better on television - holding viewers
more strongly
than a "marriage".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> IT's as clear as the KISS on Spike's face -- darrenK, 10:14:56
05/28/01
Mon
Thinking about the Buffy/Spike thing, starting with
Becoming 2 where "he likes the world too much to cause an
apocalypse," (Some
big bad he is) then moving through Out of My Mind and Something
Blue
(Hello!), I would say that Buffy and Spike have been on a 4 season
collison
course that can only end with them together. Even Doug Petrie's
assertion
that Buffy would never lower herself to be with Spike (Me thinks
he doth
protest too much) sounds like a bona fide snow job. Since when
do the
writers go out of their way to shut off plot possibilities?
And if Something Blue happened in a vacuum, maybe it would just
be another
episode, but considering 4 years of context, I'd say we're dealing
with
MASSIVE FORESHADOWING.
The writers have done a brillant job of inching the whole process
along so
slowly that even we can't really tell if it's going to happen,
but it is,
there's too much build-up for it not to. They've spent too much
time laying
the groundwork. It's all right there in front of our faces, just
like the
kiss of gratitude in Intervention.
They've put Dawn on Spike's side ("...chip, soul, same diff").
They've had
Spike win over Willow, even charm Xander in a way that Angel never
did.
And then there was Fool for Love when we find out that William
the Bloody is
really only "William the Bloody Awful Poet," an aspiring
writer and social
outcast stomped all over by the Cordelia of his day. Isn't the
burden of
otherness what the show is really all about? Isn't otherness a
condition for
Scoobydom? And wasn't that scene meant to earn our most profound
sympathies
and explain Spike's bitterness.
Maybe this show's principle character is Buffy the Vampire Slayer,
but for
four seasons it has also been about the redemption of William
the Bloody.
And William's redemption won't arrive until he and the Slayer
settle down to
start breeding the half-dead, or, is it the all-dead since Buffy's
dead? Or,
perhaps the half-resurrected? It's hard to figure out right now.
And have any of you seen a character on Buffy mourn like Spike
at the end of
the Gift?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: IT's as clear as the KISS on Spike's face -- rowan,
09:30:43
05/29/01 Tue
"I would say that Buffy and Spike have been on a 4 season
collison course
that can only end with them together."
Hmmm..interesting. Now you're making me wonder (since Spike wasn't
a regular
until S4) if Joss & Crew started to think this out a little when
they
realized that they had the potential to spin DB off (and needed
another dark
love interest for Buffy). I wonder if Joss just put the pieces
out there and
waited to see if they would gel. I did hear that it was JM's great
acting
ability that made Joss think of the expanded Spike storyline.
"Maybe this show's principle character is Buffy the Vampire
Slayer, but for
four seasons it has also been about the redemption of William
the Bloody.
And William's redemption won't arrive until he and the Slayer
settle down to
start breeding the half-dead, or, is it the all-dead since Buffy's
dead? Or,
perhaps the half-resurrected? It's hard to figure out right now."
Okay, you've discovered my secret -- this is why I'm watching
(truly, not
kidding). As much as I love Buffy, it was watching them tranform
Spike
that's kept me interested.
By the way, vamps are infertile, right?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: IT's as clear as the KISS on Spike's face
-- verdantheart,
12:09:21 05/29/01 Tue
rowan, I'm in complete agreement with you again! What could be
more
compelling than a demon transformed to fight for the light? With
no human
soul, can Spike ever expect any reward from the PTB?
Going on (and in danger of harping on what I've said before, that
I think
that Mr Marsters is an extraordinary actor), I wanted to mention
that I
believe that the best actors give more to the role than is in
the script
(subtly bringing out the essence of the character via nuances
of voice,
position, and expression). When this occurs on a TV series, the
writers are
then inspired to build on the character. In this case, perhaps
expanding the
role rather than killing him off as another vampire villain. (Another
example: Garak in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)
I'll spare you further thoughts for now!
- vh
I want to see the funeral! --
Hauptman, 08:10:07 05/27/01 Sun
I was disappointed to see the headstone at the end of the ep.
though I
understand that it's a message from Joss, "She's really dead,
kids." Fine.
And I am delighted to hear she is coming back--though I would
have really
dug a few episodes of "Willow the kick-ass Wicca."
But I want to see the funeral. I want to see the whole cast go
through their
grief paces together. I want graveside recriminations and confrontations.
I
want Angel there, Faith, Cordelia, Wesley, Johnathan, Riley, Amy,
everyone.
Gimme, gimme, gimme. But I don't think we are going to get it.
I assume,
with the WB vs UPN slapping each other's faces with dueling gloves,
that it
will be too complicated and political. Pity.
Hey, how come no one is talking about Giles new spin-off in England.
How the
heck are we supposed to see it stateside? I think it's great that
these
characters are so interesting they can be spun off easily. I would
even
watch the wacky adventures of Anya. Maybe NBC will scope her up
for a Must
See TV sit-com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I want to see the funeral! -- darrenK, 16:55:31 05/27/01
Sun
Yep, there should be a funeral.
The ENTIRE Watcher's council should be there on their pin-striped
knees for
the way Buffy sacrificed to save their smug overly academic asses.
And they
should declare her Buffy the God-Slayer and there should be 10,000
angels
(with a small a) singing and the entire ungrateful population
of humans
stupid enough to live on a Hellmouth. Without Buffy they're toast...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Good point -- Hauptman, 10:32:58 05/28/01 Mon
Good point, DarrenK. I expect there would be a huge turn out from
Sunnydale
in general. Riley could arrange a military fly-over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> No funeral Please! -- Avatar 2001, 12:50:47
05/28/01 Mon
A funeral is not called for because that would be the ultimate
goodbye and
her death is not final, Joss has already said that she would be
coming back
so a true goodbye is the wrong thing to do.
As for the honors and recognition of her accomplishments the inscription
on
the gravestone is more than adequate, it tells the world who she
was, what
she did and for who she did it for, it represents the respect
and love that
the Scoobies have for her an homage from people that did not love
her would
not be something Buffy would desire she was always a very honest
person she
would despise that type of hypocrisy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments -- curious,
12:00:12 05/27/01 Sun
I know this subject must have been talked to death already, but
I just had
to say something about how I felt after this remarkable episode.
I've been
trying to get on this board since it aired but final projects
and such
prevented me. So even it is never read, I can at least feel that
I expressed
my deep appreciation to those brilliant workaholics at the Buffyverse
studios. I do apologize if all this is repetititive, but I really
needed to
express my gratitude and delight for this wonderful show.
Just a warning to those who dislike this episode, because the
following is
very gushy and completely Pro "The Gift" and stresses
a lot of praise for
cinematic techniques.
Where oh where do I begin?
That once in a while, there are individual elements of great beauty
each in
themselves that transcends their separate parts when placed together
in a
perfect moment of synergy. I tell you, that moment arrived for
me and it
happened in "The Gift" and left me not wanting.
I just want you to know where I'm coming from. I'm coming from
the
perspective of passion and expression. Film is not only a medium
for
recording life. It is also and most often used as a creative medium
of
expression. It is the director's canvas to which he paints his
vision.
Sometimes this leads me to neglect the writing where I just don't
care about
the script as much as I care about the communication. Was the
writing
perfect? No. Did the director communicate his passion to me? Yes,
on all
accounts that were important.
There are times when you get something that washes away all logical
thoughts, leaving you only to feel and suspend all disbelief.
This episode
"the gift" did that to me. From the very moment I saw
Giles giving his
favorite little spiel, followed by seeing a young Buffy progressing
rapidly
through a hyper speed of this slayer's journey, I knew what I
was looking
at. Buffy's visual eulogy. Joss was letting me know upfront and
personal
that Buffy was going die, and I felt my stomach knot right there
and then.
O.K. I've been expecting this, but seeing it is a whole different
thing. I
have to say that this piece of hyper speed editing followed by
a real time
return to 29.97 fps, and all in perfect sync to the first real
beat of music
was the most effective piece of editing I've seen on television.
Not just on
BtVS, but anywhere on television and could easily hold its hold
on the big
screen. And that opening dialogue just sent me into even more
dread.
Buffy: "Its what I do." (Buffy's resigned fatalism?)
Guy: "But you're just a girl" (so innocent)
Buffy: "That's what I keep saying." (Her wistfully clinging
hope to
normality)
Joss was reminding us of Buffy's inner struggles and where her
current frame
of mind is. Now my stomach is in knots and my heart starts to
sink a little,
and all this before the title credits roll. (I'm cursing advertising
left
and right now)
Did anyone else get awfully exited at the unmistakable sounds
of that
wonderful genius called Christopher Beck. Man I was so, so happy
to hear
him. This episode was going to be great.
The scene in the magic shop was perhaps my least favorite scene
of the
episode, but resolved some issues, raised a confrontation and
delivered some
well-placed comic moments.
Re: Spike's speech about blood J. "Its always about blood.....makes
you hard!"
Still the most important thing I found about this scene was that
it made it
very clear where the major players stood. Giles believes in the
well being
of many over the well being of one. (Anyone thinking Star Trek?)
Buffy makes
it painfully clear that Dawn is her first priority.
I thought Buffy's unfinished expressions were an interesting insight
into
her Psyche. When Buffy says "The Monks made her out of me.
I hold her and I
feel closer to her than.....(myself?). It's not just the memories
they built,
its physical. Dawn is a part of me. The only part that I.....(?like,
love?)."
We've seen Buffy go through much insecurity these two seasons.
She's lost
herself, her center. She's been overwhelmed by her whole "slayer"
deal. To
me, this has been the "big bad" of the season. (since
it has been a very
Buffy centric season.) Not Glory. The real demon has been her
own inability
to understand her place and her worth as a human being in this
world.
Buffy's been acting on her slayer self all year, believing that
this is what
is required to win battles, that this is where her strength lies.
(I think
she's wrong. But that's a whole other topic) She doesn't know
who Buffy is,
and further more, she doesn't appear to have much respect for
her human
part. Buffy's unfinished dialogue indicated she believed that
Dawn was the
best part of her; just as a parent who looks at a child they conceived
and
instinctively think it's the most perfect part of them. If this
link is
present that parent becomes fiercely protective and will go to
every
possible and sometimes even impossible lengths to ensure that
child's
continued existence. You don't want to mess with a mother bear
watching over
her cub. Sorry I'm really waffling.
The scene in the gym was really heart wrenching. Giles and Buffy
declare how
far they will go to do what each feel is right even if it means
that they
oppose each other. Yet they sit quietly and talk to each other
about grave
matters. I thought there was a wonderfully mature quality to it.
At the
beginning, Buffy didn't really understand the nature of her calling.
At the
end of "Becoming 2", she was at a 180. She understood
what duty to the cause
meant and sacrificed her one true love to save the world. Here,
in the hours
before the granddaddy of all apocalypses, she's come full circle
to where
she started. She's faced with an impossible choice and admits
that she can't
do the right thing anymore if it meant killing Dawn. So Buffy
goes into
battle with a fierce determination to ensure Dawn's survival.
She doesn't
fail to do this.
Then to the non-stop action once we reach the scaffold site. I
must be
really slow or something because I was actually surprised when
Glory kills
the Buffybot. I loved the comic moment when Glory asked if everybody
else
knew that the Slayer was a robot. I knew something was out of
place and a
bit strange with Buffy, but I didn't suspect the Buffybot. (Methinks
Willow
has been doing some reprogramming) Then I realize what made me
feel that
way. Joss directed a slightly skewed zoom into the bot and left
the scene at
a subtly skewed angle. Very clever. It makes an impression on
the
subconscious that there is something unnatural about the scene.
From here on, I've got to say I loved all the action. I'm totally
impressed
with Clare Kramer this episode. She actually convinced me she
could act.
From the moment Dawn screamed out to Buffy, I felt the urgency
of the
situation. Buffy's fierce determination to reach her and Glory
equally
determined to stop her from getting to her sister. Kudos to the
stunts
people, and to Sarah and Clare who did a lot of their own swinging
and
climbing whilst all the time acting convincingly. Once again,
the music
score really contributed to the action. I see what Joss meant
by
"unfilmable" 100th episode. By the time we get to the
grand finale, I was
sitting barely breathing.
And what a finale. For me, it was perfect. Several weeks ago,
I think it was
OnM that alerted me to the Roger Ebert phrase about "A perfect
moment of
Cinema." Thanks so much for that. It's a great phrase. In
fact, if there was
a gypsy curse on film groupies who experience this, my neighborhood
would be
very dead by now.
The CG was just COOL, especially for a television show. That dragon
was just
priceless. The glowing energy was awesome. As someone who is in
pursuit of
doing such work in the future, I just can't pass up praising the
special
effects work to bits. I LOVED everything that occurred from here
on. SMG's
and MT's remarkable acting and chemistry made the scene so very
emotional
and so believable. Those few seconds when "it all became
so clear" to Buffy,
were such beautiful moments. That elusive moment of "knowing"
that surely we
all search for was so perfectly communicated. Buffy finally understands
her
purpose as a slayer and more importantly she understands something
about
herself. What her love means, what her her gift really is, what
being the
chosen one is all about. I maintain that Buffy does not have a
death wish as
Spike announced in FFL. I'm sure she has, on many occasions wanted
to just
lay down and not get up, but I don't believe she wants to die.
She's weary
and she has a right to be. To my own observance, she has only
exhibited a
will to live. She is intensely passionate and is ruled by those
passions. I
see Buffy as more heart and spirit than physical slayer strength.
The spirit
guide told her that she was "full of love" that it burns
brighter than the
fire, and "love would lead her to her gift." Buffy's
gift is life. In her
death she left the legacy of life. Her fierce love for Dawn led
her to to
the gift as the guide said. I feel that this is really fitting,
as I firmly
believe that Buffy has a great reverence for life because she
lives on the
sidelines and longs to be part of it. Her insistence on "being
normal" is an
expression of this reverence. You might think I'm crazy, but that's
how I
see it. To me, this story was never about the doom and gloom of
death. It
was about the beautiful gift of life from someone who respected
life more
than most.
I'm not sure if I can adequately express that wonderfully crafted
scene.
Buffy's quietly reflective look as Chris Beck's music crept in
and the wind
strokes their hair. Her calm but heartfelt last look of love and
last loving
kiss for Dawn in contrast to Dawn's anguished cries is what elevates
this
show from just mere entertainment. There's such passion and artistry
to the
making of these scenes that keeps me addicted to this show. But
the most
stunning artisty of all was what followed. Buffy's grand moment
and grand it
was.
It was perfect, it was stunning, and I was completely consumed
by it. Joss
did something that should not be allowed. He turned Buffy's death
into a
vision of mesmerizing beauty. How did he do this? It was all those
perfect
individual sums. Sarah brilliantly acted what has got to be a
blue screen
scene and later composited into CG. Everything about it was breathtaking.
The silent gasps, the wind lashing across those golden tresses
against a
current of electrical storm. All the while, against an enthralling
score, a
hypnotic voice over and a visual composition that just plain transfixes
you.
And as I see that "final gasp" as her head snaps back
and a "final look of
peace", I could have wept with joy had I not been so stunned
with an
anesthetizing awe. Everything was perfect right down to the white
sweater
even. What a creative approach to wrapping up the story. The camera
showing
us her last words to Dawn, but not hearing them. The eloquent
words then
used as a grammatical part of a whole. Joss did everything right
to evoke
all the signifcant senses that enables a viewer to 'experience'
an event
rather than just 'watching' it.
I'm convince all these elements were immaculately storyboarded
to create an
audio, visual and emotional moment that we wont forget for a long
time. I
won't. (Sorry for carrying on like that, I know all this seems
really over
the top, but I'm a digital arts, film and video student 3 weeks
away from
graduating, so you can understand my crazy exitement I hope.)
Then I start
to feel guilty because I'm filled with this wondrous awe at Buffy's
death.
Joss really knows how to mess with my head. But in the end, I
believe that
this is what Joss wanted to portray, that Buffy's death was beautiful
because her sacrifice was an act of selfless love for Dawn and
in doing so,
she also saved the world and the universe. (Huge upgrade from
merely saving
the world to coincide with the big 100 J)
To me it was Buffy Summers, the girl, that saved her sister, and
the
universe happened to benefit from this act. I don't find this
any less noble
either. It doesn't take a cosmic event for heroism to be present.
All the
scoobs are heroic, they fight against evil and are willing to
sacrifice
themselves for their loved ones. They choose to do this. This
makes them
heroic. Buffy, on the otherhand, has always struggled in the shadow
of her
slayer self. She thinks it's the slayer part of her that is strong
and
heroic. She attributes her success to that being and has hidden
behind her
slayerness. That's why I found this a thiumphant end. The girl
found her
center. She understood her role and purpose in this life, even
if that
purpose included her imminent death and faced it without flinching.
In the
end, the girl defined the slayer, not the other way around. I'm
so damn
proud. (And I'm making no sense.)
To add to this epiphany, some painfully mature and eloquent last
words for
Dawn. Contrast this to "Prophesy Girl" when she said
to Jenny,
"Tell him (Giles) that I said.........." Shrugs her
shoulders...
"Tell him something cool then tell him I said it." (Something
very close to
that)
I must admit that I was shocked at seeing her body. Along with
the grave, it
made it so final. I also like the way that Joss took a theatrical
approached
to the scene instead of a graphic bloody one. Her body laid in
repose in
serenity, and peace fits with the way her death was expressed.
He did the horror and the pain of death with Joyce. He did the
opposite with
Buffy. And then of course, Joss, in his infinitely demented mind
will even
risk sabotaging this masterpiece by "She saved the world
a lot". Can you not
see him sitting at his keyboard just 'daring' you to find it cheesy
and
knowing most of us are probably way too numb or way too distraught,
for too
emotionally entwined to find it in our hearts to laugh about it.
On that note, Buffy feels dead to me. Even though I know she'll
be back next
season, She feels very dead. And I almost wish that Joss would
leave her to
her eternal rest after such a beautiful sacrifice. Its how I'd
like to
remember her. I can understand what he means when he said that
there would
be no cliffhanger, because I really can't seem to see beyond this
episode
and I'm content to wait while relishing and savoring a gift that
is "The
Gift".
O.K. If by some miracle there is a single soul out there that
actually waded
through this, thanks for sticking it out. You have the patience
of a saint.
If not, (note to myself here) its been a most cathartic exercise
indeed. I'm
going have to spend a whole day just checking out these threads
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments
-- FanMan, 13:24:43
05/27/01 Sun
Wow!
That was quite a review. I will agree with everything you said.
I cried and felt drawn into the story myself.
I mentioned in another post that I hope people in hollywood can
get
inspiration from Joss and improve the general quality of entertainment.
It
sounds like you are part of the next generation and you definately
are
inspired by Joss! Give me some quality when you are successfull;
and I am
speaking for all discerning viewers of media in that.
Curious keep your inspiration of what true cinematic quality is
and
incorperate it into your career...and good luck in the workforce!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments
-- mundusmundi, 13:27:34
05/27/01 Sun
Obviously passion extends not only to filmmaking but to posting
boards, b/c
yours is a simply great post. I agree with everything.
First time I saw "The Gift," I was actually a little
disappointed, though
now I realize that may have been due to a lingering aftertaste
from the
embarrassingly awful double-"Frasier" season finale
I'd just finished
watching. (Kinda weird where I live: Buffy is already on a joint
UPN-WB
network, and doesn't air until 10 p.m. Tues nights, right after
"Frasier"
ended.) Undistracted the second time (and third, fourth, and fifth),
I found
"The Gift" remarkable. You conveyed exactly what I was
feeling -- that not
every line or scene was perfect, but the *totality* of it was.
Oh, and don't feel bad about the Buffybot: I was fooled too, and
laughed at
my own stupidity (smack palm on forehead).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Thank you both so much -- curious, 14:17:01 05/27/01
Sun
for your kind words. Thank you.
>>Give me some quality when you are successfull; and I am
speaking for all
discerning viewers of media in that.
:) :) :)
I'm actually more trained for the motion graphics industry, but
one can only
dream. But I have to admit to that part in the human psyche that
just say,
"dream on". And then I think about what Russell Crowe
said in his Oscar
accepting speech to "the little people working out of their
small towns."
Frankly I'm terrified at the coming months.
Thanks guys.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The Body vs The Gift -- Rufus, 16:09:44 05/27/01 Sun
The Body was a very important episode because it made everyone
including us
remember how everyday and final death is. As a slayer Buffy has
killed an
awful amount of demons but as they turned to dust or we felt they
richly
deserved their fate we became jaded to death. The Body reminded
everyone how
final and random death can be. Death happens every day. When someone
says
the Gift cheapens death because it's been done before I have to
think...no
sh*t....it sure does. Death is all around us, ignored until it
directly
affects us. When Joyce died, she died the same way many of us
will, an
illness that hits unexpectedly. That death was real and Joyce
wasn't coming
back. In the Gift we know that Buffy will be back, she is on a
journey that
needs to be completed. Death is only part of Buffys journey. So
you get a
death that is very unreal when compared to what happened to Joyce.
It was
bloodless, perfect, no ambulance or hospital.
I want Buffy back, I don't want her death to be permanent. Buffys
journey is
far from over.
Very nice review BTW.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Perfect moments--Thank you, Joss!!! -- SingedCat, 17:13:58
05/27/01 Sun
Curious, stop it with the apologizing. If this board isn't for
eloquent
deconstruction of our favorite show, I don't know what it's for.
Besides, it
was well-written (as you well know!;-)The more passionately felt,
the more
eloquently written. If you feel the urge again, then write! We
all love to
partake.
Thank you for clarifying a wonderful experience for me, and for
putting into
(not enough!) words the gratitude we on the board feel. I hope
it gets back
to Joss and Co, they deserve it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Perfect moments--Thank you, Joss!!! -- Aelith,
18:26:22 05/27/01
Sun
And thank you Curious
Your discription and annalisis has helped me relive what I failed
to tape.
You have given words to muddied feelings and made them clear.
Well, except for the music, if it is perfect I don't hear it and
I didn't.
"The Gift" felt final to me also but not only because
I don't/won't get UPN
but because of the internal logic of the show's premis: The Vampire
Slayer
is a teenager, Buffy is no longer a teenager. The thread for this
whole
season has been Buffy grows up. Her last sacrafice is a very Adult
Human act
of commitment.
The only reason for her return is the unfinished business between
Doc and
Dawn which only Spike knows about. She hasn't finished saving
Dawn and I
think Willow is going to need some saving also.
I fear that the only way to bring her back in body will be to
turn back the
clock. *gastly thought, sorry*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Perfect moments--Thank you, Joss!!! -- cjc_36,
22:16:25
05/27/01 Sun
No, her job isn't finished because she will become something rarely,
if
ever, seen-- the accepting, adult Slayer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments
& Storyboarding --
Anthony8, 18:43:39 05/27/01 Sun
Great post Curious. Re: storyboarding--have you checked out the
Buffy
Shooting Scripts Site(http://www.mustreadtv.com/buffyscripts/)?
It's
interesting to see what stays in and what is taken out of the
final shoot
before airtime.
SPOILERS COMING UP DOWN BELOW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
For example, you mentioned how Buffy's actions and dialogue (in
the magic
shop) reflect the emotions of a protective mother. When I brought
up a
similar thought in an earlier thread, someone directed me to the
fact that,
in the shooting script, Buffy actually states that Dawn is her
sister AND
her daughter. When you think of it, leaving out those words in
that
particular scene allows our dramatic experience to resolve more
forcefully
when Buffy makes her ultimate sacrifice at the end. In the version
that
aired, Buffy is not quite able to communicate to the rest of the
SG what she
means by Dawn being "a part of her." She is not really
certain herself why
she feels this way, but you can see some deeper realization is
brewing. At
the end, when she's on the tower with Dawn and, through her memory
flashes,
pulls it all together to realize what has to be done, we come
to that
realization along with her. Dawn is not just her sister (i.e.-Joyce's
offspring and Buffy's sibling). Dawn, for all intents and purposes,
is her
child. Buffy, in a moment of perfect clarity (unconditional parental
love
has that effect on people), knows what she must do.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Great post-- and please let us know when you graduate...
-- OnM, 19:25:25
05/27/01 Sun
...and we'll all send out a hardy whoo-hoo! :)
I think when you get a chance to read all the posts (or at least
some--
there's been a lot!!) you'll see that your passions are shared
by nearly all
of us here. I'm still working on my thoughts, since whenever I
start to set
down and write them, I stop here, read some more comments, and
pick up still
more insights!
I envy you for working in the field you are... I wish my own talents
were
more so in that direction, but 'tis not so. One great thing though,
independent film and video work is slowly but surely making it's
way into
the general way of things, with a lot of great talent out there.
We all hope
that fortune smiles on you and we'll get to see your work someday
soon.
Keep us posted! (Literally, even).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments
-- cjc_36, 22:12:02
05/27/01 Sun
What a wonderful think piece! I'm serious! You laid out what has
been going
through my mind since Tuesday night.
SMG's voice-over last words to Dawn recalled to me the end of
ST: II, while
the strains of Amazing Grace on bagpipes, the camera sweeps by
the
starfield, then Nimoy's voicover "Space, a Final frontier...."
No death scene has topped this for me in a genre movie/show (death
of
Superman comic mini was close) until now.
A perfect moment of personal clarity for Buffy, and perfectly
executed by
Joss and everyone who works for him.
SMG's acting in the last scene, especially the voice over to Dawn
recalled
to me the best of early Files work from Gillian Anderson. Understated,
powerful and real.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "The Gift", Joss and Co. = Perfect moments
-- change, 04:23:19
05/28/01 Mon
Great post. It's nice to hear from someone who is actually getting
into
film. It's amazing how far television and film have come. The
CGI effects
obviously much better than anything they had when I was a kid,
but that's
just the tip of the iceberg. All of the production values are
an order of
magnitude better. The writing, acting, and directing on BtVS are
just
incredibly good. BtVS episodes are better than most movies I saw
as a kid.
I've got a question on Christopher Beck though. I thought he left
BtVS after
Restless. Did he come back?
Where Will They Be? (spoilers
and spex) -- mundusmundi, 10:47:44 05/27/01
Sun
Some random thoughts/natterings/speculations....
Where will the characters be at the start of B6? What will they
be doing?
Seems like figuring this out will offer clues on what to expect
with other
Lingering Issues. Going down the list:
1. Buffy - ??? Yer guess as good as mine.
2. Xander/Anya - prepping for the wedding (most certainly to go
disastrously
awry, but that's another plot arc). Anya perhaps also prepping
to run the
Magic Shop in Giles's soon-to-be recurring absences.
3. Willow/Tara - school/spells.
4. Giles - prepping to return to England. (Poor sod. What's an
ex-Watcher to
do?)
5. Dawn - the heart of the matter. Perhaps in a foster center
or with foster
parents.
6. Spike - perhaps drunk and disheveled at his loss (dig the flask),
but
also watching over Dawn from a distance.
Could be way off on this, but I see Dawn's isolation from the
group as the
key (erm, not *The Key*) to the season premiere. Assuming Buffy
is really
gone -- and I agree there was something dreamlike about that tombstone
shot,
but still, as the Spirit Guide told her, "Death is your gift,"
not "Coma is
your gift" --and assuming none of the Scoobies will adopt
her -- again, an
interesting idea, but I don't see it happening -- there seems
no other
alternative than to have Dawn as an orphan. This would also unfortunately
offer the opportunity for some cheap shots on orphanages and/or
foster
parents, using them as the monster element. (Pray this isn't the
musical
episode, with Dawn singing "Tomorrow.") Still, it could
work dramatically.
One other intriguing thing somebody mentioned in another post,
and which was
in the shooting script of "The Gift" but deleted, was
Buffy's line about
Dawn being "my sister and my daughter" (weirdly echoes
a line from
*Chinatown,* but never mind). Maybe Joss just found it too weird
to include.
Or, mebbee it's something he wants to pick up on next year. In
any case, it
could tie in to the aforementioned spex above - unless it's all
wrong! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Where Will They Be? (spoilers and spex) -- curious,
14:04:52 05/27/01
Sun
O.K. after my brain exploded with painfully long and serious thoughts
in the
previous post. I can only come up with this.
Willow and Tara:
After much sabotage by the WB executives, they manage to steal
Willow and
Tara away from Joss to star in their very own spin-off "Charmed
once more".
Their combined magic have conjured up an entire Country called
Willosia of
which the capital is Taraville, the seat of the Wiccan community.
In memory
of their beloved friend, the official language is Buffonian, so
an updated
dictionary is a must. They have a 5 year contract and a central
arc to derat
Amy.
Giles:
After a painful recovery, Giles can no longer stand to be in Sunnydale
with
his memories. His magic store is suddenly very successful and
becomes a
Franchise. He bequeaths the one in Sunnydale to Dawn, sells the
Franchise
and returns to England to start an optical outlet that specializes
in extra
strong glasses. Their by line is, "Our glasses never scratch
no matter how
much you polish them and our frames are unbendable."
Ayna and Xander:
They get married on his 21st Birthday over the Summer and get
custody of
Dawn. Ayna is the manger of the Dawn's business as well as vice
president of
a new business that she and Xander started. They manufacture Bulldozers
with
the strength to knock down extra large buildings and gods. During
the
Summer, Xander finds a new kid on the block who looks extremely
like Buffy
and brings her home. The new kid has no idea who she is or where
the heck
she came from and is completely clueless about life. Ayna is delighted
that
she is no longer the newest and most clueless person around so
takes the new
kid under her wing and teaches her how to deal with life starting
with Ayna
101. Xander is appalled and is constantly shaking his head but
bites his
tongue because Ayna is damn good at making money. Dawn is delighted
that she
gets to boss this new kid around. Xander builds them a prefabricated
tree
house. They are quite the happy family.
Spike:
Spike after a tearful farewell to his favorite slayer goes off
to Tibet to
find a cure for his Vampism. Oz previously clued him in on it
while they
planned revenge on the initiative. He promises Dawn he will be
back to tell
her really good Asian ghost stories with lots of blood and guts.
Buffy:
Whom the God of the Buffyverse is well pleased with has decreed
her destiny
free. She gets the equivalent of ocean front property in heaven,
lives with
Joyce who is making up for her previous neglect by mothering Buffy
to a
second death. God also likes to shower her with gifts of which
her favorites
are her Angel and Spike dolls. She alternates her days between
polishing her
many pairs of slayer boots (which leads to other fashion accessory
problems)
and playing with her Angel and Spike dolls. Meanwhile, here on
Earth, Angel
and Spike are wondering why they do the things they do.
And don't take me in the least bit seriously. I just being silly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Where Will They Be? (spoilers and spex) -- mundusmundi,
14:45:28
05/27/01 Sun
Your post gave me more laughs than anything recently on "Frasier."
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Very wicked and funny - I needed a mental hug
- Many thanks --
Brian, 17:40:41 05/27/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Very wicked and funny - I needed a mental
hug - Many thanks --
Nina, 17:59:23 05/27/01 Sun
I second that!!! It was an incredible good laugh! I needed it!
Thanks! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> LMAO !!!!!!!!!!! -- Avatar 2001, 12:55:17 05/28/01
Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Where Will They Be? (spoilers and spex) -- Jessica,
14:11:37 05/27/01
Sun
Dawn might be in foster care next year and be angry at the rest
of the
scoobies for not taking care of her or heaven at Buffy for leaving
her and
when Buffy comes back, it might not be a great reunion at first,
or Buffy
might be angry at the scoobies for not taking care of Dawn.
Another possibility, is Hank Summers is back and he is taking
care of Dawn
in Sunnydale or he wants to take her away and the scoobies want
to object
but can't and just before they live Buffy just happens to come
back and she
fights with her father for custody and as to tell him where Dawn
comes from
and that she's almost like her daughter and that she is the slayer.
Another possibility, Spike takes care of Dawn and moved in the
Summers
house. Can you imagine the possibilities and the conflict he could
have with
the rest of the scoobies. Plus when Buffy comes back what a shock.
Other possibilities, Buffy comes back but she as amnesia or she
is crazy or
she is darker.
Will just have to wait and see, I'm sure that Joss will surprise
all of us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Where Will They Be? (spoilers and spex) -- mundusmundi,
14:57:31
05/27/01 Sun
I agree that Hank will figure bigtime next season. They've been
foreshadowing him all year, much as they did the Mayor in B2,
and it
wouldn't surprise me if he emerges as a Big Bad of some kind.
(Lord knows,
as Masq points out on her site, Joss has issues with daddys.)
I would be
surprised if he popped up in the first episode. Joss likes to
tease us,
string us along, and there seems to be plenty already to deal
with over 2
hours. (No stretch to say I do expect the Buffster back, more
or less, by
the end of ep. 1.)
It's highly improbable, but I do enjoy the image of Spike trying
to put one
over on the neighbors as "Uncle Willie", reading the
paper, smoking a pipe
and wearing an ascot. More likely, I suspect he'll be both devoted
and
distraught, and initially at a distance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A Watcher for Dawn -- darrenK, 17:20:37 05/27/01
Sun
Joss has good fun with puns.
Back in Restless--during one of the dream sequences--Giles and
Spike are
swinging on a swingset, both wearing Watcher's uniforms.
Now, I would NEVER suggest that Spike will LITERALLY become a
watcher, I
think the interpretation is open for Spike to become Dawn's metaphoric
"watcher," her babysitter, minder or keeper.
This would actually have the kind of symmetry that Joss loves.
How ironic a
vamp caring for Dawn.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Giles doesn't become Dawn's
guardian
and take up residence in the Summer's house with Spike, Willow
and Tara. It
will be a parody of Full House and leave plenty of room for lack
of
privacy/sanity humor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The way I see it... -- Nina, 18:17:32 05/27/01
Sun
Buffy:
I think that Buffy won't be darker, but lighter. Full of love.
Full of her
experience. She sacrificed herself for love. I really don't see
her coming
back with a dark side. That look of peace she had before she jumped
showed
us the Buffy I'm yearning to see. I hope we will see more of her
that way.
Dawn/Spike:
Somehow I image them mirroring their grief. They might cling together
after
Buffy's death. I think Dawn will have more weird behaviors too.
She started
stealing hearings when her mother died, what will she do now?
Maybe she will
be caught by Spike and he'll tell her to stop stealing stuff.
She'll say
that he steals so she can steal too and who knows maybe they will
both work
on their stealing issues! (Gee that sounds terribly like a bad
soap!) She
will probably be very guilty too, other particularity she will
share with
Spike. Basically I see them becoming very close and the watcher
prediction
being reinforce by him taking care of her. Hank coming back would
be
interesting. We need more male figures on the show!
Willow/Tara:
The gap between their abilities may be a problem. Willow is very
powerful
and Tara is far behind. How will she cope with that? Will it be
like
Buffy/Riley? Or will they overcome the difference? I don't have
a clue to be
sincere.
Anya/Xander:
I don't see a wedding too soon. He proposed, let them be engaged
for awhile.
I do see Anya taking up the shop. I see Xander working very much
on
construction sites (the city was destroyed a lot during "The
gift")
Giles:
I don't think he'll move to England. The actor does, but I don't
think Giles
will. He might just be a lot more distant. Maybe he'll sell the
shop to
Anya. I see a darker Giles next year. He had to kill to protect
the
humanity. He lost his slayer. Think about "Dark age".
That's what I see for
him. (I hope I am wrong though)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: A Watcher for Dawn -- verdantheart, 07:30:40
05/29/01 Tue
I thought that the Spike as Watcher sequence may have forshadowed
his
stalking behavior, although it may forshadow more than that.
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: A Watcher for Dawn -- Nina, 09:58:37
05/29/01 Tue
I think there's something there not only because Spike said he'd
watch for
Dawn but because the staging in "The Gift" was pretty
clear. Between the end
of "tWotW" and "The Gift" the SG and Giles
have changed seats. Spike is
right behind Giles. When Giles backs away and says that they will
all die if
Buffy doesn't kill Dawn, Spike who was sitting behind like a back
up now
faces Buffy. Those are little details. But if it wasn't important
everyone
would have kept the same seat they had in "tWotW".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Where Will They Be? (spoilers and spex) -- Mishka, 12:59:41
05/28/01
Mon
I don`t know guys, but it seems fair to say that it will be up
to Angel to
ressurrect Buffy. As he did with Darla (I forget which episode)
he could go
through those three tests to bring her back.
I think Spike and Angel will come to the same sort of understanding
that
Spike and Riley came too. There is only and will only, every be
one true
love for Buffy, and that is Angel. The only reason he isn`t human
right now
is because the PTB said that there will come a time when she will
die
because he isn`t strong enough to save her.
I don`t see Dawn in foster care though. I think Spike truly sees
her as a
kid sister and will be constantly watching out for her secretly,
like a
childs imaginary friend. Spike is just cool. When all else go
mushy and
whiny, he brings us back with quick wit and ruthlessness. Although
there is
the potential for Mr.Summers to return and disturb things.
I miss Oz. And Doyle. I hope they somehow visit us in Season 6.
Also I hope
there is more plot line with Cordy`s pet ghost. (aside)
I don`t see Tara and Willow lasting. They are too much alike.
Relationships
like that get boring. They`ll drive each other crazy with sweetness
and cool
teen-speak. (they`ve been driving me nuts for awhile) Or maybe
if Tara could
just get a little less wussy and needy, it wouldn`t be so bad.
Maybe Faith will have to step in to help the team somehow, you
never know.
Without a slayer in town, its only a matter of time before Armageddon
number
7 comes around. Although I really like that Willow is getting
Uber-powerful.
I think Xander should join martial arts or something, maybe Spike
could
train him for awhile, I think its time, especially without Buffy
not being
around. Anya`s spunky, she`d probably be better at it. I`m sure
Giles can
figure out a way to keep Dawn with them, if all else fails. She
still is
super human after-all and there are many other baddies that would
probably
kill/use her for some reason.
Just some musings...
p.s. why isn't Giles going to be around next season, I missed
the reason?
The importance of Buffy's clothes
-- Kerri, 14:39:45 05/27/01 Sun
I just rewatched "The Gift" and I noticed how important
what Buffy is
wearing is.
In the first scene she wears a white top with black under it.
She's Buffy
the girl trying to hide the darkness inside.
Then when Buffy is training she is wearing all black. She's in
a dark place,
unsure of her calling and unsure about life. I loved how when
she gave the
speach to Giles about everything being stripped away she was surrounded
by
all black, all the pain inher life. In this scene Buffy also states
how
she's only a killer. Black representing the slayer.
The in the last scene Buffy is in white. Her human half. Her purity
and
innocence. Buffy was delivered from her uncertainty by her human
half, by
her complete, unconditional love for Dawn. Buffy is wearing all
white when
she dies. It is her human half that wins in the end. Her human
half that
saves Dawn. Her human half that embraces death as her gift, as
an expression
of love, of life.
Buffy dies, and a new day dawns, darkness turns to light. She
understands.
She loves. And through her death gives life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes -- jc, 15:30:51 05/27/01
Sun
Also in the EP. "WOTW"
In Buffy's mind there were two of her.
1) Buffy in a black top w/ pants, and her hair was in a pony tail.
2) Buffy in earth tones w/ a skirt, and her hair down.
To me the one that was at the shelf returning the book. The one
that for a
fraction of a second thought, and felt knew she would lose to
Glory. Was the
"Human" buffy. Whereas the "Slayer" aspect
was the one standing next to
Willow. Also note that the number 1 Buffy was the aspect that
in Buffy's
mind. Killed her sister. Also the one that stated "Death
is my Gift."
I agree with you that her clothes have some symbolism. I also
think the way
her hair is done has some symbolism as well.
Also, there is the cycle about.
BIRTH - DEATH - REBIRTH going on in "TG"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes -- Sebastian,
18:47:55 05/27/01
Sun
I've always thought there was always a lot of significance in
Buffy's
clothes this past season.
The three episodes that stand out the most was "Buffy vs.
Dracula," "The
Weight of the World" and "The Gift." The latter
two episodes are higlighted
in the above messages - but in "B vs, D" - her style
of clothing and
hairstyle very much made me think of Faith. The leather pants,
the flowing
(and somewhat wild looking) semi-curly hair she sported made me
think of
Faith's look during the apex of Season Three ("Bad Girls",
"Consequences",
etc....)
Frivolous...but just a thought. ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes -- Talia,
20:34:48 05/27/01
Sun
"In "B vs, D" - her style of clothing and hairstyle
very much made me think
of Faith. The leather pants, the flowing (and somewhat wild looking)
semi-curly hair she sported made me think of Faith's look during
the apex of
Season Three ("Bad Girls", "Consequences",
etc....)"
As others have pointed out, in Sunnydale usually leather pants=evil.
Just my two cents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes -- Bellagracelyn,
20:47:21
05/27/01 Sun
I noticed Buffy's hair found its way more and more in a ponytail
and usually
a haphazard bun-like one. It reminded me of the Buffy in 'Dopplegangland'
the alternate universe where Cordelia wished Buffy never came
to Sunnydale.
That Buffy was all Slayer, and her hair was done up in a tight
braid,
appearances the last of her concerns.
This season, her wardrobe became more 'classic' and less trendy.
She still
wore leather, but instead of wearing tight little tanks to patrol
like she
used to, she would pair up leather pants with a t-shirt or loose
sweater.
She gave up flashy colors and sparkly designs for earth tones
and cleaner
lines. I think the brightest color she wore all season was the
red sweater
in The Body.
Also, in the episode before Restless, where the gang blended their
spirits
and contacted the 1st slayer, Buffy also wore a white sweater
like in The
Gift. At the end of Restless, Buffy's season five ponytail made
its debut.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes
-- Shiver, 10:28:14
05/28/01 Mon
Remember also that Buffy is "growing up". No longer
the slave to high school
fashion, she dresses now more like an early 20-something. Still
trendy,
college-student but on occasion also very practical, businesslike,
even
mom-like. When she goes to school with Dawn after Joyce's death,
when she is
folding laundry later at the house. The clothing and hair changes
reflect
the transition in Buffy's life to adulthood as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The importance of Buffy's clothes
-- LoriAnn, 14:32:10
05/28/01 Mon
Very important as well, her clothes keep her from getting arrested
for
indecent exposure. We have to look at things from a practical
viewpoint
also.
BtVS: A musical appreciation
of Season 5 -- Nina, 09:35:28 05/28/01 Mon
Well the season is over now and I am finally able to write this
thread. I
know that some of you like OnM and Curious are very good to analyse
the
cinematic aspect of the show, being a musician I'll try to give
my two cents
on the music this year. In order to analyse the musical material
I rewatched
all the episodes (minus episode 1&2 as I don't have them on tape).
I would
have liked to do a thorough analysis of the themes, intruments,
harmony,
etc... but well, I might just sound very technical in the end
and I would need
many more screening to do so anyway, so I'll keep it as simple
as possible.
Even though I graduated in music 5 years ago, I am certainely
not an
authority and this thread is merely intended to calm an itch I
had for many
months! I hope you enjoy and are not too afraid by its length.
Skim through
it otherwise! ;)
From what I've heard here and there, many people didn't like the
score this
year. But also many people complained about the new stunt coordinator,
the
new body double for SMG, the new love interest for Buffy (be it
Riley in S4
or Spike in S5), the new Big Bad for the season. A lot of people
complain...
but how accurate is it music wise? Thomas Wanker's replacement
of Christophe
Beck is almost like Riley's replacement of Angel as a love interest
for
Buffy. We want security, someone we know. Someone we trust. We're
used to
having him around and anyone who will try to fill his shoes will
have a hard
time.
Music composer: Thomas Wanker
Personally I am torn between liking and not liking the music material
TW
gave us this year. Some of it was just wonderful and some of it
just got on
my nerves. I'm willing to bet that the real problem behind all
this is
money. Never before did a composer on Buffy had to recycle music
ideas like
that. Never before did we get so few real solo instruments (we
used to have
plenty before, think about the B/A love's theme flute solo in
Innocence or
the Paganini-like violin solo in BB&B, the cello solo in GD2
when Angel
leaves...). I really suspect that Thomas Wanker was on tight schedule
and
didn't get the same kind of money for the music department. Why
would I say
that? Three words: Fool for love. The music in that episode was
fantastic. A
guy that can work miracles like that in so little time is obviously
restrained when he has to recycle stuff. I also believe that JW
wouldn't
have accepted recycled stuff if he knew it could be otherwise.
Same thing
goes for the special effects department by the way (the snake
in "Shadow",
the Ghora demon in "Forever" were cheesy - the money
was clearly lacking).
All the money seem to have been stored away to pay for the finale.
I am
happy that Christophe Beck scored the episode, but I really suspect
something under it. If someone knows why CB left the show in the
first place
it could help me understand better. Anyway...
Season five: theme
Season five is about darkness. Darkness before dawn. Exploring
identities.
Nothing to do with the lightness (I mean the innocence of the
characters) we
saw in early season 1, 2 and 3 (even 4). Emotionally the characters
explore
darker regions of themselves and the music follows. In previous
seasons, the
woodwinds (flute-oboe-clarinet) used to characterize the lightness.
They
were still young and even though they had their share of pain,
they still
were innocent and young. This year we get a lot of darker intruments
(brass
/ cellos and bass). Many scenes are established with the background
use of
horns and trombones. The general music ambiance is following the
characters.
Bad stuff
As I want to finish on a possitive note I'll start with the bad
stuff:
Recycled material. Mostly if you take some time to listen to the
music in
the fight scenes you'll notice two musical themes. Two! For the
whole
season!!!!!!!! That's what gets on my nerves everytime there's
a fight
scene. The first theme is what I'll call "Battle theme".
You can recognize
it everywhere. Some hints? You get the long version in "Crush"
in the last
battle between Spike, Harmony, Dru and Buffy. If you pay a little
attention
you'll see that everytime there's a fight scene that's the same
music. The
second fight theme is what I will call "Glory's battle theme".
Usually used
when Glory is fighting with the SG. Now sometimes Glory's battle
theme is
used elsewhere and it just gets confusing (like in IWMtLY when
Buffy fights
April). There are some exceptions though, the fight scenes in
OomM, the
fight with the knights on the RV in Spiral (though it is intertwined
with
Glory's battle theme). Those are what I call lucky breaks. New
scores. In
Spiral I was happy with that fight scene just because the music
was new!
(though I suspect it was recycled from a fight scene between Buffy
and Faith
in GD1)
Stuff I loved
Apart from the recycled stuff that I'll blame on a lack of money,
there are
so many wonderful details to be noticed this year. One is the
use of the
minor third. Technically the minor third is a three notes interval.
As for
example, in a C scale the notes would be C-D-Eb (do-re-mib). This
motive is
very important. It is used constantly throughout the season. Many
of the
themes are built with the minor third as a central core. The fact
that it's
minor mirrors the darker sides of the season (a Major third would
be too
light and playful) and the choice of the third is great as we
get a lot of
triangles this year (Buffy-Spike-Riley/ Xander-Anya-Willow/ Dawn-Glory-Ben/
Spike-Buffy-Dawn...) 3 is even in 7-3-0! Okay here I disgress...
In the
beginning of the season that minor third was established plainely,
alone.
Three notes one after the other so we could recognize it, get
use to it. As
things progress we hear more themes issue from that interval,
but we don't
get to hear the minor third alone anymore. Examples of minor thirds?
In OomM: When Riley and Buffy arrive at the hospital (when they
go see
Joyce) and when Riley and Buffy leave Joyce's room a little later.
In NPLH,
we hear the minor third just before Buffy discovers Spike behind
the three.
It is often hidden everywhere. We just have to be careful to hear
it.
In NPLH, the use of electro accoustic music during Buffy's spell
is
wonderful. Electro accoustic is a way to use sound and distort
it, make it
musical. The texture is more important then the melody. I just
love how it
distorts the atmosphere around Buffy.
In Fool for Love, there are so many wonderful details. All new
material
(Yay!!!) Great fight scenes music. The violin solo (one of the
few solos
this season) we hear when we first discover William in 1880 is
pure genius.
The music says everything. First of all it shows that William
doesn't fit
with his peers. In 1880 people played piano in social circles
and that kind
of dance we hear on the violin was an oddity for his era (at least
100 years
old - circa 1780). The violin is light like William used to be
(compared to
dark Spike). Once William moves to meet his peers, the violin
stops. Great
way to describe his inner world. Later in that episode there's
the use of a
chorus singing "Misere Mei"(God have mercy on me) when
Spike jumps over a
barrel during the Boxer Rebellion. The cinematography in this
short scene is
beautiful, but that's the music that gets me everytime. Then there's
the use
of the flute during the rebellion and the use of the celesta (a
kind of mini
piano that sounds two octaves higher) when Spike just kills his
second
slayer and stands up in the subway. That eerie touch of lightness
in a dark
moment is chilling! Then the use of the cello when Buffy tells
Spike "You're
beneath me". A great contrast to the violin we heard earlier.
A darker
version of William.
In "Triangle" I just love the use of the marimba (family
of the xylophone
but made out of wood) during the interview scene. That made the
scene look
funnier. A very nice touch!
In "Crush" The use of the celesta again when Drusilla
appears for the fist
time and when Spike tells Dawn a story. Very chilling. Great contrast
between darkness and light.
In "Intervention", one of the greatest voice solo during
Buffy's walk in the
desert. Not unlike a part of Vivaldi's "Stabat Mater"
(with an arabic touch)
Love themes and other themes
Riley/Buffy love theme. In the watcher's guide, Christophe Beck
said that he
didn't have a lot of time to come up with something for "Hush".
Joss wanted
something romantic. CB didn't know a lot about the relationship
and where it
was going and did something cute. Not as passionate as B/A love
theme but
sweet. Now the use of that theme in season five is just great.
Everytime we
hear it we have a hint that this relationship is going awry and
that it will
explode one day or the other. The first time we hear it in season
5 is in
OomM in the initiative caves when Riley says "loving you
is the scariest
thing I have ever done Buffy" (just a little hint, a few
notes of that
theme, but still recognizable). We hear it again later when he
says "I'll be
fine" and Buffy kisses him to leave him immediately after.
In ItW the theme
begins right after their lovemaking session when Buffy rolls away
from
Riley. Again later in the training room when he says "I'm
leaving Buffy
unless you give me a reason to stay" and finally when he
leaves in the
chopter. For the final break-up TW uses brass instruments (horn-
trombones-tuba). Very pathetic. A good contrast to the use of
strings in B2
when Buffy sends Angel to hell.
There's no Buffy/Spike love theme, but one theme strikes me as
being a
Buffy/Spike descent to the inferno theme. That's the piano theme
we hear at
the end of Fool for love when Spike and Buffy are sitting on the
porch. The
theme is built with descending thirds. Something like Eb-C/D-Bb/
C (mib-do/
re-sib/ do) The core material being the famous Eb-D-C (reverse
position for
what we got earlier C-D-Eb). They are both going down, descending
into
themselves. We also hear that theme in OomM after Buffy says to
Riley "If I
wanted superpowers I'd be dating Spike". We hear it a third
time during Dawn
and Buffy's scene in Triangle (in Buffy's bedroom). Buffy says
"it will all
be better soon" and we cut to Spike in his crypt. Those words
are ironically
chilling as we all know that nothing is going to be better and
that the
descent to inferno will continue until it reaches bottom in "Crush".
B/A love theme. In "Forever" there's a little piano
reminescence of that
theme when Angel and Buffy kiss. I might say something false (I
haven't seen
all season 3) so if I am wrong just tell me! From what I have
seen in season
3 the B/A theme doesn't come back. There are other themes, other
music
material between them. When Angel leaves in GD2 there's a cello
solo (almost
foreshadowing AtS's opening credits theme) not the B/A theme.
So maybe
that's why I feel that when the theme came up in the "Forever"
episode, it
looked like a projection of the Angel Buffy remembered. The kind
of love
they used to have in "Innocence" (when the theme first
appeared) It wasn't
the Angel of season 3 she was kissing, but the lost love of season
2, the
one she sent to hell. Well my POV. Please beg to differ! : )
Tara/Willow love theme. Appears two times in "Tough Love"
(I just wish it
would have come back when Willow cures Tara in "The gift"-
it would have
made more unity) We hear that theme just after Willow and Tara's
fight, when
Tara is at the fair and later when Willow feeds Tara with a spoon.
Very
romantic theme. Personally I liked it a lot, especially when we
saw the
dragon in the park. Great contrast between hapiness and grief.
Christophe Beck and "The Gift".
First thing first. The music in that episode was wonderful. I
don't know why
CB came back but I loved what he did. The only problem I have
is that it
doesn't fit with the rest of the season. The use of woodwinds
was great but
it felt off to me compared to the darker music we got this year.
As a stand
alone episode it was perfect. As an episode part of a continuity
it didn't
fit at all. That's one of the problem I have with the choice to
give a
single episode to another composer (to me it's as if Ben had been
recast for
the last episode and replaced by a better actor). Did JW and TW
didn't get
along? Did TW really was bad (but then why did he gave us so many
beautiful
things if he was that bad). I just have a problem to see that
JW ditched his
composer to replace him for the finale. Something behind that
move smells
bad to me. As I mentioned earlier if anyone knows anything about
the behind
the scenes concerning the music composer switch I'd love to know.
I
personally think that CB is a better composer. There's a lot more
intensity
and sensitivity, but it's the switch that bugs me! The lack of
unity!
Beck proposed a completely different approche to the music material.
He
ditched the minor third (sniff for me... I was waiting for some
kind of climax
in that area. A wrapping for all the musical ideas of the season)
and
replaced it by the fifth and the seventh. The theme we hear when
Buffy jumps
to her death has been established very slowly. Two notes at first
during the
magic box scene (in a C scale it would be C-G (do-sol)), then
we hear it
often with horns and trombones everytime we see the tower. The
final theme
appears when Buffy and Dawn are on the tower. The fifth expends
to a
seventh. We now get C-G-Bb (do-sol-sib). Lots of tension there.
I know how you loved the 7-3-0 speculations OnM, so here is mine
for you. We
got the 3 all season (third), we got the 7 in the last episode
(seventh),
and we got the 0 as the last note of the episode (unisson- not
an interval
as every instrument plays the same note). That last note sounds
like a
delivrance. So many episodes finished with an harmonic ambiguity
(it makes
us fidgety, waiting for more) and we finally got the final gasp,
the look of
peace and the harmonic resolution!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: BtVS: A musical appreciation of Season 5 -- Jen C.,
18:56:58 05/28/01
Mon
All I can say is WOW! I have to go back and watch my tapes now!
Great post!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Bravissimo! Many thanks for this :) -- OnM, 20:58:02 05/29/01
Tue
Whew, long day today, just got home a little while ago (10:45
EST), but
while dinner was a'heatin', I got out my printout of your post
and read thru
it. I was so happy to see you get to do this for us, it's a great
topic and
really hasn't been covered by anyone else so far that I can recall
(at least
not in detail).
As I mentioned previously, while I have always had a great love
of music, I
am not a musician, so you are right in that some of the technical
aspects
escape me. This doesn't matter though, I have had a continuous
subscription
to _Scientific American_ magazine since about 1971. Most of the
articles
written therein are 'above my head', but if they looked interesting
I read
'em anyway, picked up what I could, which was always something.
Over time,
you can learn a surprising amount of stuff by hanging around people
who have
knowledge in areas that you do not, or that you have only a peripheral
interest in.
I think it's a shame when people restrict their creative thinking
to the
most narrow of fields, typically only the one that directly generates
income
for them. So many areas of knowledge overlap, that knowing one
inevitably
helps you gain access to knowing others.
One addition I would like to ask for your input on... could you
deconstruct
the opening themes to BtVS and Angel? They are both really striking,
I
think, and seem to sum up the overall emotive 'feel' of the two
shows
extremely well.
I just 'sense' this when I hear them, but I would like to know
*why* from a
technical, musical standpoint. What do you think?
Thanks again, great post! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I'll check for the opening themes! -- Nina, 09:56:59
05/30/01 Wed
I so agree with you OnM! We have to try to do our best to be open
to things
we don't know or don't comprehend right away. I do believe that
the best way
to learn is to assimilate them slowly without trying to force
it. I know
that I learned philosophy 10 years ago. Gee, I had 9 hours of
philosophy a
week! I love this board because even though I have forgotten almost
all of
it, I get the chance to slowly remember what I learned so painfully
at the
time. I finally get the chance to find a use for it! :)
Bad for me if the music appreciation still sounded too "technical"!
I'll try
to come with something about the opening credit music (and keep
it simple!).
As I already said the use of the cello when Angel is leaving in
GD2 really
hit me when I realized that it's what they use for AtS theme!
I'm sure it
was used on purpose.
I'm currently supposed to look for work (and not be here!) so
it may take a
little while, but I'll post it as soon as it's ready! :)
THE CHIP!! -- cknight, 10:31:10 05/28/01 Mon
I would love to see Spike and Buffy hook up, but
it would be really interesting to see what would happen if the chip in
Spikes head is removed. Has he really grown beyond a being a killer or would
he revert to his old self.
I also think that the chip must be removed before Buffy would really have
anything to do with him in terms of romance.
Maybe vampires aren't souless, maybe the soul is just held captive in the
body while the demon controls the body. Maybe in Spike, the chip controls
the demon allowing the captive human spirit a chance to revive and regain
control
of the body?
I think the chip gives the character of Spike a chance to be the most
interesting vamp in the Buffy World.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I think my antihistamine kicked in........... -- Rufus, 14:14:06 05/28/01
Mon
I read your post as you wanted Buffy and Spike together and you wanted his
head removed. I shook my own head wondering what that would do to any
further small talk they may have.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: THE CHIP!! -- Joann, 14:24:42 05/28/01 Mon
I guess you meant the chip and not the head. I agree Spike would be the most
interesting player on the show if he got more air time. I believe The Slayer
is dark enough to be attracted to Spike. But I would like to see Spike stay
true to his code. He would never mate with the enemy. I just think he would
use her and leave her when he came to his vampire senses.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: THE CHIP!! -- darrenK, 16:29:50 05/28/01 Mon
In a previous thread I posted this quote from Season 2
"Spike, my boy, to kill this slayer you have to love her..."
---Angelus to Spike
But, I have to say that I believe the writers have been working on Spike's
redemption for too long to go back to the ambiguity there was before. Spike
is now a good guy.
dK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: THE CHIP!! -- Sam Raimond, 18:56:06 05/28/01 Mon
Not only is he a good guy now, they were able to make a Vamp a good guy
without giving him a soul and repeating the whole Angel thing. they devserve
points just for that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: THE CHIP!! -- Joann, 19:12:12 05/28/01 Mon
All this soulful feeling for the Slayer is just a result of the chip. Let's
de-chip him and then see what takes place. Wouldn't that be something to see
-- if Spike's plan was "to kill this girl you have to love her." Ummm...that
gives me *good* chills...because it reminds me too of Angelus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> If The Host can be bodyless, why can't Spike be headless? :) -- rowan,
20:05:23 06/04/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> What? and miss out on all those bon mots? -- verdantheart, 08:31:12
06/06/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption -- Jarrod Harmier,
13:22:25 06/03/01 Sun
People have said that the Spike's chip takes away his ability to choose.
This is probably accurate if you talk about his capacity for violence. I do
think next season he should be given the option of having his chip removed.
However, I think it is important that none of the Scoobies know that Spike
has this option because of what I think should happen. This chip removal
would be a real option, not like the fake chip removal that occured in "Out
of My Mind". This is a very tempting offer for Spike. However, several
questions enter his mind: "Will I be the same?", "Will I go back to being to
feeding humans", and, the most important one, "Will I still love Buffy?" He
has an offer that appears to be everything he could ever hope for and then
realizes it is not what he needs. He refuses to have it removed. When he has
the option to tell the group that he had the option and refused it, he
doesn't. These actions taken together would be integral in his path to
redemption because they show that has built character far beyond just
keeping a promise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption -- cknight,
17:35:18 06/03/01 Sun
I agree with you on most points...but I think Spike should face all those
questions and decide to remove the chip. Through the mental conditioning of
chip and his discovering some personal control, it would be cool if he
stayed on his
path to semi goodness without the chip.
He must lose the chip on his journey. I also think it would be interesting
if Spike started to feed on the demons he defeats, perhaps gaining more
personal power from their blood
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption -- Aquitaine,
18:50:52 06/03/01 Sun
*** However, several questions enter his mind: "Will I be the same?", "Will
I go back to being to feeding humans", and, the most important one, "Will I
still love Buffy?" ***
As to that last question, I think that Drusilla's words to Spike in FFL
(circa 1998) show that Spike loved Buffy pre-chip. I think that little
snippet was inserted precisely to establish this fact.
Needless to say, I too think the chip needs to come out before anything can
happen between Spike and Buffy.
Jeez... It's so hard talking about these things when Buffy is DEAD! LOL. How
absurd!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption -- rowan,
20:14:36 06/04/01 Mon
"As to that last question, I think that Drusilla's words to Spike in FFL
(circa 1998) show that Spike loved Buffy pre-chip. I think that little
snippet was inserted precisely to establish this fact."
I too, admired this little insertion into the past via a current episode.
Quite clever!
"Needless to say, I too think the chip needs to come out before anything can
happen between Spike and Buffy."
Won't Buffy be scared spitless if the chip is out? Or rather, won't she be
back in Distrust City, expecting Spike to turn at any moment? Although, it
could make the sex kind of hot -- that thrill of danger -- will he or won't
he? I'd be afraid to let him kiss my throat, though!;)
In the back of my mind, I visualize a scenario where Spike is kidnapped by
Drusilla, who intends to remove the chip. Buffy and the SG come to rescue
Spike (although the SG are quite adamant that if the chip is out, Spike must
be staked). They arrive, but it's too late -- Spike is unconscious, and the
chip is out. Buffy stakes Dru and rescues Spike (much to the dismay of the
SG, who want him staked as a preventive measure). Buffy has now as good as
declared her feelings for Spike to the SG.
When Spike awakens, only Buffy is there. Spike asks if the chip is out.
Buffy confirms it. Spike then asks (with bitterness) if Buffy will now stake
him. Buffy responds with a question: Angel was not willing to fight for
their love; he gave in to Angelus. Is Spike willing to fight for them?
Spike's answer is: yes. Fade to black.
You can now see why I don't write for TV for a living. This is too
derivative of Intervention (although I kind of like the symmetry). But it
might make a nice fanfic.
"Jeez... It's so hard talking about these things when Buffy is DEAD! LOL.
How absurd!"
Well, it is Spike, after all. Are we sure necrophilia is totally out of his
picture? ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Um....yeah....and ewwwwwwwwwwwwww........:):):):):):) -- Rufus,
20:35:57 06/04/01 Mon
I do remember saying that we sould get Buffy breathing before we send her on
a date. How about we let rotting corpses stay where they are and wait for
the shiny new model in the new season. The thought of a love scene with
Spike and a Buffy that is shedding rotting body parts is way worse than
robot love......:):):):)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Weird love is better than no love.... -- rowan, 21:02:34
06/04/01 Mon
If I can eke out a small bit of disgusting humor in every thread, my work
here is done.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption --
Countess Karnstein, 06:48:29 06/05/01 Tue
"As to that last question, I think that Drusilla's words to Spike in FFL
(circa 1998) show that Spike loved Buffy pre-chip. I think that little
snippet was inserted precisely to establish this fact."
Guys - It's precisely because that scene was inserted way, way after the
fact (S2) that I don't buy it. It screamed "revisionist history" to me. It
was, as far as I'm concerned, just part of an effort to sell B/S to us after
B/R failed so badly the previous season to lure fan interest. Some fans are
so keen to see B/S happen that they bought it eagerly, even though it
contradicted everything that Spike and Buffy ever said or did to each other
in the past. Let's remember that he hated this woman and attempted - in all
seriousness - to kill her many times. Just as importantly, he was deeply in
love with Dru in 1998 and beyond. Sorry, writers, but some of us do have
long memories.
Jarrod - I would be horrified if Spike ever rejected the opportunity to rid
himself of the chip. Maybe I'm out of place on this philosophical board, but
I detest the idea of redeeming Spike. An evil supernatural character is
perfectly legitimate on a fantasy show and should be left alone. And,
incidentally, I don't believe he would give up the opportunity to lose the
chip and regain all of his old power and prestige.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption --
Humanitas, 08:38:31 06/05/01 Tue
I'm not sure I agree with your "revisionism" theory. The scene in FFL
matches pretty closely Spike's description in "Lover's Walk," way back in
season 3. Spike may have been in denial, but look at the way he describes
it:
"It was that truce with Buffy that did it. Dru said I'd gone soft. Wasn't
demon enough for the likes of her. And I told her it didn't mean anything, I
was thinking of her the whole time, but she didn't care. So, we got to
Brazil, and she was... she was just different. I gave her everything:
beautiful jewels, beautiful dresses with beautiful girls in them, but
nothing made her happy. And she would fliiirt! (sniffs) I caught her on a
park bench, making out with a *chaos* demon! Have you ever seen a chaos
demon? They're all slime and antlers. They're disgusting."
-- Lover's Walk
Sounds like a guy guilty of cheating to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption --
rowan, 11:11:51 06/05/01 Tue
I just found the seeds that the writers planted (once we saw the fruit) to
be so clever, even the one in FFL -- almost because it was revisionist. It
was good revisionism to me, as opposed to bad revisionism.
Hey, they had to do some revisionism, right, because Joss hadn't planned for
JM to return as a regular. Somehow, I expect the phenomenal acting ability
of JM has influenced the story to some extent. After all, if you've got
Secretariat, you can't just use him for strolls in the park on holidays --
he was born to run!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption
-- Humanitas, 13:27:04 06/05/01 Tue
I sometimes think that's the mark of genius - to be able to find seeds of
things never conciously planned. I just re-read the shooting script for
"Becoming part 2" and there is that moment where it looks like Angel is
going to kill Buffy:
As Angel approaches Buffy, sword in hand.
SPIKE: God, he's going to kill her. . .
After a moment of intense worry, he shrugs, takes off.
Now, OK, he does walk off, but there is that moment where he's all worried
for her. That moment leads to his feelings of guilt that show in his
description of the scene where Dru leaves him in "Lovers' Walk," a scene
which we are actually shown in "Fool for Love." That little arc plays out
over almost 4 seasons, all from a little moment, which may have originally
been a throwaway. Wow!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's
Redemption -- rowan, 14:36:00 06/05/01 Tue
Thanks for that flashback. I was a more casual Buffy view in the first three
seasons, so while I watched every ep, my recall of the earlier seasons isn't
as sharp. I'm really looking forward to the F/X reruns this fall.
Interesting what a difference a few seasons can make, isn't it?
I hope when Aquitaine does her post on Spike, she dwells a little on Spike
as truthteller. It's amazing how clearly he sees through to the heart of
things (whether he cares about them or not).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's
Redemption -- Aquitaine, 18:17:10 06/05/01 Tue
"I hope when Aquitaine does her post on Spike, she dwells a little on Spike
as truthteller. It's amazing how clearly he sees through to the heart of
things (whether he cares about them or not)."
You mean my book-length analysis, right? LOL. Spike as truthteller... it's
certainly one of his most endearing qualities. Trust me. I *will* be going
there!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Can't wait! -- rowan, 19:48:47 06/05/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's
Redemption -- Rufus, 20:53:21 06/05/01 Tue
You know that I'll only be forced to kill another tree....so keep it to
under 50 pages....:):):)
Then of course there will be all of our reply posts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's
Redemption -- verdantheart, 08:37:37 06/06/01 Wed
When's that coming out? I have some days off coming up and I don't want to
miss it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Spike arrives on 7/19! -- rowan, 20:15:14
06/06/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Muchas Gracias! -- verdantheart,
06:25:59 06/07/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Option of Chip Removal and Spike's Redemption
-- verdantheart, 08:44:24 06/06/01 Wed
Absolutely! The question for me isn't is it revisionist, but does it work?
If it were inconsistent with past characterization and incidents, there
would be a problem. I don't see a big problem with this because the seeds
were there all the while (I read an interview with Mr Marsters wherein he
says that he intentionally played a subtext of sexual tension with Buffy
from the beginning -- clever boy!). Further, (I like the Secretariat
allusion, by the way) you've got an actor who can make the shift believable.
Sure, some of the audience took some convincing -- that's as it should be.
(Sorry, couldn't resist adding my thoughts, even though they probably don't
add to much)
- vh
And now for something completely
different... -- Lazarus, 11:37:49 05/28/01
Mon
I notoced something quite some time ago and I was wondering if
I was the
only one. (Please excuse me if this has already been covered,
but I haven't
had time to wade through all of the archives yet... ;) ) Way back
during one
of Dawn's early episodes (I can't remember which), I noticed that
in the
opening credits when they got to MT's spot they showed a little
scene of her
walking doen a street, I think it was, and they had this nice
fancy little
CG logo of "The Key". My initial thought then was that
perhaps JW was
planning a spinoff series starring MT that was intended to appeal
more to
the teen viewers again, but subsequent developments have kind
of put that
theory to bed. It just struck me as kind of odd that someone like
Joss would
go to the trouble of a special little logo like that and not have
a reason.
So anyway, I was wondering, did anyone else notoce this? Was I
the only one?
Did I hallucinate it? Was it discussed before? Does anyone else
even care?
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: And now for something completely different... -- Joann,
14:18:18
05/28/01 Mon
No, I didn't notice it. I am all for Dawn getting her own show
and leaving
BTVS to The Slayer. But in the credits the spot of Dawn sitting
on her bed
waving a pencil and rolling her eyes like a little teen princess
writing in
her diary is so not BTVS material. That looks like a shot from
Seventh
Heaven.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: And now for something completely different...
-- SingedCat,
20:45:25 05/28/01 Mon
sorry, Lazarus-- I never saw such a thing. But while I've seen
them all, I
usually do so on tape, and often fastforward through the opening
credits.
But I'm planning to rewatch with a friend, so I'll keep an eye
out for it.
you're tight, though-- it's odd. I'd vote for the personal dream
sequence.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: And now for something completely different...
-- Dariel, 20:57:44
05/28/01 Mon
"But in the credits the spot of Dawn sitting on her bed waving
a pencil and
rolling her eyes like a little teen princess writing in her diary
is so not
BTVS material. That looks like a shot from Seventh Heaven."
I think we can classify this shot as irony on the part of Joss
et al. Dawn's
life is nothing like that of the characters on Seventh Heaven.
And what of the Key? -- Shiver,
13:04:13 05/28/01 Mon
Here's something that's bugging me.
Dawn is still the Key - Glory's demise notwithstanding, Dawn is
still the
embodiment of something very powerful - and very dangerous.
What's to stop any other Big Baddie from trying to get to her
and use the
Key for their own ends?
It would seem silly that her Key-ness would just fall by the wayside,
but
would get quite boring if next season's arc has another BB coming
after the
means to unlock dimensional portals.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: And what of the Key? -- Kerri, 14:10:11 05/28/01 Mon
I'm not sure when and if there will be other opportunities to
use the key.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: And what of the Key? -- darrenK, 16:49:23 05/28/01
Mon
The Key has been activated and I think we'll see other uses for
it in the
future. We might even see Dawn able to control its power.
In "The Gift" Giles refers to the Key having been channeled
into human form.
I think the key (no pun intended) word there is channeled.
The human, Dawn, is the channel for the power of the KEY. Power
whose
potential is limitless.
There was more than symbolism to Buffy's sacrifice. She sacrificed
herself
at Dawn indicating that something new now begins.
Up until now, Buffy has fought the forces of Hell to a draw. Maybe
Dawn will
change this?
Can't hardly wait to see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: And what of the Key? -- Joann, 14:14:03 05/28/01 Mon
I think someone mentioned stand alone shows like the first season.
I think
that would be a good idea. It took way too long to resolve this
storyline
because I didn't enjoy Glory her minions or Ben at all. I think
Joel Grey
proved more menancing in the short time he was on the show. And
I am all for
less time for Dawn. I am so tired of The Key. I want The Slayer
to be the
focal point of any arc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: And what of the Key? -- Cactus Watcher, 18:58:21
05/28/01 Mon
I agree, the Key story got to be repetitive and very tiresome.
If Dawn isn't
killed off over the summer by all the nasties that slipped through
into our
reality, I hope she is no longer supernatural. Xander shouldn't
be the only
normal person on the show.
Neither Glory nor Darla were very satisfactory villians. Glory
was too silly
to be taken seriously, and Darla was a feather-weight. I hope
they put a
little more thought into the Big Bad for next season.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: And what of the Key? -- darrenK, 23:12:11
05/28/01 Mon
I agree that there weren't enough stand-alones this season and
Dawn was used
to good effect in episodes like "The Real Me," where
she was really the
Slayer's little sister and not some unbelievably serious artifact.
The show lost some of its satirical edge in the operatic explosion
of love
between Buffy and Dawn, but the show always takes a serious turn
toward
season's end. And Dawn is a good character. It's a good element
to have the
Slayer love something besides a 243 year old Vampire.
And this arc did have episodes like Spiral that were full of fear,
action
and paranoia.
Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus,
remember that trees are recyclable resources!
;) -- OnM, 16:33:39 05/28/01 Mon
What if God was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us?
Just a stranger on a bus,
Tryin' to make his way home...
_______________Joan Osborne, 'One of Us'
Now the flames they followed Joan of Arc / As she came riding
through the
dark
No moon to keep her armor bright / No man to get her through this
very smoky
night
She said I'm tired of the war / I want the kind of work I had
before
A wedding dress or something white / To wear upon my swollen appetite
Well I'm glad to hear you talk this way / You know I've watched
you riding
every day
And something in me yearns to win / Such a cold and lonesome heroine
And who are you, she sternly spoke / To the one beneath the smoke
Why I'm Fire, he replied / And I love your solitude, I love your
pride
Then Fire, make your body cold / I'm going to give you mine to
hold
Saying this she climbed inside / To be his one, to be his only
bride
And deep into his firey heart / He took the dust of Joan of Arc
And high above the wedding guests / He hung the ashes of her wedding
dress
It was deep into his firey heart / He took the dust of Joan of
Arc
And then she clearly understood / If he was fire, then she must
be wood
I saw her wince, I saw her cry / I saw the glory in her eye
Myself I long for love and light / But must it come so cruel,
and oh so
bright
______________Leonard Cohen, 'Joan of Arc'
Sometimes you make me lose my will to forgive,
And just become a beacon for your soul
______________Shawn Colvin, 'Riding Shotgun down the Avalanche'
*******
From the Orlando Sentinel:
OS: You have left people grieving, man. How can you live with
yourself?
JW: Good. That's what I live to do. You think Charles Dickens
said `Oh, let
Little Nell live'? "
*******
The show opens with that familar voice, as have all the shows
before it--
"Previously, on Buffy the
Vampire Slayer..." and what follows in the next 30-some seconds
is both
grief and joy all rolled into one.
Grief, since as soon as the montage of clips from the past five
years begins
to unfold, and then so rapidly
accelerate, I know that my worst fears have just been confirmed--
it is now
a certainty that Buffy is going
to die by the end of the episode, and that there will be no last-second
rescue from this sad destiny. There is
joy, though, when the clips end with a smash cut into a scene
where the
camera, obviously the point of
view of someone running, jars you back into the present. (On a
subsequent
viewing, you suddenly realize
that the music that builds and rises higher in pitch as the clips
speed up
is strongly reminiscent of the end of
The Beatles tune 'Day in the Life'). The sheer cinematic technical
proficiency involved in not only
conceiving of, but executing this opening sequence reminds me
that even if
the play of the evening is going
to be a tragedy like Romeo and Juliet, it's still Shakespeare
at the helm.
The POV turns out to be a teenage boy, exhausted and terrified.
The reason
for his fright quickly becomes
evident, as a fairly burly-- and fairly hungry-looking-- vampire
walks into
frame. The boy pleads with the
vamp not to hurt him, the vamp simply seems amused at this. Just
as the
tension peaks, a tiny
blonde-headed female figure pops out of a doorway, and soon, with
the words
"You know, fighting's not
cool!", we are on familiar ground as the past revisits us.
Vamp threatens,
Buffy jokes, vamp gets dusted.
The boy is speechless.
Buffy: "You should get home".
Boy: "How did you... do that?"
Buffy: "It's what I do."
As she says this she walks slowly, not with pride, but just sort
of
resignedly. It's just another day-- or night
-- on the job, a job that never ends. She walks back over to the
door she
came out of and begins to open it.
"But you're just a girl!" the boy notes, still not able
to believe what he's
just witnessed.
"That's what *I* keep saying", replies Buffy, and closes
the door behind
her. Fade to black, and then the
opening credits.
*******
Past is prologue, and for a few minutes we have seen the old Buffy,
the
Buffy who was the Slayer when
that was a simple thing-- the bad guys stand up, she knocks them
down, and
gets in a few mocking
comments in the meanwhile, just to make sure that Evil knows how
little
regard she holds for it.
But things aren't simple now. Buffy is an adult, albeit a very
young one.
Her mind is no longer young,
however, as the soul-crushing events of the past year have taken
a drastic
toll. She slays a vamp who
doesn't even know who she is, which neatly mirrors her own thoughts.
Simplicity of purpose has given
sway to the moral complexities of dealing with seemingly purposeless
loss,
of where she fits in the total
scheme of things. Fighting evil is easy compared to fighting to
hold on to
your inner faith in a grand-- and
benificent-- purpose to the universe, some sense of greater meaning.
This ageing process has come too quickly. The opening series of
clips are
like the manner in which time
seems to accelerate as one grows from childhood, slowly at first
then faster
and faster until everything is a
blur and suddenly you are where you are now and don't really remember
how it
all happened. In the case
of some lucky persons, those memories you do recall are happy
ones and you
will find yourself at peace
with the universe and with your destiny as it unfolded. Buffy
has not had
this luxury, for the last five years
she has done her best to answer a calling she never wished for,
but it is no
longer enough.
All this weight is in evidence when she walks back into the Magic
Shop,
where her friends await. When
asked what happened, she simply replies "Vampire". Her
response gets another
one-word response from
Xander-- "Oh." Just a vamp, evil at it's most pathetically
simple, why can't
we have that again?
What follows in the next several scenes really builds upon, and
then lays
bare the core of the dilemma.
When faced with making a choice among a series of actions, all
of which
entail the loss of that which
makes you human and allows your soul to continue to embrace the
light, how
do you justify even seeking
victory? What's the point when all outcomes are negative?
Giles has already given in to despair, which is something we have
never seen
him express before. Giles has
been unsure, been frightened, been worried that he might fail
in his sworn
duty to protect 'this sorry
world', but he has never despaired. This is so unlike him, that
like most
viewers, I am actually shocked
when he stands up and yells at Buffy for avoiding what he sees
as the only
possible way out-- killing Dawn
before Glory can begin the dimension-opening ritual:
Giles: "Buffy, if the ritual starts, every living creature
in this and every
other dimension imaginable will
suffer unbearable torment and death. Including Dawn."
Buffy: "Then the last thing she'll see is me protecting her."
Giles: "You'll fail. You'll die. We all will."
In terms of having evil ultimately triumph, this is surely the
lowest moment
of the episode, and in fact of
the whole series. In Becoming Pt.2, Buffy is taunted by Angelus
that she is
alone, that she has nothing left.
Her response, after a beat, is that she still has herself. While
she would
not have realized it at that moment,
what she really means is that in her innermost soul, hope still
lives.
Whether it is a conscious knowledge or
not, the result it still the same. She pulls out of despair and
goes on to
defeat Angelus.
In *The Weight of the World*, this despair did manage to cripple
her, and I
have now been thinking that
this may have been what changed Giles to make despair possible
in him. It is
interesting that for the years
Buffy has known Giles, she has looked to him as the guide, the
parent, the
source for knowledge, a shelter
from the storm of adulthood. Now, suddenly, the position is reversed,
the
roof has blown off the shelter
and the walls are shaking in the wind-- Giles has given up, and
it is up to
Buffy to take adulthood on
completely by herself without the buffer of an adult for guidance.
As in
Becoming Pt.2, a beat passes, and
then Buffy accepts this additional burden.
Buffy: "I'm sorry. I love you all, but I'm sorry".
She means, and they understand, that the issue of killing Dawn
is off the
table. It will not happen, at least
not if she can, by any conceivable means, prevent it. This is
exactly what
needs to happen at this point in
time, and it does. The irony is not lost that in *Spiral*, Giles
gives what
sounds like a deathbed speech to
Buffy telling her how much he admires her, especially the way
she always
follows her heart. She is
following her heart now, because logic has failed to provide a
solution, but
Giles does not agree. Perhaps
he feels that because Buffy broke down previously, her instincts
may no
longer be reliable, or perhaps there
is another reason-- one that could be enought to drive any 'parent'
to
despair.
It has also occurred to me that Giles may have already deduced
the 'answer'
that Buffy arrives at only after
the portal has opened and she is trying to prevent Dawn from sacrificing
herself, i.e., that her blood is the
same as Dawn's blood, and so she can sacrifice herself in Dawn's
place.
Giles was privy to Buffy's
experiences in the desert visionquest and the cryptic 'Death is
your Gift'
pronouncement by the spirit
guide. Events occurring afterward may have only served to reinforce
this
belief. (Buffy's obsession with
protecting Dawn above everything and everyone else, and the eventual
knowledge that Ben = Glory).
Knowing this meant there were essentially only three ways to defeat
Glory--
kill Ben, kill Dawn, or kill
Buffy. To Giles, it isn't a choice. How could you possibly justify
allowing
your beloved 'daughter' to end
her life when you could instead take the less-than-real 'life'
of Dawn, or
even the 'innocent' human Ben.
He also had to know only too well that Buffy would make that choice,
and
each and every time Buffy
insists that Dawn cannot be killed, his despair grows.
So it come down to Buffy taking a stand, which she does. Giles,
reluctantly
but resignedly gives in, and the
rift begins to heal. The scene in the workout room behind the
magic shop
further continues the process
when Buffy responds to Giles quiet statement of "I imagine
you hate me right
now."
In the shooting script, Buffy turns to face Giles and replies,
"Little bit.
But I understand."
There are actually quite a number of instances in this ep where
the shooting
script and the actual broadcast
differ. In each case, I felt that the changes or deletions worked
to the
betterment of the story, and this one
was no exception. I have always felt, and had those feelings reinforced
this
past season, that Sarah Michelle
Gellar's gifts as an actor are in greatest evidence when she has
little or
no dialog to work with, and she has
to rely on facial expressions and body language to convey the
emotion of the
moment. The dialog above
was deleted in the actual ep, and Buffy does not turn to face
Giles.
Instead, we see a little series of shifts of
expressions, barest tiny movements, that express her change of
mind from
anger at his lack of faith in her
to acceptance that he really only wants what she wants-- a happy
outcome
somehow springing
unexpectedly forth from this colossal mess. My compliments to
Sarah-- when
you're good, you're good.
When you're great, we weep.
This is also a pivotal moment for another reason, and I don't
think that
anyone's caught it yet, at least I
haven't heard it voiced. This recognition that Giles was not 'the
enemy' in
Buffy's quest to keep her sister
from dying allows her for the first time to consider letting Dawn
die, if
there really, truly, turns out to be no
alternative. The ensuing conversation on the couch, with the two
of them
sitting there discussing their past
battles, completes the process of clearing the air between her
and Giles.
She already knows now how Giles
feels (she may not know why, if my conjecture about him already
having
figured out the 'blood'
connection) and so she openly expresses how she feels. Again,
brilliant work
from both Sarah and the
cinematographers, with her face framed all alone in the upper
corner of the
screen, looking out into the
blackness. Another little touch-- as pointed out by several other
posters,
she is dressed in all black as she
does her 'warmup' for battle-- the Slayer psyche is predominent,
but when
she sits back down on the
couch with Giles, she picks up her white sweater and holds it
in her hands,
thus symbolically starting to
reenter her fuller, more balanced self.
Buffy has made a decision, she knows the world must go on even
if Dawn must
die to permit it, but she has
made it clear that, unlike in her catatonic 'dream loop' life
will not go on
for her, and that Dawn's death
will mean her own as well, either literally (they die together)
or at the
very least, her soul will be dead and
she will not perform her calling any longer. Why work to destroy
souless
evil when you have no soul
yourself? You are no longer a child of God ("What kind of
God would demand
her life for something she
has no control over?) and would be no better then they are.
Buffy: "I guess a Slayer is just a killer after all"
Giles: "I think you're wrong about that"
Thus, her statement "If Dawn dies, I'm quitting"after
she arises from the
couch and prepares to leave the
room. Giles prior statement denying her 'I'm just a killer' remark
will soon
be seen as foreshadowing for
act 4, where the truth will become all too obvious.
(I'll skip now to the last act, I realize some of what I've talked
about so
far overlaps to some extent the
thoughts others have posted, but it would make things too choppy
if I placed
only my 'new' thoughts in
here. Knowing that you guys are as hopelessly obsessed with this
mythology
as I am does make it easier!).
I've stated in some previous posts about my admiration for how
the story is
eventually resolved. The
power of the ending is such that it doesn't diminish with repeated
viewings,
and there is no higher praise
than that, that is the mark of a classic. In fact, viewing it
this morning
just before I started to write this little
dissertation, I found myself choking up before they even got to
the
tombstone shot (yes, I'm a big softie, I
don't deny it), while Buffy recites her last words. The reaction
was even
more intense than when I viewed
it last, possibly because I've been pondering all these imponderables
for
the last week and some of it is
starting to sink in.
I will make some comments on the Giles and Ben issue, and some
comments
about suicide and sacrifice,
just to put in my three cents.
I stated in the post I made a few days ago that asked whether
or not Giles
disregarded the 'will' of the
PTB when he killed Ben, that perhaps he should have accepted Buffy's
decision to spare him, and by
extension Glory. I also stated that I agreed with his decision,
that Glory
is simply too big a threat to allow
her to live on. This isn't a trivial issue, however, and I was
very pleased
to see that there was a lot of
disagreement as to the correct course of action in the responses
to my post.
Maasquerade (and others) made the very excellent point that we
can only do
what we think is right in any
given situation, and to try to second-guess non-existant or cryptic
infromation handed down from above is
to ultimately end up paralyzed in indecision or non-action. From
a realverse
position, this is certainly true.
In the Buffyverse, things are less clear. In this universe, the
PTB are a
reality, we know of their existance
as a given. We know that they mostly speak indirectly, as in the
visions
that they send to Cordelia, but
there have been been instances of them speaking more directly
in terms of
Buffy and the events that
revolve around her.
Giles states that he admires Buffy most for 'following her heart'.
The PTB
seem to agree with this concept.
If Buffy wasn't an avatar for their will, the snow would never
have appeared
in *Amends* indicating to
Angel that he should heed her words and live. Buffy hid Angel
from the
others when he returned to Earth
from hell, a course of action that made little sense from a logical,
rational standpoint, (and for which she
caught significant flack when they eventually discovered it) but
doing so
eventually led to *Amends* and
the course of warrior for good that Angel pursues today. There
is plenty of
evidence that Buffy's decisions
in times of pivotal occurances should not be questioned. Her decision
to
save Dawn saved something more
than just the world, if saved the concept of hope, without which,
like a
soul, life becomes pointless and
humans just animate chemical blobs.
In the beginning of the episode, we get to hear Buffy state what
undoubtably
is her essential concept of
herself-- she's 'just a girl'.
But someone who's 'just a girl' doesn't have the strength of spirit
to make
an immortal god bleed and ask
for mercy. Someone who's 'just a girl' wouldn't grant that mercy.
This is
the spiritual essence of the
warrior hero-- they fight the good fight, but they never revel
in it, and
they know when to stop fighting.
They are creatures of the light, and the light seeks to nurture
more
potential light, even if all it exhibits is a
glimmer, just that 'nagging pinch of humanity'.Would Glory have
returned to
seek revenge? Very possibly,
even likely, but maybe.. if a soulless, presumably evil creature
can weep
uncontrollably in grief at the death
of his once mortal enemy, who is to say for sure?
Finally, on suicide and sacrifice, this is just to respond to
the comments
by a few that interpret Buffy's
death as suicide, and therefore morally wrong. I see this as a
linguistic
dilemma, in that we don't really
seem to have a word in the English language that refers specifically
to
giving one's own life in exchange for
a much greater good. 'Sacrifice' is about as close as it comes,
and that's
good enough for me, but it does
leave a bit of ambiguity as to the intent of the sacrifice-- i.e.
was it
righteous, or no? There is not the
slightest, most minute bit of evidence to this viewer that Buffy's
death was
anything but a noble act of the
first order. Buffy gave her mortal life to save both her 'child'
and the
world, just as Giles gave up his soul,
or at least a good part of it, to save Buffy from possible revenge
by Glory.
In either case, the 'parent'
sacrifices for the 'child'. Intent is everything, and to me the
greater
morality here couldn't be clearer.
Xander actually foreshadowed the answer to this question when
he refused the
'Sophie's Choice'
conundrum in the ep where the troll wanted him to choose which
of 'his
women' would die. He refused to
pick, and would have sacrificed himself if necessary.
As Xander once said, when faced with a difficult choice in life,
he asks,
"What would Buffy do?" Works
for me.
*******
Well, this is a day late, (and probably several dollars short
;) but I was
so filled with ideas, all of which
were only augmented by the many wonderful posts ya'all put up
here over the
last week, it just took that
long to come together. While everyone contributed, I do want to
make special
thanks to Rufus, fresne,
Solitude1056, rowan, Malandanza, gds, age, curious, Nina, spotjon,
FanMan,
Brian, VanMoodySenior,
Humanitas, mundusmundi, Wiccagrrl, Anthony8, Diana Michelle, SingedCat,
LoriAnn, verdantheart,
Wisewoman, Max, Aquitaine, Ryuei (you last two guys still out
there? I miss
you!) and the many other
regulars and newbies (if I missed you, didn't mean to!) here at
ATPoBtVS for
making this board such an
intellectually and emotionally stimulating place to hang out.
The quality of the posts has gotten better and better the longer
I have been
here, and the last few months
speak for themselves in terms of the intelligence and thoughfulness
of we
few-- we lucky few-- who are
present here for the birth of a New Classic, for that is what
the completion
of the last five seasons signifies
to me. At the moment, we are just a 'cult', but I am as sure as
I've ever
been sure of anything that Buffy
and her universe will eventually be regarded as one of the great
artistic
achievements of the 20th century.
Yeah, I know, but I leave you with the words (paraphrased, I am
very
unlikely to find the original article
on short notice) of the classical-music-loving (and very snobbish)
magazine
editor who, back in the early
70's, pretty much sneered at the work of 60's musicians and said,
"Who's
going to remember Bob Dylan
20 years from now?"
My greatest thanks to Masquerade, as always. I am hoping you and
the others
here will keep things going
through the (long! Oh, man!!) summer. (I'll do what *I* can!)
Congrats, BTW, on the nearly one year anniversary of your discussion
board.
Big whoo, and definitely
hoo, too!
Movie, anyone?
Peace,
OnM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus, remember that trees are
recyclable
resources! ;) -- Nina, 20:08:38 05/28/01 Mon
OnM as ever I am speechless! Love the post. Love the way it makes
me want to
see the episode again. If I have anything to contribute it would
be about
stage directions. Hey, I'm coming back from seeing theater auditions
and
staging is all I can think about! ;)
I love the way the magic box scene was staged. If you notice every
couple is
separated. They don't sit together. They face each other. Xander
faces Anya,
Willow faces Tara, Buffy faces Giles. When Giles backs away and
says "You'll
fail. You'll die. We all will." Spike replaces Giles and
faces Buffy, taking
Giles place as protector of Dawn.
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have noticed it, but I just wanted
to add a
little something! :)
While I'm here thanks to you too OnM! This board wouldn't be the
same
without you!!!!! Big cyber hugs!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus, remember that trees
are recyclable
resources! ;) -- LoriAnn, 20:19:24 05/28/01 Mon
OnM, you nailed the suicide/sacrifice issue. I had meant to post
this
earlier, but didn't have a chance. Moralists tell us, as you did,
that
intent is the controlling concept. Was Buffy's intent to kill
herself? That
seems clear: no it wasn't. Her intent was to stop this particular
armegeddon
and save her sister in the process. That makes this a great sacrifice
and no
suicide. Were her intent to end her suffering by ending her life,
that would
be suicide, but the death was not a necessary part of her action.
It was a
highly probable part, but not an objective, and the intended objective
makes
all the difference.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus, remember that
trees are
recyclable resources! ;) -- Cactus Watcher, 21:36:02 05/28/01
Mon
Despite our affection for Buffy, we should not ignore the darker
side of her
motives in the final episode. We know from the episode Fool for
Love, that
often slayers don't simply die, they give up and welcome death.
We know how
vehemently, Buffy fought at the gas station to keep from losing
anyone.
However, Buffy told Spike not everyone was coming back from the
final battle
with Glory. She'd already told everyone she would willing die
defending Dawn
no matter who else got hurt or killed in the process. She told
Giles that
she no longer understood what she was fighting for, even though
she claimed
her only desire was to protect Dawn. We have to assume there was
more to her
death than doing the right thing. In her final moments, Buffy
told Dawn that
living on was the hardest thing. Wasn't she telling us that in
a sense she
was taking the easy way out? Wasn't she asking Dawn to be the
noble one and
bear the grief she herself could not?
All this aside, your points certainly have merit. But if there
is no
amibiguity in what Buffy did, if there are no unanswerable questions,
then
Robo-Buffy is just as good a hero as the real one. In fact at
that rate, it
would be better to only bring back Robo-Buffy because she will
never have to
suffer the pain and self-doubt. Personally, I prefer the real
Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus, remember
that trees are
recyclable resources! ;) -- Anthony8, 23:05:09 05/28/01 Mon
I disagree that Buffy's words to Dawn indicated that she was giving
up the
fight. I think her words were more instructive in nature, like
parental
words of wisdom. Her internal struggle and final realization are
reminiscent
of the Hindu 'Bhagavad Gita.' There, the great warrior Arjuna
experiences a
moment of doubt on a battlefield in which he is pitted against
his own
relatives. He is reluctant to fight because he does not believe
the cause
(protecting his territory in accordance with his birthright) justifies
the
destruction of the lives of his own flesh and blood, including
possibly his
own. Krishna, the incarnation of the preserver god Vishnu, appears
to
explain to Arjuna why he must fight. The battlefield is not a
literal
battlefield, but is life itself. In life, one way or another,
you will
encounter obstacles/adversaries, and in the process of overcoming
them there
will be great pain and loss. Retreating from the fight will not
change
anything. In fact, retreating from the fight is spiritual suicide/cowardice.
Those who are slated to die will die and there is nothing you
can do to stop
it. Your withdrawal from participation in the conflict will not
change that.
You cannot overthink it. All you have is yourself, your convictions,
your
love. The only way to the Truth, self knowledge and how you fit
in the
cosmic order of things, is to cast aside your fear. The truth
will then
manifest itself and what you discover will transcend the battlefield,
the
body and the field of time. That's an epiphany (the Host's described
"moment
of clarity")is--what I believe Buffy experienced when she
put the "Death is
my gift" puzzle together. She wasn't giving up at all. She
wasn't making a
decision based on intellect (pure rationality) or duty (to protect
the world
and Dawn). Her resolve as reflected in her body language on the
tower and
final peaceful rest (a tribute to SMG and the life she breathed
into this
character) evidence a decision based on pure, selfless and unconditional
love. Of course, I could be all wrong--there could've been a real
cute
outfit dangling in the portal just enticing her to jump in.;)
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus,
remember that trees are
recyclable resources! ;) -- Cactus Watcher, 08:26:12 05/29/01
Tue
I think you're trying way to hard to make Buffy as we knew her
into an minor
god of virtue. The point I was making is that while certainly
noble and
valiant aspects seem to dominate what she did, there are dark
and even
craven undertones as well. The peaceful look you mention is one
of those
things Spike mentioned in Fool For Love. Buffy knows peace for
the world
really isn't possible. She can't accomplish that. Her longing
for personal
peace has been bubbling to the surface since season one, episode
one. If
Dawn died, Buffy, with good reason, believed she would never find
personal
peace. By dying herself and not letting Dawn do the valiant and
noble thing,
Buffy hopes she'll find that peace. Like it or not this has a
selfish
aspect. We won't know how the powers that be are reacting to Buffy's
decision till next season.
Besides, Buffy clearly succeeded as a mother-protector in this
episode. As a
slayer-protector she failed in this episode. How dare I say that?
What did
Buffy tell Faith was the first rule of being a slayer? DON'T DIE!
Why is
that of parmount importance? Because a dead slayer can't protect
anybody.
All kinds of nasty things poured into our world while the portal
was open,
yes, even while Buffy was saying her sweet goodbyes. People are
going to
die, because Buffy chose to save Dawn and find personal peace,
instead
letting Dawn do the noble thing and with Buffy bearing her grief
and
fighting on.
You and I both might hope we would make the same choice Buffy
did, but that
does not mean it is the pure and unambiguous.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift* -
(Rufus, remember that trees are
recyclable resources! ;) -- LoriAnn, 11:09:14 05/29/01 Tue
Cactus, I don't think I'd watch a program in which the protagonist
was such
a dismal shit. You're building a house of cards trying to read
darkness into
Buffy's motives: to hell with everyone else, I want to get some
peace. Buffy
may have put more value on her sister than on her duties as a
slayer, but
that was what Giles said was the thing he admired most about her:
she put
her heart first. She was actually human, not a killing maching.
At the top of the tower, Buffy finally figured out what the guide
meant by
"Death is your gift"; that was why she looked peaceful.
She had the same
certitude that she was doing the right thing as she said she had
had when
she killed Angel.
Others' motivations are difficult to understand, just because
Buffy could
have been influenced by other considerations is not evidence that
she was
and particularly not when we have good evidence of what her motivations
were. She tells us clearly that she would give her life for Dawn,
she tells
us why, and we "walk through" the logical chain in which
she figures out
what she can do to save Dawn's life and close the dimensional
rip.
As far as a too perfect Buffy goes, heroes aren't brainless robots
that do
as they're programmed. Heroes are those who strive for perfection
and once
in a while actually touch it. That perfection can be defined in
different
ways, but it is always some sort of perfection. The person who
jumps in
front of a bus to push a stranger out of the way isn't someone
who never
thought of others as important. That person always would have
considered
others important to some extent, and for a split second, brought
that
concern to perfection or, at least, close to it.
Entertainment requires flawed heroes, those who are not perfect,
so we can
relate to them, but it and we also need heroes who strive to be
better, to
be perfect, even if they don't always quite get there. Without
striving
there is no accomplishment. Without striving people will never
be any better
than they are. Without striving there is no hope. We must shoot
for the
stars, and although we may not get to them, we could get to the
moon or
Mars, and while not perfection, that's progress.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Essay on *The Gift*
- (Rufus, remember that trees
are recyclable resources! ;) -- Cactus Watcher, 13:17:13 05/29/01
Tue
LoriAnn, I liked you're reply. I was never trying to say that
what Buffy did
was wrong, just that it wasn't as pure an act as some people were
trying to
believe. I wanted people to think about what Buffy really was
doing. I think
you did. Thanks for your thoughts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks for your
thanks. -- LoriAnn, 15:15:23
05/29/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Essay on *The Gift* - (Rufus, remember that trees are
recyclable
resources! ;) -- Rufus, 20:39:02 05/28/01 Mon
Almost one year that is a milestone. Congrats Masquerade.
Now to the show. OnM go back and watch Buffy vs Dracula and watch
a few
things. First there are a few broad hints in the dialogue of what
was to
happen. First Dracula says this to Xander:
Dracula: "I'll make you an immortal. A child of darkness,
feeding on life
itself, on blood......"
Xander: "Dracula's gifting these ladies with his own blood.
And blood is
life!"
Then rewatch the sequence where Buffy drinks Draculas blood to
find out her
dark nature.
"Flash: a series of images, rapid fire - hunting , blood
going through
veins, finally the face of the Primative and an explosion of white....."
In the first episode it was established just how important blood
is but it's
only later we find out just how important is becomes to Buffy
when she makes
her choice. Think of the words "You think you know. What
you are, what's to
come...you haven't even begun...." Those words spoken by
Dracula before
Buffy drinks his blood are important. The vampire was telling
Buffy that her
power was rooted in darkness but her vision told her that it was
the
opposite. The light she saw was blinding(love). It's also the
order of the
images that is interesting it follows what happens. The hunting
the blood,
the primative(seen in Intervention) ending with the explosion
of white. It
reminded me of what some people talk about when they have a near
death
experience. It also was telling Buffy that she was going towards
the
light(portal in the Gift). Because of the words that were first
said by the
first slayer then Dracula I never felt that Buffy was going to
be gone
forever. I felt that she was going towards her destiny as the
Slayer, a step
she has to make, only she can make.
Giles may have given into despair in The Gift but at the end Buffy
truly saw
what she was meant for. Why she had been brought to that point
in time. Love
brought her to her gift, the gift she could only give herself.
When she went
and jumped in the portal I teared up, partly in sadness and mostly
because I
was happy she did the right thing.
Now to Dawn. In the Real Me Dawn is confronted by a crazy man.
He says to
her...
Man: "I know you...curds and whey...I know what you are.."
As far back as Real Me we were shown what Dawn was. Curds and
Whey is the
Miss Muffet, the Key, Glory mentioned when she said in No Place
Like Home:
Glory: "Doing it over and over and over and over til somebody's
gotta sit
down on their tuffet and make this birthing Stop."
It only becomes clear in later eps just how much they had shown
us before.
In Blood Ties we were shown how Buffy would come to her conclusion
to
sacrifice herself but Riley mentioned sacrifice in a casual conversation
to
Buffy in Real Me:
Riley: "You know what I mean. You have super powers, and
college, a studly
yet sensitive boyfriend-"
Buffy: "-and a pesky life or death job I can't quit or even
take a break
from."
Riley: "She doesn't get the sacrifices. She's a kid."
By the time the portal started to open Dawn fully understood what
life what
and what a sacrifice meant. Dawn, unlike Ben, was ready to sacrifice
herself
for the world because it was the right thing to do. When Buffy
took her
place, she was no longer just a kid, she understood what death
was and what
Buffy was giving up.
Go back to the first few eps and the answers are there just to
be figured
out. And it's a good excuse to have a marathon Buffy night.
I only got a few of the points that went from the beginning to
the season
finale. I was sad that Buffy died but understood she was coming
back. Buffy
isn't dark, she has love that is brighter than the flame, her
fear of her
own ability to love is what made her fear her darkness. Buffy
went from
burnt out to peaceful in what she had figured out about herself.
It's going
to be a long summer and fall before we get to see what is to come...as
we
haven't even begun.
Lovely post OnM......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: "...Buffy went from burnt out to peaceful
... -- curious, 21:56:46
05/28/01 Mon
in what she had figured out about herself"
Doesn't that just make you proud.
BTW, in an earlier post, I didn't mean to imply I wanted Buffy
to stay dead
when I said I'd almost wish that Joss would let her rest. It was
a
compliment to Joss's great ep. that he left me so contented for
the Summer
and also a desire for Buffy to have some peace while she can because
I think
Joss is going to send her off on an impossible journey which I'm
certain
will culminate in something even more significant than "The
Gift". So, I
with you on her journey. In fact, "you've only just begun"
couldn't be more
apt.
A really strange thing though, your little remark
>>"lets get Buffy breathing again before we send her
out on dates"
or something like that has been swimming in my head all day as
I chuckle
about it. I fear you are turning me into a clucking mother hen
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: "...Buffy went from burnt out to peaceful
... -- Rufus,
22:17:13 05/28/01 Mon
That is funny how sometimes the most simple thing will stick with
you.
Happens all the time. I understand what you say about now that
Buffy is in
peace it seems to be a shame to bring her back to reality. But
that is who
she is and what she is to go through. I wonder if she will feel
the same way
when called back to life.
I'm serious about the Buffy vs. Dracula look at that series of
images and
you will see the series in order. Buffy sees the Primative again
in
Intervention shortly before she gets to understand her gift. It
bugged me
how that series of images ended with blinding light. Makes more
sense now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: But...do you have...... -- curious,
22:42:29 05/28/01 Mon
any ideas about this?
>>"But that is who she is and what she is to go through"
Problem is, I'm beginning to question all the more "Just
who are you?". For
a while now, I've felt that she is alot more than a slayer. There
is
something very special about this girl. Ther fact that she will
be
ressurected is itself a testimony to that. Unless of course she
is
ressurected by witchcraft or something of that nature. Personally,
I hope
that this is not the case. I worry about this since the writers
have really
dwelled on the power of witchcraft in the last few eps. I've many
thoughts
whirling incoherently in my mind and one of these days, I'll have
to sort
them out.
What do you think? just who exactly, what exactly is Buffy Summers?
Do you
think Joss has already a destination planned for her? I think
he must, or
pretty close to it.
I don't recall the BvD images too well as its the only one in
the season I
managed to screw up and tape over. Hopefully I'm catch it again
in reruns.
It makes sense from what we see in hindsight though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Wonderful thought........ -- curious, 21:32:59 05/28/01
Mon
OnM
That was certainly quite a piece. Wonderfully insightful, worth
every pixel
its written on. You can bet it's finding a home on a certain hard
disk. You
know, got to save the trees and all that;). I only wished I had
discovered
this board sooner than I did. I feel like I've really missed out.
Going
through some of the posts of the last week, I am completely amazed
at all
the Posters' level of emotional and intellectual contributions.
These
essays, reviews and comments have really made the experience of
BtVS all the
more special for me, because no longer do I feel like such a freak
for
loving this show so much. Even my film friends engage in ridiculing
me for
the level of admiration I have for this program and a certain
vampire
slayer. Thanks people. Thanks OnM.
Few things I'd like too address from your post though. And all
in complete
agreement. You've effectively completed all the incoherent thoughts
still
swimming around in my mind I have yet to express. All the little
holes too
exhausting to get to. The weight of the world on her shoulders,
the reversal
of role between Giles and Buffy. The scene in the gym communicated
a
significant contribution to the viewers understanding of their
impossible
positions. You have broken it down just right.
As for suicide vs. sacrifice, I am firmly and completely without
a shadow of
a doubt in agreement that Buffy's death was made selflessly out
of nothing
but love. I cannot see this as a suicide for a couple of reasons.
I can only
address this somewhat briefly as its really an enormous topic
of discussion
in itself. I see this is going to become addicting.
The way it appears, and this is JMHO, the intentions behind suicide
vs.
sacrifice are the antithesis of each other. First, it seem suicide
is
selfish, born of a need to satisfy one's own need for escaping
what the
'victim' perceives as a truly impossible ordeal to live with.
When a person
commits suicide they put their needs before the needs of others.
As for
judging such an action? I would never attempt to judge something
so grievous
to a person that he/she would want to end one's own life for seemingly
nothing. It is a terrible and tragic circumstance. I can only
feel a hollow
kind of sorrow for this. It also represents fear. Fear to face
whatever
consequences are driving the person to choose death as the only
viable
option. Sacrifice to me, is an act of selflessness. The intention
is to bear
torment or in this extreme example, bear death so that another
or others can
benefit from it. It is not for nothing. It would take great courage,
and the
opposite of fear and whereas it is grievously sad, it is not a
tragedy. The
writers have taken great pains to illustrate the level of commitment
and
love Buffy has for Dawn. I could never see her death an anything
other than
giving and hence, a sacrifice. Of course the writers' intent and
the
audiences' perceptions may not always mesh.
>>>whether or not Giles disregarded the 'will' of the
PTB when he killed
Ben, that perhaps he should have accepted Buffy's decision to
spare him<<<
I thought it emphasized the extent of Giles' pragmatism and highlighted
that
although Buffy is forced to be pragmatic, she has still retained
her
idealism. That tenuous link to innocence. I sorta loved this reminder.
>> Would Glory have returned to seek revenge? Very possibly
even likely, but
maybe.. if a soulless, presumably evil creature can weep uncontrollably
in
grief at the death of his once mortal enemy, who is to say for
sure?
I hadn't even thought of this, thanks for the insight. Very chewable.
Last thing!
>>>I have always felt, and had those feelings reinforced
this past season,
that Sarah Michelle Gellar's gifts as an actor are in greatest
evidence when
she has little or no dialog to work with, and she has to rely
on facial
expressions and body language to convey the emotion of the moment.
My
compliments to Sarah-- when you're good, you're good.
When you're great, we weep. <<<
OnM, you have made my day. I began to notice this particularly
in season 3.
Particularly in episodes like "Earshot" and many scenes
with Faith contained
that quality too. T.V. Critics have always praised her dramatic
acting
ability which is very obvious to me and of course I love it. But
what is
even more remarkable is the way she conveys emotions or lack of
merely by a
glance, a gesture or the smallest of expression as I mentioned
in "Forever".
Sometimes even just a look. I often wondered if it was noticed
by the
'important' entertainment gurus of the world. Adding to that,
she also has a
great sense of comic timing. I've long since included her into
my pantheon
of favorite actresses the likes of Streep, Sarandon, Bacall, Hepburn,
Foster, Pfeiffer. Hard to believe she's only 24. I'm hoping that
when BtVS
is over, producers and directors will see her great range in acting
and not
relegate her into a typecasted role that many t.v. actors and
actresses find
almost impossible to break out.
BTW, I don't know if you caught an earlier response from your
"movie of the
week" thread. I would love to see a list of your movie suggestions.
Only
thing is, I doubt I'll be able to get back here much until graduation
is
over. I don't know what your e-mail philosophy is, but here is
mine.
tjadeh2000@yahoo.com
Great essay:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Movie summary will appear this Friday at the usual
time -- OnM,
22:32:31 05/29/01 Tue
Thanks, curious. I write this stuff because I enjoy doing so,
and it helps
keep my brain limbered up (in contrast to the rest of my inevitably
aging
corporeal self! ;)
If others enjoy it, that makes it even better. Don't worry if
your friends
jibe you for your affection for the show. There are roughly three
categories
people fit into on this:
1 > Those who don't get it, and never will. This isn't their
fault. Some
people's brains just cannot percieve beyond the surface of art.
Doing this
is not inherent in all people, it is a talent, or at minimum a
skill. I'm
not a musician, for example, it doesn't matter what I want, I
don't have the
genes, and lack the skill.
2 > Those who don't get it because they don't want to. They
have decided in
advance that the subject in question has no inherent worth, therefore
anyone
who thinks otherwise is foolish. Ignore them, you can't change
a closed
mind. (Unless of course, they happen to be your congressional
representatives, in which case FLEE!!)
3 > Everyone else. Here, you have a shot. Persons here range
from deranged
crazy obsessives (like us! ;) to the just, well, curious, actually.
Go for
it!
Don't know what your schedule re: graduation is, but I'll be glad
to e-mail
you the list of movies, I keep a file on the titles so I don't
accidently
repeat myself. The movie column is rarely written before 9:00
PM EST on
Fridays, because somehow I don't get the chance most weeks to
do it earlier.
The deadline (No! Sleep!! 'Till post time!!!) is self-imposed,
but that's
probably a good thing since otherwise they might never get done!
Depending
on how awake the muse is, it takes from one to three hours to
do the
writing, after which I proof the thing and then log on and post.
Since this weeks column isn't written yet, you will need to check
back
eventually to get it, but the titles should be e-mailed to you
tomorrow AM
(EST).
Thanks again for your very kind words.
OnM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Movie summary will appear this Friday at
the usual time --
Brian, 07:36:44 05/30/01 Wed
Hey, OnM, truer words were never spoken on point 2. I always have
an inward
sigh when I tell people that Buffy and Angel are the two best
shows on TV,
and I can see their minds just shutting out what I've spoken.
Some people
just can't past the title of BtVS, and the word Vampire seems
to completely
stun their brains.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Movie summary will appear this Friday
at the usual time --
Cynthia, 05:45:49 05/31/01 Thu
well, your last paragraph would have sorta describe me for a long
time.
I didn't realize that the series had a different tonethan the
movie plus I
don't, as a whole, enjoy horror.
Actually, I loved Dark Shadows, silly as it sometimes was (Like
Spike, I
enjoy the suspension of disbelief). I appreciated JW's wink-and-a-nod
of
understanding to all of us soap watchers and the basic acknowledgement
that
BTVS is one. They're the epic poem style of storytelling of our
century. But
the horror movies of my adulthood i.e. Halloween, Jason, etc.
just stripped
all interest for me. Guess they were too over the top for me.
My imagination
was always better at scaring me than blunt example, or perhaps
has been my
awareness of the horror in the real world that lessen my taste
for it as
entertainment.
But Buffy has proven that I still have a small craving for horror
after all.
As long as it has great writing and acting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Horror movies -- verdantheart, 06:45:07
05/31/01 Thu
As long as horror has great writing and acting ...
That's how I feel. I love horror, always have, back to when I
was a kid
(draw any psychological conclusions you wish), but I've always
gone into a
film hoping that it would be good but expecting that it would
be bad. The
fact is that horror films are not treated with respect by TPTB
(that is,
movie producers/distributors). They are typically seen as low-budget
fodder
for teens. Promising ideas get no backing and are not well-realized.
Good
films are hidden in a mountain of dreck. As a result, those who
create and
participate in horror films are frequently unjustly treated with
disdain and
can get little respect for their work until they move on to something
more
mainstream. (For example, I can't understand how a talent like
Jeffery Combs
is so under-utilized, and worry lest the excellent performers
in BtVS meet
the same fate.)
Of course, on the heels of The Sixth Sense, there was a spate
of
bigger-budget horror films which were poorly executed (good lord,
The
Haunting (of Hill House)! couldn't they have come up with a better
script
than that!) and did nothing to improve the overall opinion of
the quality of
horror.
Of course, I could go on and on, boringly about how studios have
ruined
horror films (their fear of showing the supernatural, for example),
but I
think I'll cut it off.
Perhaps I should come up with a list of recommendations ...
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Wonderful thought........ -- Anthony8, 01:00:36
05/30/01 Wed
Good luck in your creative pursuits. Your open mind is obvious
and will be
an indispensable asset as you develp your skills as a cinematic
storyteller.
I'm a musician, of sorts, and have come to realize over the last
few years
that in order to advance any truly artistic aspirations, one must
open one's
mind to all creative expression. To dismiss anyone else's creative
contribution as silly or trivial (or even unskillful) is really
insecurity
and fear of one's own failure speaking. Truly, crap is in the
eye of the
beholder. Those people who "pooh-pooh" shows like BtVS
should be pitied,
since they are not able to recognize (or are possibly jealous
of) successful
storytelling. As a point of interest, when Rolling Stone interviewed
Stanley
Kubrick after the release of 'Full Metal Jacket,' they asked him
what work
or works of film impressed him the most at the time. He said that
he was
most impressed by the Michelob beer commercials that were airing
in the U.S.
at the time (generally a series of images of people venturing
in and out of
clubs in a Greenwich Village/Soho type part of town and set to
contemporary
pop tunes--Steve Winwood, Genesis, etc.). He stated that they
most artfully
conveyed the feeling and atmosphere of the perfect night on the
town
encapsulated in a minute. He had not seen any current feature
length film
accomplish that feat. People like your dismissive film buddies
would let
their own prejudices prevent them from finding art in such unexpected
places
and aren't very likely to produce the stuff of the Kubricks, or
even the
Spielbergs (by the way, it will be interesting to see what he
does with what
was to be Kubrick's next project , 'A.I.') and Whedons of the
world. It's
your friends' loss, sadly.
By the way, and I don't mean this in any sort of scolding manner,
but I
think you and others have been oversimplifying the whole subject
of suicide
(even as it pertains to BtVS). Yes, it is ultimately a selfish
act (in the
truest sense of the term). In most cases, however, it is the end
result of a
profound spiral of individual depression, despair, and actual
physical pain.
It is especially overly simplistic to view it as a product of
fear. It would
be really easy to view a suicide as an act of cowardice, and in
the case of
a murder-suicide or "blaze of glory"-type criminal suicide,
for example, I
would be in agreement with you. But there are some people out
there who, as
the result of actual psycho-neurological illness or deep depression,
reach a
place of such absolute despair and hopelessness that it seems
like the only
solution. To the objective person, who can see all the options,
suicide
seems absolutely ridiculous, self-indulgent, even immature. Moreover,
when
you consider the types of tragedies in the world that people live
through
and struggle to survive(holocausts, wars, AIDS, etc.), suicide
seems
wasteful and silly. But to the individual who is suffering, it
is very
real--like a living hell of absolute hopelessness and emotional
pain. If you
see it from that perspective, it makes the whole subject more
than just the
simple matter of a selfish or cowardly act. In fact if Buffy's
act were a
suicide (in the sense of escaping her responsibilities, fears,
etc.), it
would be a cowardly act and her character would not deserve to
come back. In
fact, it would be so inconsistent with her character, that it
would be a
true betrayal of the viewers by JW and company. Despite all the
bad that had
happened to her, even the coma, she never really was experiencing
the type
of despair I described above. She had momentary bouts of self-doubt,
she is
supposed to be human after all, but she's just too strong a character
to
ever fall into the bottomless pit of hopelessness. All her actions,
throughout her five year incarnation, point to the probability
that her
death was a sacrifice in the way of a mother jumping in front
of a moving
vehicle to protect her young.
Sorry about the lecture.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Suicical oversimplifications -- OnM, 07:35:08
05/30/01 Wed
A8, don't be sorry for your 'lecture', you have just raised some
very good
points, and I am in agreement, and I suspect many others are.
I think that our oversimplifications came because we were trying
to
differentiate between Buffy committing 'suicide' and Buffy committing
a
'sacrifice'. Considering the obvious (at least to me, anyway)
intent of her
actions, it didn't seem to make sense that anyone could consider
her actions
immoral, but some seemed to see sacrifice=suicide=immoral=bad
etc. I believe
that was what the discussion became about, and you are right,
we have
glossed over the many true implications involved in deliberately
ending
one's own life.
I don't ever see suicide as always being an evil, it depends on
the
circumstances. There are horrific examples of people who are captured,
imprisioned, tortured and eventually killed for no other purpose
than to
make them 'examples' for enemies of a political regime. I would
think that
if some unfortunate found themselves in this situation, with no
possible
hope of escape (and I emphasize the latter), they would consider
suicide as
a morally acceptable option. Why suffer needlessly, and further,
serve the
evil ends of evil people by allowing themselves to be so brutalized?
The same could be said of a person suffering a painful terminal
illness (or
even a serious loss of mental facilties) with no possible cure.
I certainly
don't want to die before my time, but neither do I want to suffer
pointlessly or have friends and family suffer to care for me.
That isn't
bravery to me, it's just denial of reality.
There are always exceptions depending on circumstances, which
is why I
always have trouble with moral 'absolutists'. Life is simply too
complicated
to 'always have a perfect answer' to everything.
I think this is a great topic, I'd be glad to hear from others
and their
thoughts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Essay - Wow! More 'Deep Thoughts' (Long) -- Anthony8,
21:51:25
05/28/01 Mon
Great catch on the 'Day In the Life' parallel. That musical signature
is so
commonly identified with the Beatles' tune, I wouldn't be surprised
if Mr.
Beck had intended the homage. John Lennon was inspired to write
the tune
after he read a newspaper headline regarding the death of the
Guiness heir.
Moreover, the song had been identified as a clue to the alleged
"death" of
Paul McCartney (and his replacement by a look-alike)-- a hoax
in which The
Beatles, at the time at least, coyly denied any participation.
I had a few more thoughts regarding mythological motifs that crept
up in the
last three episodes in particular. The whole Knights of Byzantium
thing in
'Spiral' kind of had me stretching my suspension of disbelief
at first. I
mean, I know it's Sunnydale and all, but shouldn't someone have
noticed the
large Rennaissance army marching on the outskirts of town? Not
to mention
the fact that the fastest racehorse doesn't run much faster than
30 mph--the
SG should have been able to outrun them even in a Winnebago! Okay,
fiction
vs. reality rant aside, I began to think that 'Spiral' is really
where the
mythological aspect of the series started to take over. As Giles
noted in
'Restless', "it's all about the journey, isn't it?"
'Spiral' is where the
Homerian-like Odyssey begins. This is the first time we see Glory's
true
god-like abilities. Up until then, she had exhibited super strength
and
brain-sucking propensities (ho-hum, mere demon anyone?), but the
blurring
speed appeared very god-like. And the Knights, in full Rennaissance
Faire
regalia represent the old guard of thought and action, frozen
in time by
their single and simple-minded way of life/duty.
Then we have the flight into the desert. That really set off the
alarm
bells. Where have we seen this before? In the Old Testament, Terah
(pregnant
with Abraham) flees into the desert to conceal her pregnancy and
protect her
child, a threat to the old order, from Nimrod's edict that all
male children
be slaughtered. Next, we have Moses and his "children"
(and their status quo
threatening monotheism)fleeing from their Egyptian pursuers into
the desert.
In the New Testament, Mary and Joseph must flee into the desert,
baby Jesus
(who must live and grow up to bestow his boon of The Word on the
world) in
tow, to escape King Herod's edict that first-born male children
be killed.
Then, we have the flight (Hejira) of Mohammed from Medina to Mecca.
Where's
the innocent, vulnerable child here? It is the new message of
Allah--the
word of Islam.
In BtVS, The Key (Dawn) is the human incarnation of a pure energy,
whose
origins and reason for existing are unknown. Those who do not
understand it,
the spiritually immature, the ignorami who want to maintain the
dogmatic
status quo (KOB and their clerics) want to destroy it. Those who
want to use
the energy for their own personal power (Glory and her minions)
want to
coopt it, corrupt it and use it for their own gain regardless
of the
consequences. These people are slaves to their egos, their need
for personal
gain, or their need to maintain order in their lives. Buffy, who
does not
care what The Key is for, but loves it as her sister-child, has
the singular
duty of protecting it at all costs.
What The Key has in common with the four myths cited above is
that it is a
metaphor for a new way of viewing the universe. So far, we've
only learned
of its destructive powers. But in mythology, the Buffyverse, and
every
individual, there are always pairs of opposites. For every dark
form their
is a corresponding light form. We have yet to learn of the Key's
life-affirming powers, but the monks thought that it had the potential
to be
harnessed for the Forces of Light. Buffy sees the life affirming
power in
the form of her unconditional love. Like any new idea, or child,
it has to
be protected in its infancy, toddlerhood and adolescence so it
can develop
unfettered and realize it's full potential.
So what does the Hejira into the desert represent? On an individual
level,
it is the shedding of the ego, the throwing off of all the external
trappings and man-made structures that obscure the truth (pure
love,
enlightenment). It is a process necessary to enable one to exist
in the
universe in a state of pure waking consciousness. We can contrast
it with
the exploration of the unconscious which would be represented
by immersion
in the sea. That would seem to me to be the next step in the hero
cycle. The
flight into the desert in some cases may be proceeded or accompanied
by a
visit for meditational purposes or to receive spiritual direction.
For
example, Mohammed received the Koran after repeatedly venturing
into a cave
in the desert to meditate. Buffy receives the cryptic message
of her 'Gift'
during her prior desert quest in 'Intervention' and, to some extent
from the
revelations she received in her desert dream in 'Restless.'
Her flight into the desert goes awry, with Dawn's capture, however,
and she
retreats to familiar forms (the images in her coma in 'Weight
of the World')
which detour her on her spiritual journey. In many mythologies,
trickster
demons will appear to confound the hero or dissuade her from going
to the
next level of consciousness on her way to fulfill her ultimate
destiny. One
example would be the tempatation of Jesus by Satan in the desert.
In Buffy's
case, her paralysis is caused by fear, desire (for a normal life)
and
concerns that she has failed in her duty as the slayer/protector(themes
often found in Hindu and Buddhist mythology). Ultimately, she
emerges from
the desert and her coma, free from fear, desire and the constrictions
of her
duty as the Slayer. With a clear mind, she is open to the real
message of
"Death is your gift" which she finally comes to understand
on the tower with
Dawn in 'The Gift.' In her moment of clarity, she performs her
sacrifice,
and in doing so experiences atonement (literally at-oneness) with
the
universe by inserting herself at the nexus of its infinite dimensions
(her
blood, after all, closes not only the portal to Glory's dimension,
but to
all the dimensions). Almost sounds like Nirvana, or smells like
teen
spirit--you make the call.
Okay, that was incredibly long-winded, I know, and I would appreciate
anybody filling in the holes (of which there must be many). I
was going to
go into a whole comparison with the personal evolutionary odyssey
of Dave in
'2001,' because I saw some similar themes (interplanetary space
in place of
the desert metaphor; HAL the computer as the manifestation of
the limits of
human ego on spiritual evolution, etc.), but maybe another time.
You may ask what set this kid off on this whole 'Desert Flight'
mini-dissertation in the first place? I was listening to Joni
Mitchell's
album 'Hejira,' and the title track in particular, and it set
me to
thinkin'. Ultimately for me, the thing that makes me so passionate
about
BtVs is that the themes so artfully (and entertainingly) presented
throughout the series have resonated on a personal level. Sometimes
they are
blatantly obvious, but more often the perception is much more
subtle, even
subliminal, as with all good mythology. Our Hero's journey is
the journey of
every individual on one level or another and the lessons I learn
by
analyzing the recurrent mythic images help me to clarify my own
philosophy.
To me that is the function of Art. With that in mind, I would
encourage
anybody to listen to 'Hejira' whose lyrics are as follows:
I'm travelling in some vehicle
I'm sitting in some cafe
A defector from the petty wars
That shell shock love away
There's comfort in melancholy
When there's no need to explain
It's just as natural as the weather
In this moody sky today
In our possessive coupling
So much could not be expressed
So now I am returning to myself
These things that you and I suppressed
I see something of myself in everyone
Just at this moment of the world
As snow gathers like bolts of lace
Waltzing on a ballroom girl
You know it never has been easy
Whether you do or you do not resign
Whether you travel the breadth of extremity
Or stick to some straighter line
Now here's a man and woman sitting on a rock
They're either gonna thaw out or freeze
Listen...Strains of Benny Goodman
Coming through the snow and the pinewood trees
I'm porous with travel fever
But you know I'm so glad to be on my own
Still somehow the slightest touch of a stranger
Can set up trembling in my bones
I know-no one's going to show me everything
We all come and go unknown
Each so deep and superficial
Between the foreceps and the stone
Well I looked at the granite markers
Those tributes to finality--to eternity
And then I looked at myself here
Chicken scatching for my immortality
In the church they light the candles
And the wax rolls down like tears
There is the hope and the hopelessness
I've witnessed thirty years
We're only particles of change I know, I know
Orbiting around the sun
But how can I have that point of view
When I'm always bound and tied to someone
White flags of winter chimneys
Waving truce against the moon
In the mirrors of a modern bank
From the windows of a hotel room
I'm travelling in some vehicle
I'm sitting in some cafe
A defector of the petty wars
Until love sucks me back that way...
On a lighter note, and only somewhat related to the above blather,
I
recently came across an old e-mail of 'Deep Thoughts'--the following
one in
particular still cracks me up:
"I believe in making the world safe for our children, but
not our children's
children, because I don't think that children should be having
sex." :)
It's all about the journey.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Essay - Wow! -- curious, 22:25:46 05/28/01 Mon
My God Anthony8,
My mind is reeling now thanks to you?
could there possibly be anymore holes to fill on this board?
Interesting you brought up the 2001 parallel, I hadn't really
thought of
that. I have been thinking more on the lines of the Buddist and
Greek
mythologies of the journeying hero. You've illustrated that one
of the great
things about a show like this, is that it reintroduces much of
what we
learned in school and forces us to rethink and reassess it. :)
BTW, 2001 is supposed to be re-released on the big screen sometime
this
year. Least that's what I'm hearing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Essay - Wow! -- Anthony8, 22:31:50 05/28/01
Mon
Thanks. It's possible I ate too many (portabello) mushrooms this
weekend.
That joke only flies if you saw the Saturday Night Live 'Delicious
Dish'
skit this past weekend.
:)
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Ahh, so now we've come full circle.. -- OnM,
21:40:58 05/29/01 Tue
..and as was stated in 'Day in the Life', now we know how many
holes is
takes to fill the Albert Hall. ;)
ATPoBtVS-- we're we'd love to turn you on!
A8, when you get a chance, please fill in some of your thoughts
on the 2001
space as desert/HAL extension of the Hejira concept. I've seen
2001 at least
about 10-15 times, and that *never* occurred to me! Damn! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Ahh, so now we've come full circle..2001
-- Anthony8,
23:42:33 05/29/01 Tue
I've seen '2001' about the same number of times and the space
as desert
analogy didn't occur to me until the 'Spiral' desert flight set
me to
thinking. It's late here too, so I hope my thoughts are somewhat
coherent
and concise (not one of my strengths). So here goes.
In '2001,' the journey from beginning to end is the evolution
of man, with a
nudge from the alien intelligence communicating through the monolith(s).
The
transformation from ape to man begins with the use of the first
tool which
enables the creatures to become hunters (masters of their own
fate) where
they once were gatherers (the environment controlling them). Next
we have
the discovery that the tool can be used as a weapon, the first
warfare and
tribal politics. Jump ahead to 2001. The evolution of man's intelligence
has
equipped him with the capability to develop the technology necessary
to
travel to other planets. He discovers the moon monolith which
directs him to
Jupiter. The technology developed to take him to Jupiter is an
artificial
intelligence made in his own image (HAL 9000). A computer that
can think for
itself, make its own decisions--every creator's dream/nightmare.
In a twist
on the creation theory (superior god, jealous of its own power,
creates
inferior man, but is always worried that the creation might gain
the
knowledge and immortality that will render the god obsolete),
man creates
this super computer, endowed with human personality traits (pride,
humor
albeit dry, concern, rationality) as a "perfect" reflection
of man's own
intelligence. HAL is supposed to be infallible. Man's ego clouds
his logic
(can the imperfect really create the perfect), and ultimately,
it is that
very ego, programmed into HAL that makes the creation turn on
its creators.
Okay now the Odyssey truly begins.
Dave and his fellow astronauts are on a mission so secret, they
do not even
know (at least the two that are not in suspended animation) its
true
objective. The actual physical odyssey, the initial foray into
the desert of
space, if you will, is the trip from Earth to Jupiter. The astronauts'
survival is dependent on the technology their advanced intelligence
has
created. Kubrick was masterful in showing you all throughout the
space
station-to moon-to Jupiter part of the film how the technology
had
sterilized and permeated the lives of human beings (think of how
complicated
the technology has made even the most basic of bodily funtions--remember
the
voluminous instuctions on the gravity free toilet?) and separated
them from
their true essence. At first you might think, wow, what a utopian
view of
the future. But it really isn't--think of how wonderous such an
event an
interplanetary journey should be, and yet how routine and technical
the
whole process is experienced by Dave and Frank on The Discovery.
Okay, HAL goes bonkers--the ultimate ego trip gone bad. In fact
the ego is
so out of control that it murders the very souls it was created
to protect.
In order for Dave to regain control, to survive once more on the
most basic
level, and resume his journey, he has to dismantle the technology
(shed his
ego, or really the collective ego of mankind as contained within
the entity
HAL). Note how HAL's artificial intelligence (Ego) has to be systematically
taken apart until he is capable of only performing basic ship
functions and
sing a child-like song. This is symbolic of what Dave, as the
representative
of everyman, must do in order to take the next evolutionary step
in
consciousness. From a psycho-analytical perspective, he's 'Digging
in the
Dirt,' to quote P.G.
Okay back to the desert parallel, and I'm probably stretching
it a bit here,
but bear with me. The desert flight here is not as dramatic as
the Islamic
Hejira or the SG's adventure in 'Spiral,' but it serves the same
function.
The desert is barren, life and existence stripped to its most
basic
components. It is vast and appears motionless,even timeless when
viewed from
a fixed location--it almost has 'eternal' qualities (at least
as close as
you can imagine on Earth). Think in contrast to the constant motion
of the
sea (and think of how that is analagous to the turbulence of the
unconscious
mind). Space, like the desert is vast and barren (okay--it is
actually a
void with some matter scattered throughout--but ignore the man
behind that
curtain!). Space can be thought of as representative of the consciousness
free of ego. Or has the perfect backdrop for the ego free consciousness
to
emerge.
Dave, now stripped of the constraints of his ego, makes contact
with the
extraterrestial intelligence that had been guiding his species
for over a
million years and is allowed to pass through the portal into the
dimension
of the alien beings. He has to live out his life in benign captivity,
but
can't take the next step until he sheds his corporal existence
(sounds
familiar, sounds familiar--quick! Picture Buffy-ego free in her
moment of
absolute clarity-diving into the portal that is the nexus of all
the
dimensions of the universe-and off with the shell, the body, that
was her
corporal existence). We see Dave age and die to his old self in
a matter of
mere moments (contrast the passage of his years with the infiniteness
of
eternity, and keep in mind that that segment of the film is titled
'Beyond
the Infinite,' or something to that effect). What next? Dave is
reborn as
the Starchild, a human satellite existing at one with the universe,
self-contained, beyond the ego (no technology necessary)--a
superconsciousness! Could Dawn be BtVS equivalent of the Starchild.
Or is
that Buffy's destiny to fulfill. I'm not saying
anything--I'm-a-just-a-presenting a debatable (or not)topic for
discussion.
So what do you think? Close or no cigar? I know, I'm rambling.
I humbly
apologize, or, to quote Alex the droog in 'A Clockwork Orange'
:
"Appy-polly-loggies!"
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Worth a cigar to me! -- OnM, 07:50:14
05/30/01 Wed
Now if only I can figure out how to e-mail one. ;)
If that was rambling, then ramble on, dude! Great stuff!
Thanks. :)
BTW, were you aware that in A. Burgess's original draft for 'Clockwork'
the
very last chapter was about Alex, many years in the future, and
he had
'reformed' himself, given up evil-doing of his own violition?
His publisher was certain that this would completely undermine
the basic
point of the novel, and strongly urged that he cut the chapter,
and finish
the book at the place we are used to seeing. He did, but remarked
that he
was never sure thereafter that he had done the right thing.
This can be a whole subject for serious debate itself-- since
we all have
ideas regarding a certain BtVS 'Clockwork Orange' character, now
don't we?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Worth a cigar to me! --
Anthony8, 11:48:49 05/30/01
Wed
Yeah, I read about the extra chapter of the book somewhere, but
thank you
for reminding me-I had forgotten about that. I wish someone would
ask JM if
he has infused a bit of Alex into Spike. We know Spike, the ficitional
character, has patterned his modern persona on a post-punk Johnny
Rotten
type with serious Bily Idol overtones. To some extent, the style
and
attitude of the late 70's punk movement in England was inspired
and
influenced by 'A Clockwork Orange.' John Lydon himself, in the
PBS 'History
of Rock And Roll,' claimed that he patterned his Johnny Rotten
persona on
Lawrence Olivier's interpretation of Shakespeare's Richard III,
but I could
detect a not-so-subtle undertone of droog in there as well. What
do you
think?
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Somewhat stray quote --
Anthony8, 12:01:26 05/30/01
Wed
On the subject of the evolution of man and his technology--well
I guess we
never really were discussing that, were we? Anyhow, I saw a funny
George
Carlin quote in the newspaper today:
"This species could have been so great, and now everybody
just wants a new
Salad Shooter or sneakers with lights in them. This is what we've
settled
for." :)
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Aaccckk! I forgot purplegrrl! So, so sorry! -- OnM, 05:13:00
05/29/01 Tue
Mea culpa, pg, I love your stuff. Didn't mean to leave you out
from my
'credits list' there at the end!
Gotta go to work now, job to do early this AM, but I already see
there are
lots of responses to my humble thoughts, what a great way to start
the day
out!
Thanks again to one and all-- see you (well, read you anyway ;)
tonight!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Forgiven, plus some other thoughts -- purplegrrl,
12:21:11 05/29/01
Tue
You're forgiven, OnM!
I haven't posted very many pithy thoughts lately. My brain is
full and I
need to go home. Or maybe download into my purplegrrl-bot!
Great essay, by the way.
Wanted to add my two cents to the Buffy sacrifice vs. suicide
discussion:
Spike told Buffy that she had a death wish. At the time Buffy
scoffed at the
idea and told Spike he was full of it. Whether or not Buffy thought
consciously about her "death wish," I think Spike's
words lived on in her
subconscious. Buffy knows that the only way out of her Slayer
duties is to
die. Maybe this knowledge along with Spike's accusation colored
Buffy's
actions this season. Maybe she *did* want to die - at least in
some small
dark corner in the back recesses of her mind. And this is where
she
retreated to during her catatonic state. But even there Buffy
realized that
Dawn was someone that needed to be taken care of, to be nutured.
It didn't
matter that Buffy's logical mind said that Dawn wasn't really
her sister,
that she was just a human shell on a box of energy. Buffy's emotional
mind
*knew* that Dawn was family, blood. Buffy saw herself in Dawn.
Saw the
potential she would have had if she hadn't been called to be the
Chosen One.
Buffy knew that she would die young (although she did hope to
extend that
for as long as possible) as Slayers are prone to do. She chose
to give her
death more meaning than simply dying in some battle with some
big, bad evil.
So in the end, what may have started out as a "death wish"
became an
emotional choice of love, hope, and blood.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Reminds me of that great X-Files ep... --
OnM, 22:01:30
05/29/01 Tue
...where those hackers really did literally download themselves
into this
giant AI matrix?
*** "Or maybe download into my purplegrrl-bot!" ***
The young woman who called herself the Invisigoth? I think that
was the one
scripted by William Gibson. (Hope I have his name right, I know
exactly who
I mean, but it's sooooo late here and I'm soooo tired that I might
write
'Bob Barker' and it could look right!)
I try not to think too much about how weak 'Files' has been this
past season
compared to the sheer brilliance of stuff like that that used
to be the norm
for them, but that's a whole 'nother riff and besides I don't
like to dwell
on the weaknesses, rather point out all the successes. Whether
the glass is
half empty or half full, if you drink the water you'll be less
thirsty, says
I.
Thanks for your thoughts, and btw, quality pithy-ness is damn
hard to do on
any regular basis, lemme tell ya from personal experience, so
you just do
what you can. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> June 14th--one year Anniv of the ATPoBtVS discussion board
-- Masquerade,
09:10:16 05/29/01 Tue
I remember 'coz we had a heatwave in San Francisco that day. 103
degrees F!
July 1st -- 2 1/2 anniversary of the site. Thanks for the congrats
and of
course all your wonderful contributions, OnM!
Meanwhile, I'm going on vacation!
zzzzzzz
Masq
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: June 14th--one year Anniv of the ATPoBtVS discussion
board --
Cynthia, 05:48:50 05/31/01 Thu
All this great discussion in just one year. Wow.
Needlesstosay, as a newbie, I have spent several late nights reading
back
threads.
Congradulations everyone for the great thoughts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: June 14th--one year Anniv of the ATPoBtVS
discussion board --
Brian, 13:50:55 05/31/01 Thu
Isn't June 14th Flag Day in America and Bastille Day in France?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> It's also the official "You have
too many thoughts" ATPoBtVS
Posting Board Day -- Masquerade, 20:57:21 05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> You're half right... -- Isabel, 19:52:02
06/01/01 Fri
Brian,
June 14 is Flag Day, but Bastille Day is July 14. (Think hot and
humid
Summer sparking bloody revolution.)
There's nothing bloody about this board, but sometimes the ideas
are
revolutionary.
;)
Isabel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: You're half right... -- Brian,
15:15:49 06/02/01 Sat
Thanks for the clarification. "Power to the BtVS Board!"
A thought about Doc -- Jen C.,
22:44:32 05/28/01 Mon
I finally got around to watching the finale again, and I had a
thought about
Doc. I've read several posts about Spike's "Wimpiness"
when battling Doc. He
was easily knocked out of the fight in Doc's office, and Xander
saved the
day. In the finale, Doc dispatched Spike quickly and seemingly
with little
effort, while Buffy tossed Doc off of the platform almost as an
afterthought. What's my point?
I've noticed a sub-sub theme of corruption this season. We have
Dawn's much
discussed thievery, Willow's dark magics, Giles despair and (really
chilling) killing of Ben. It may be that Doc's power is directly
proportional to the amount of evil in a person. A vampire like
Spike would
be almost powerless against him - while Buffy could squash him
like a bug.
If Doc returns next season and this is in some part true, it will
be very
interesting to see the soul searching that results!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A thought about Doc -- AK-UK, 04:19:55 05/29/01 Tue
I'd settle for that explaination.......I'd settle for ANYTHING
which cleared
up this awful plot development. Unfortunately I fear that it will
just be
forgotten about. Spike's defeat was just a means of allowing Buffy's
heroic
sacrifice to happen (silly writers, plot inconsistencies *grumble
grumble*).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A thought about Doc -- Nina, 08:41:10 05/29/01
Tue
I too think that there's something about Doc, Jen C, you are perfectly
right!
Think about this. Doc somehow new things about Spike's past (other
hair
color - China - Cocoa) He seemed to want Buffy to die for a reason.
He made
it obvious that he wanted Spike to have the papers in the chest.
Why? Maybe
because he wanted Buffy to know about the blood ritual and wanted
her to
sacrifice herself in the end. Maybe Buffy's death and resurection
is what
Doc really wanted all that time. After all Spike introduced Doc
as being the
bloke who knows all about resurection spells.
Doc's words when Buffy appears on the tower are :"That should
be
interesting"... Yes indeed! Mostly if Doc knows that Buffy
will figure out
what to do and sacrifice herself. I'm suspecting that somehow
Doc will have
something to do with bringing Buffy back. Maybe he'll have some
control over
her. He's obviously not interested in the Key or he would have
used it while
Dawn first came to see him in "Forever". The strong
DNA from Dawn's hair is
Buffy's DNA. All along he was more interested in Buffy than Dawn.
He also
knew that the girl Spike brought him was the slayer's sister.
Why would he
know if it wasn't because he was watching Buffy all that time!
I am also pretty certain that Doc really knows Spike. Maybe he
was watching
him too. Doc knew that throwing Spike from the tower wouldn't
kill him. He
could have cut his head with the knife if he wanted him dead.
He just needed
him out for a awhile.
Doc will probably be the big bad next year...or... he could be
revealed to
be a good guy after all. Having to stage all this in order for
Buffy to die,
learn and come back. That would be a nice turn of events!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: A thought about Doc, next big bad. -- Aelith,
19:07:50 05/29/01
Tue
I agree that Doc is slated to be the next big Bad. (strange lingo
you guys
have developed.)But I think you have misread Doc. I think it is
The Power
that is Dawn that he is after. If as you say he was playing a
double role to
get Buffy there, then perhaps his goal was to get Buffy out of
the way. I
think Doc controls Spike but not as obiously as Adam did. I never
bought
Spike's reasons for taking her to Doc in the first place.
Has anyone givin thought that Dawn's power may be affecting those
around
her. The Power is for tearing down barriers. Could it be 'leaking?'
Causing
Spike to feel more human, Willow more witchy, Giles more proactive.
Was she
having an affect on the barrier seperating Ben and Glory?
I'm betting her power will again be the Key, this time to bring
Buffy back.
But first she will have to brake loose from Doc's influnence/control.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A thought about Doc -- Justin, 18:49:10 05/30/01
Wed
I don't think it was poor plotting because then Joss could have
had Buffy
actually have to FIGHT Doc and have a hard time beating him. He
went out of
his WAY to make it as effortless as possible. (With the nice effect
of it
being funny). As to Doc knowing Spike, didn't he say something
about
recognizing him the first time he saw him? At any rate, I don't
think it's a
bad plot move even if Doc's easy defeat to Buffy has no significance.
She
didn't give him a second thought and he got caught off gaurd.
Also, even if
it was a cheap plot move, it far MORE set up that look between
Dawn and
Spike which was more powerful than Buffy's sacrafice.
Buffy: The Musical?!? -- Rob,
08:58:59 05/29/01 Tue
Yes, you read that right...Next year, during November sweeps,
will an air an
all-singing, all-dancing episode of "Buffy," with music
and lyrics
by...Joss!!!
Now, I know this sounds like a really weird idea, but I am REALLY
looking
forward to it. Here's the TV guide article about it:
--------------------------------------------------------
Buffy the Vampire Slayer creator Joss Whedon wants to set the
record
straight - so to speak - about the show's upcoming all-musical
episode.
Contrary to his recent Buffy.com posting, in which he told fans,
in jest,
that the installment "could be the worst hour of TV ever
made," the
acclaimed auteur is now singing a different tune.
"I actually think it's going to be good," he says of
the episode, which is
slated to air next season during November sweeps (it's episode
six). "But it
is something I've never done before, so it's a little nerve-racking."
Whedon - who will write and direct the hour-long singing and dancing
extravaganza (with a choreographer on deck to coordinate the fancy
footwork)
- reveals that beneath all the spectacle will rest something far
more
profound than, say, a Busby Berkeley opus. "It's about what
it's like to
live in a musical world," he previews, "because all
our guys are gonna start
singing and dancing, and they're gonna be like, 'Did anybody notice
that we
were just singing and dancing? What's that all about?' It's basically
the
repercussions of living in that kind of world.
"I think of it as kind of a sequel to [last season's Emmy-nominated
episode]
'Hush,' in the sense that 'Hush' was about when you stop talking,
you start
communicating," he adds. "And the musical is about when
you sing, you
express yourself, things you wouldn't otherwise express - which
can be great
or very destructive." - Michael Ausiello
----------------------------------------------------------
I think the idea sounds intriguing, and especially after reading
the
article, I'm glad to see that, as usual, Joss does not do "stunt"
episodes
that exist for no other reason than to be a stunt. When he does
a such
episode, like "Hush," it always has a purpose, and always
ends up being a
masterpiece.
Personally, I'm laughing already thinking of the Scooby Gang bursting
into
song, and then saying after, "Why the hell did we just do
that?"
And on the more serious side, I think the idea of seeing how songs
can
reveal deeper emotions than people would normally vocalize could
be an
excellent way of getting deeper into our favorite characters'
minds. Can we
look forward to a Buffy/Spike love duet? An Anya comedy song?
A line of
dancing and singing vamps? I sure hope so!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy: The Musical?!? -- Brian, 10:08:49 05/29/01 Tue
I'll assume some kind of spell (Willow gets all Evita?)that leads
to the
all-singing, all dancing episode. I know that Giles can sing,
but what about
the rest of the Scoobies?
Maybe we should be happy that Angel has his own series?
I can see Spike singing the Sunnydale version of MY FAIR LADY'S
"On the
street where you live"
Or will their singings voices be dubbed?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy: The Musical?!? -- verdantheart, 11:23:04
05/29/01 Tue
Well, I know that James Marsters has sung professionally, but
I personally
can't testify as to his voice. This sounds very risky, but could
be
interesting if done properly.
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> We know Spike digs the Ramones ... -- Shiver,
17:40:17 05/29/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And from his chosen persona a bit of Billy
Idol, too... --
Lazarus, 21:44:24 05/29/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Billy Idol is a Sid Vicious wanna-be.
Spike imitates Sid, not
Billy -- Elizabeth, 09:52:11 05/30/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Heck, maybe Sid imitated Spike:)
-- Greta, 11:37:13
05/30/01 Wed
We could use another flashback story:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Billy Idol is a Sid Vicious
wanna-be. Spike imitates
Sid, not Billy -- Lazarus, 11:37:23 05/30/01 Wed
The reason I brought up Billy is that I saw him on one of the
late night
shows recently (Leno, I think...) and it was almost like Spike
(albiet a bit
older looking) was sitting there talking away... Brings up an
interesting
thought though... Maybe Billy (the virtual has-been trying to
revive a
failing carreer) was doing Spike (a currently popular pop-culture
figure not
too far from Billy's public persona)?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy: The Musical?!? -- fresne, 14:34:13 05/29/01 Tue
Ok, so I have to admit, I love musicals. So, the idea of a Buffy
musical is
especially intriguing.
I am en-heartened to know that Joss has enough background in musicals
to
randomly drop Busby Berkley references.
So, what do I want to see. Hmmm...
On one hand, I wouldn't mind at least one surreal Berkleyesk sequence.
Characters merging into shapes and reflections. The benefit being
such
sequences requires zero dancing ability.
On the other hand, I prefer more intimate dance numbers. What
draws me to
musicals is the expression of emotion through music and dance.
What would be
maudlin if spoken is wonderful when expressed in song and motion.
Here I'll make my own movie recommendation, The Sky's the Limit.
This was a
WWII Fred Astaire vehicle, which you never hear about, but has
one of my
favorite dance numbers. Fred, for various plot reasons, is being
separated
from his fiancee by war, circumstances, life, etc. and he proceeds
to do an
absolutely stunning dance of despair and anger to the tune of
One More for
My Baby. It was a particularly dangerous number because he kicks
and
shatters bar glasses (because there was a war on and sugar was
rationed,
they used real glass) and does taps and slides on a steel bar
top.
Much will depend on how well the cast can dance. Singing isn't
really a
problem. Dubbing is a wonderful thing. Dancing (since it seems
there will be
dancing) is the real problem. Most movies that have dancing these
days do
lots of gratuitous cuts, shots of feet, shots of faces, reaction
shots. All
of which tends to break up the power of a number. Of course, they
can also
be used to hide a lack of terpsichorean ability. So, here's to
the hope that
the cast can pull off shots that show the full body in motion.
Now back to pondering the Gift.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy: The Musical?!? -- Diana Michelle, 15:00:29
05/29/01 Tue
I'm with you on loving musicals. They're probably my favorite
kind of movie
because they can be so honest.
Let's see, we know that ASH, James, and Amber(she sang at the
Rocky Horror
Anniversary Show) can sing, but what about the rest?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Go see Moulin Rouge...It was excellent! -- Rob, 08:40:39
05/30/01 Wed
Reading your post about how much you love musicals and what you'd
like to
see on "Buffy"s musical, I just had to jump back in
and recommend you go see
"Moulin Rouge" as soon as possible. It's coming out
all over the country
this Friday, May 30. I saw it in the exclusive limited run in
New York City,
and it was without a doubt one of the best movies I have ever
seen. The
musical numbers are absolutely stunning and extremely creative.
The movie is
filled with so much imagination that I think you'd love it in
particular. I
would recommend it to everyone, though, even those who do not
love musicals.
I went with a bunch of friends who don't love musicals like I
do. And I
swear that at the end of every musical number the entire audience
was
clapping (including my friends) as if they'd been to live theatre.
At the
end they gave the movie a standing ovation. I'd recommend it to
anyone,
especially those interested in operatic musicals, with intense
heightened
emotions, which is what the "Buffy" ep sounds like it
will be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Go see Moulin Rouge...It was excellent!
-- fresne, 23:47:26
05/30/01 Wed
Yes, I have to admit, all of my friends have been frothing. I
mean, I like
muscials, costuming, and Paris.
Ergo...deep felt sigh. Soon...
The future of the Scooby gang(speculation
and wishes and theories for next
season) -- Unsung Hero, 10:27:05 05/29/01 Tue
Ok, so I think many of us have theorised that next season will
probably be
the last season of Buffy:The Vampire Slayer. The way I have it
figured, the
sixth season will be less big and larger than life, and more subdued
and
whispered, focusing on the characters final transition into the
real world,
and an ending to thier era as The Scooby Gang, stepping aside
for a new
slayer and a new slayer circle. I'm just seeing that as a logical
course of
action, a final harrowing for the SG, and a final great victory,
but not
over a God or Master Vampire, but over life and aversity. Seeing
this, I
figured I'd toss in some ideas and theories about the whole mess,
done by
character.
Buffy: Early season: Buffy returns from the dead. Yeah, we know
that. But
how and why? Here's my theory:
Whedon doesn't do stupid things like having someone just kind
of pop back in
without rammification. I believe that Buffy will be next years
big bad, or
perhaps the decoy bad. And this is why. They made a big noise
about Doc,
only to have nothing really happen with him. He's pretty damn
scary, but
nothing happened. All we know is that worships Glory and is a
master of
RESSURECTION spells. So I believe that Doc will ressurect Buffy
to get
revenge on the SG for the death of his deity, particularly the
little girl
with good genes that escaped, putting the entire SG in a whole
new hornets
nest: What happens when your beloved leader becomes the bad guy?
Mid-Season: Buffy infliltrates the gang for Doc, acting probably
just like
herself, but secretly taking steps to cause trouble.
End of Season: Buffy's pure spirit will shine through, and she
will probably
die again, sacraficing herself not for the world, but for her
friends.
Xander: Begining of season: Xander will probably be one of the
earliest to
deal with Buffy's death and move on, realising that Sunnydale
still needs
The Scooby Gang to fight the evil monsters and save the world.
He will also
be preparing for his Marriage to Anya.
Mid-Season: Xander will begin to grapple with the seriousness
of what he is
about to undertake with his wedding, and will probably have some
ups and
downs with Anya as he begins to doubt his decision.
End of Season: Xander will marry Anya and will take a much deserved
early
retirement from demon fighting and move out of Sunnydale and settle
down.
Willow: Begining of Season: Willow will take a little longer to
deal with
the death of her best friend, but soon will become the wrecking
ball she
always could be, taking over the role of ass-kicker in the SG.
Mid-Season: I think that the idea of Willow becoming corrupted
is being made
pre-maturely. While Willow is harnessing dark magic, she is still
remaining
humble and rather uncorrupt(as we saw in "The Gift",
she doesn't consider
herself a big gun). Willow is the SG's soul, and would never choose
Evil.
However, that doesn't mean Evil can't choose her...
End of Season: No matter what hurdles Willow deals with, corrupt
or
uncorrupt, Willow will overcome, and most likely will stay in
Sunnydale with
Tara and fight evil.
Anya: Begining of Season: Anya will be continuing to support to
Scooby Gang
in a non-combat fashion, still being the scooby gangs ties to
the ground and
keeping them from being over-heroic.
Mid-Season: Anya will have some ups and downs, due to her own
insecurities
about humanity and her tie to Xander.
End of Season: Anya will marry Xander and they will settle outside
Sunnydale.
Dawn: Early season: Dawn will take the longest to deal with Buffy's
death,
still deeply traumatised by the death of both her sister and Mother
in the
same year. She will most likely be staying with Xander and Anya,
or with
Giles, but still staying close with the equally traumatised Spike.
Mid-Season: Buffy's imminent return will effect Dawn's life big
time,
probably in that reality altering sort of way. Especially if her
beloved
sister returns as one of the bad guys.
End of Season: One of two things: In the event of Buffy's death,
Dawn is
inflicted with that pain once again, but she will live on, perhaps
going
with Xander and Anya to find her place in the world for herself.
Spike: Begining of Season: Spike will still be grieving, deeply
upset by the
death of the slayer, but he will remain strongly involved in the
fighting of
evil, probably in a suicidal way.
Mid-Season: Spike will be the first to re-act when Buffy returns,
probably
the first to notice Buffy's change, and being ostracised by the
SG for his
petty distrust, perhaps alligning himself with Doc and Evil Buffy,
perhaps
getting the romance with Buffy he always wanted.
End of Season: Spike only has three final destinies: 1) He dies,
which I
think is the most likely one, in which he will sacrafice himself
for the
good guys, perhaps earning the redemption he never asked for.
2) He resumes his evil ways and leaves Sunnydale or 3)Lives on
to find his
destiny, perhaps to be the new slayers' version of Angel.
Giles: Begining of season: reduced to re-ccuring status(sadly),
Giles will
be involved much less. Giles will be leading the SG in Buffy's
abscence, the
first to learn to carry on without her.
Mid-Season: He will be one of the most adversly affected by Buffy's
return,
probably being the only one to note the slightest change.
End of Season: Giles will most likely return to England in the
end, or
retire somewhere far away.
So that's my theory. It's pretty detailed around Buffy's ressurection,
which
is only one of a number of possible ways for the most powerful
slayer to
return. I'd prefer Buffy as a bad guy, since any other possibility
I can
think of would be too comic book resurection for me, and those
are always
rather cheesy. The SG dealing with one of thier own, particularly
thier
leader, as one of the bad guys seems to me the only interesting
idea that's
left.
Of course that's my opion(and preference), I could be wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The future of the Scooby gang(speculation and wishes
and theories for
next season) -- Rob, 12:03:18 05/29/01 Tue
All of your theories are interesting. My only problem with them
is the
premise that next year will be the last season. The UPN has ordered
44
episodes of "Buffy," or, in other words, 2 seasons for
now. Therefore, there
will at least be a sixth and a seventh, and maybe more beyond
that depending
on how successful the next 2 seasons are.
I do agree with you that the Scooby Gang will be maturing, moving
even
farther into adulthood. But I do not think that means they will
necessarily
separate. Season Four was all about how they were not all together
in high
school anymore, they were all facing new challenges and new friends,
which
threatened to split up their core group. By the end they were
able to
incorporate some of these new elements into their group, and learn
how to
best balance their new lives and priorities with their old friendships.
Having successfully acheived this, the Scooby Gang has become
more than a
group of friends: they are a true family. When Joyce died, every
member of
the group felt like their own mother had died. And in a way, she
was. Willow
and Xander looked up to her, as she seems to have been a better
and more
caring one than their own respective parents. Therefore, I think
they are
fated to remain together. Growing up, although to a certain extent,
implies
moving on from one level to another, does not necessarily mean
moving away.
There is also the business of saving the world. No Slayer has
lived to be
old. Few have lived past their young adult years. Perhaps Buffy's
death and
rebirth next year signifies the fact that she is the Slayer fated
to live to
an older age. That raises interesting questions about whether
Slayers, with
their superhuman powers, have the ability to live longer than
other people
(provided they do not die in a fight, of course). If Buffy returned,
could
she live to be an old woman (and if she did, would her powers
still be as
strong?).
I may have ventured away from my topic here, but what I'm trying
to say is
that Buffy (when she comes back to life, of course) and the rest
of the
Scoobs have the potential to fight evil for a very long time.
I'm sure they
would not split up because of that fact. All of them are dedicated
to saving
the world, and all of them know that, despite their entering their
adult
years, they do not have to abandon or leave the family they have
developed,
a family that is stronger and more closely knit than their birth
families.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> My own thoughts. -- vampire hunter D, 13:48:54 05/29/01
Tue
I find your speculations interesting, however, I see Willow as
the most
likely to become leader of the Scooby Gang in Buffy's absence.
She did this
before in "The Weight of the World" so we know she has
both the will and
ability do it.
Also, I find the possibility of any of the gang getting custody
of Dawn slim
at best [of course, I'm thinking in real world terms, and not
in Whedonverse
logic]. Therefore, I see Spike as being the the Scooby who keeps
the closest
relationship with her, perhaps wathing over her as a sort of
pseudo-guardian.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> My take on the 6th season (longish) -- Avatar 2001, 13:55:56
05/29/01 Tue
Remember that there are at least two more season of Buffy. And
I'm pretty
sure that UPN isn't ditching over 2 million a pop for a year of
Buffyless
Buffy.
As for a traitor inside the gang working for the Doc or another,
that's a
particularly god idea, and so is the resurrection of Buffy by
an evil
character giving her a certain moral ambiguity and separating
her from the
gang in particular Xander and Willow (and there significant others).
So how would my season be like?
Well, Buffy would return but she would do so without a full set
of
memories/marbles. Her actions won't be those we (and the SG) have
come to
expect over the last few years. Many times she simply won't care
refusing to
go in help of some people others she would appear out of control,
vicious
maybe even evil. To complicate matters further there will be also
be
evidences (prophecies) indicating that her return may bring forth
the
apocalypse, most of which substantiated with the fact that the
force behind
her resurrection would be none other that the First Evil (Angel
might have
to fight Buffy to get his prize, now that's something to keep
him thinking).
In short her body will have been violated, her spirit tainted,
her heart not
into it, and her mind gone.
Giles would have to leave for England (BBC mini-series) in order
to research
all the prophecies surrounding Buffy's return without arising
too much
suspicion from the Council that would certainly try to kill our
slayer if
they knew that she had been resurrected (much like the Knight
tried to do
with Dawn). He will also be visiting his family.
Xander would be too busy with work and the arrangements for his
weeding to
fight the good fight. He's too worried about his new status as
a family man,
not wanting to make the same mistakes as his father. Also he won't
trust
this new Buffy and her relationship with Spike and his support
for her will
not get her any points in Xander's book.
Dawn will obtain a parental divorce from Hank on the base of neglect
and
Spike will be acting as Dawn's surrogate father during the summer
fulfilling
his promise to Buffy. Expect to see a blushing vampire at the
local 7-11
buying tampons and Sunnydale's PTA meetings will never be the
same. With
Buffy's return this two will be the only ones that won't treat
her with
distrust. With her friends suspicious and her watcher gone Buffy's
only
support structure would be Spike (I'm a B/S shipper) and Dawn
this two will
believe in her even when the revelation about the power behind
her rebirth
leaves her doubting herself. They will represent another family.
But for this season I would make the traitor Willow, giving reason
to Tara's
fears and explaining how it was that her powers could grow so
fast (and why
her eyes became BLACK like the Doc's). Of course she would not
have
knowledge that she was doing evil, she would be either manipulate
or
possessed and she would honestly believe that her action were
for the best.
At the end of the year she would have to face up to her actions.
Karma is a
bitch and even the brightest souls can be tainted (and the darkest
purified,
like the love for Buffy did for Spike).
As you can see I used the cards from Restless and linked the characters
and
their changes to Buffy's own changes:
Spiritus - her Spirit, Willow will be tainted...
Animus - her Heart, Xander will no longer be in the fight filled
with
worries about his family...
Sophus... - her Mind, Giles will be gone...
And Manus - The Hand, herself will be chanced, her body violated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spike at a Sunnydale PTA Meeting - Priceless!
:) -- Brian,
06:15:59 05/30/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy and Xander -- Diana Michelle, 14:29:33 05/29/01
Tue
>Buffy: Early season: Buffy returns from the dead. Yeah, we
know that. But
how and why? Here's my theory:
Whedon doesn't do stupid things like having someone just kind
of pop back in
without rammification.<
*cough* Angel *cough*
>I believe that Buffy will be next years big bad, or perhaps
the decoy bad.<
Ouch, that would be interesting.
>Mid-Season: Buffy infliltrates the gang for Doc, acting probably
just like
herself, but secretly taking steps to cause trouble.
End of Season: Buffy's pure spirit will shine through, and she
will probably
die again, sacraficing herself not for the world, but for her
friends.<
This is where I have to disagree. Joss isn't going to kill Buffy
again.
>Xander: Begining of season: Xander will probably be one of
the earliest to
deal with Buffy's death and move on,<
I majorly disagree with this. Everyone else was starting the grieving
process when they saw Buffy's body, Xander was just completely
shocked and
disbelieving.
>He will also be preparing for his Marriage to Anya.<
This I agree with because I think that Xander will be trying to
distract
himself from his pain.
>End of Season: Xander will marry Anya and will take a much
deserved early
retirement from demon fighting and move out of Sunnydale and settle
down.<
I don't think that Xander will ever truly stop fighting. I think
that next
year, he'll throw himself into more than before.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"She saved the world a lot"--"Gift" spoilerage
-- Rob, 11:23:41 05/23/01 Wed
I just wanted to comment on how great I thought the ending shot
of the
gravestone was. It encompassed the dark humor of the show, b/c
in essence
"She saved the world a lot" it's a funny statement.
But it also is sad, it
being on a gravestone, and Buffy's nonetheless. What I think is
so great
about it is how personal that statement is. In fact, it sounds
just like one
of the Scoobies would talk, probably Willow, making it a very
personal
statement commemorating their deceased friend. The humor derives
from the
fact that someone who did not know her, viewing the gravestone,
might think
that this is just a figure of speech, when in fact, Buffy really
did prevent
worldwide apocalypse over and over again. Most touching is how
personal her
sacrifice was. To save the lives of everyone in the world, and
most
particularly her little sister, she killed herself rather than
kill her
sister. At the end of the second season, in order to save the
world, in
"Becoming," Buffy sacrificed her one true love for the
sake of the world.
This time however she will not do that. She will not sacrifice
her sister,
and even threatens to kill any one of her friends who tries. She
will
sacrifice herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "She saved the world a lot"--"Gift"
spoilerage -- spotjon, 13:55:12
05/23/01 Wed
I agree, the inscription on the gravestone really epitimized the
nature of
the show, its cosmic/supernatural aspects coupled with its dark
(but not too
dark) humor. I thought that it was great that they ended with
Buffy being
buried, and not just with showing her lifeless body. It really
enforces the
fact that she is dead, and not simply comatose.
"She will not sacrifice her sister, and even threatens to
kill any one of
her friends who tries."
I wonder, if it had come down to it, would Giles have killed Dawn?
I think
that of all the gang, Giles is the only one who would have actually
killed
Dawn. Spike promised to protect her, and the others care for her
too much.
Giles cares for her, but he realizes that Dawn is not actually
Buffy's
sister, and that hard choices somtimes need to be made. He's made
many in
his time. Giles would have sacrificed Dawn's life for the world,
even though
it meant his own, death, and probably a painful one at that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: "She saved the world a lot"--"Gift"
spoilerage -- rowan, 19:05:22
05/23/01 Wed
I agree. I think Giles would have done it. He was the only Scooby
to really
press the point home that it might need to be done (twice). The
only other
person I could see doing it would be Spike. I believe if Buffy
had asked him
to do it (chip or not and it would be interesting to see if harming
Dawn
would activate the chip), he would have.
But of course, it needn't have come to that, because Dawn (unlike
Ben) was
willing to sacrifice herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: "She saved the world a lot"--"Gift"
spoilerage -- Justin,
14:59:05 05/29/01 Tue
Hm...
You know, with that last look that Spike gave Dawn before he got
thrown off
the tower, I don't think he could have killed her. At some point
on this
board, someone went so far as to say that Spike didn't realize
that the true
love he felt was for Dawn. Even more so than Buffy.
By the way, Rowan, that description you gave a while back of the
great
moments of the episode were perfect. I had written an e-mail to
a friend in
which I chose all the same moments. And most of them weren't verbal,
but
were the incredible force of the way the characters looked at
one another.
Spike and Buffy at the threshhold. Dawn and Spike before he gets
thrown off
the building. And that one was so poignent and painful, it was
almost
indecent. It hurt!
Justin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: "She saved the world a lot"--"Gift"
spoilerage -- Avatar
2001, 16:48:38 05/29/01 Tue
I agree with you there is no way that Spike could've killed Dawn
nor do I
believe that Buffy would ever ask him to.
Even if she did I don't think that Spike would've have gone through
with it,
not just because he likes Dawn (nibblet) but because he would
know that
after that Buffy would never forgive him or herself
The future of Angel Investigations(specs,
wishes and theories about next
season) -- Unsung Hero, 10:54:19 05/29/01 Tue
Angel's got a few more seasons left, I imagine, but here's what
I'm thinking
and hoping we'll see next year.
Chances are, the threat will be more massive, upping the ante
and danger
levels for Angel Investigations. Now back to being a fighting
unit again,
Wesely will lead Angel, Cordelia, Gunn, The Host and Fred into
battling
evil, both massive demon gods and the evil within humanity. Wolfram
and Hart
will try thier apocalypse, Darla will almost certainly return
to plauge
Angel once again, and Lindsay, unable to bury the evil, will return,
but not
to Wolfram and Hart. Someone mentioned the Gypsies who cursed
Angel, I
certainly hope they return, as do the Watchers council, who should
be pretty
upset at Wesley teaming with a Vampire, taking out three of thier
tougher
members AND aiding the escape of rouge slayer Faith(who I'm sure
will do
something this year). I also believe that it's quite possible
that the
slayer who was called when Buffy bit the big one(and there is
one out there,
kids) will arrive in Sunnydale, probably lost and alone and perhaps
in
Annies shelter.
Angel will hopefully will go back to acting like himself. Angel's
been too
positive and happy at the end of Season 2, and hopefully he'll
brood again
and be the dark hero he's always been. Knowing the true face of
the creature
inside of him, he will begin to accept humanity, but his curse
prevents him
from being happy and content. He has to brood, or he's angelus.
But this
season, Angel will deal with the monster inside of him and cement
his
friendship with his allies, and possibly a romantic relationship
with Fred,
although it is doomed.
Cordelia will deal with the visions, perhaps toughened up by her
experiences
in Pylea, particularly in the area that she has gotten what she
thought she
always wanted, but didn't want it after all. Perhaps she and Gunn
will
further cement thier friendship, and perhaps more. Cordy may have
a vision
of the new slayer, who is going to need serious help.
Wesley will lead AI much better now, realising that his team is
in fact
expendable- any and all of them could die at any time, but this
is the risk
they take for saving the world, and saving souls. He will probably
get the
chance to act as Watcher for the new slayer, although not officially.
Gunn will be the rock of Jobraltor for AI, backing Angel up offensivly
and
still being the one you can count on to get things done. His decision
to
abandon his crew again should be explored some more, as well as
the conflict
that would exsist between the two teams.
The Host...well...if he even is a regular(which I hope and think
he will
be), The Host will continue to be in Caritas, however I imagine
he will find
himself being more and more useful in other areas.
Fred is another one that may or may not be a regular, but she
did walk into
Angel Investigations headquarters with the others at the end of
"There's no
place like plrtz glurb" and seemingly is going to be important
to Angel
himself. She will probably deal with an attraction to him, or
maybe Wesley,
and be the one who needs to catch up real quick on the groups
history, as it
will almost assuredly be a major part of the season.
I expect more and more action this season, Wolfram and Hart, Lindsay,
Darla
and Drucilla, The Watchers and The gypsies hopefully all will
supply pleanty
of bad guys for the season, as well as a more powerful threat(maybe
a senior
partner who isn't just a thing with a ring). I'm sure we'll get
a huge show
next season.
Oh...and is Angel going to be run on UPN like it was this season?
I don't
have the WB, so I really hope it's still going to be on Saturdays
at 9 on
UPN....any help?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The future of Angel Investigations(specs, wishes and
theories about
next season) -- verdantheart, 11:16:20 05/29/01 Tue
Angel was on WB this season and will be next season. It must be
syndicated
on your UPN station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The future of Angel Investigations(specs, wishes and
theories about
next season) -- maddog, 09:47:09 05/31/01 Thu
A quick note, there is no new slayer. When Buffy died the first
time Kendra
came. When Kendra was killed Faith came. So only Faith's death
would bring a
new slayer. I've already made this blunder once so I know all
about this
scenario. :)
RePost: Anya Questions... -- Rob,
12:11:43 05/29/01 Tue
I don't want to be annoying, but I posted this a while ago and
didn't get
many responses, because it got lost along with all "The Gift"
posts. I'm
still, though, really interested to see if any more people had
ideas about
this, so I'd appreciate any reponses. I thought with the season
done, you
guys might want to hearken back to an old topic. Thanks! :)
---------------------------------------------------------
Now, I know that this subject may be rather old, but I just recently
rewatched "The Wish," and I have a few questions about
Anya when she was a
demon. Now, the only episode I have ever missed was "Doppelgangland"
(damn
my crappy VCR...LOL), and some of my questions may have been addressed
in
that one, but I won't know unless it's ever rerunned somewhere
or those darn
DVDs ever come out.
But anyway, here it is. I was wondering how Anya's demon power
works. Now I
know the source of her power is the necklace, which she then places
on the
neck of the girl who wants to be avenged (Cordy in the instance
of "The
Wish.") My question, however, is, when does Anyanka decide
to take the
necklace back? When has the wish lasted the point where it is
time to
reclaim it?
I was surprised that Anyanka didn't reclaim it when Cordy was
drained by
VampWillow and VampXander...If she wouldn't do it when the wisher
was
killed, then when? By leaving the necklace there, she left it
susceptible to
be taken and later smashed by Giles. I don't fully understand
the logic in
that, or why she didn't at least attempt to take it from Giles
before he
called upon her. Since this necklace contains all the source to
her power
and its destruction would render her mortal again, wouldn't it
have been in
her best interest to get it back as soon as possible?
If anyone has any answers to this question, or any theories, if
the show has
never answered them, I'd be really appreciate some responses,
since these
questions have been kind of bugging me.
Many thanks,
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RePost: Anya Questions... -- Scott, 01:28:44 05/31/01
Thu
Anyanka puts the necklace on Cordy and Cordy wishs. Bizarro Land.
But, when
Giles figures it out, He has to summon Anyanka, to get the necklace
from
her. Cordy has the neclace but after the wish is granted, she
has a
worthless shell. The POWER necklace returns to Anyanka. Remember
that As
Anyanka is threating Giles the Necklace is glowing around her
neck and Giles
grabs it and breaks it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RePost: Anya Questions... -- Anthony8, 16:40:31 06/01/01
Fri
I think I posted a partial response to your query a few days back,
but for
some reason it got lost in transmission. Actually, the reason
Anya lost her
powers was secondary to Giles' destruction of her necklace. After
her
attempt to retrieve the necklace by enlisting Willow's help in
'Doppelgangland' failed, D'Hoffyrn refused to reinstate her as
a vengeance
demon citing her carelessness and the fact that her powers, in
any event,
were bestowed upon her by "lower" beings (hmmm...interesting,isn't
that the
same term the Oracles used to describe Angel?).
In case you're interested in finding out a blow-for-blow description
of what
happened in episodes (act-by-act scene descriptions, dialogue,
and all) that
you missed (or as in my case, only saw once and never got a chance
to tape),
you may want to check out the transcript site (http://psyche.kn-bremen.de/).
Alternatively, if you go to the shooting script site
(http://mustreadtv.com/buffyscripts/) you can see what did or
did not make
the final edit of each aired episode (a great example, cited in
another
thread, is Buffy referring to Dawn as her "sister..and daughter"
in WOTW).
Hope this was helpful.
A8
Willow as the strongest of the
group... -- Rob, 12:22:33 05/29/01 Tue
One of the small moments in "The Gift" that made the
episode absolutely
priceless for me was when Buffy told Willow that she was the strongest
one
in the gang. That just blew me away! Not that it isn't true, but
the fact
that Buffy has here, probably for the first time, admitted that
she is not
the true strong one in the group, but it is Willow. Willow was
as shocked
herself to hear it. Willow has always been the smartest of the
group
(intellectually, at least), but her character's strength was always
hidden
by her shyness and her endearingly silly use of words, her defense
mechanism
in keeping herself out of the center of attention. She is usually
very
low-key and is also sweet, but over the past years her powers
have been
growing (as a witch and a human being). While in "WOTW"
it was magic that
allowed her to enter Buffy's mind, it was Willow herself, not
the magic,
that ultimately talked Buffy into snapping out of her rut. Overcoming
huge
troubles and heartaches, such as her breakup with Oz, and even
more
significant, her need to take care of Tara, after Tara's meeting
with Glory
left her a pitiful shell of the person she once was, has strengthened
her
character. Taking care of her soulmate, having to give her medicine
and
become her caregiver, has made Willow an extremely strong person.
Her
protectiveness over Tara prompted her to perform magics which
hurt Glory.
She is in fact the first one in the group, Buffy included, to
even mildly
hurt Glory. Therefore, even though Glory did trounce her eventually
in that
fight, she was able to momentarily cause her pain. I marvel at
the changes
Willow has undergone over the years. She has gone from being the
geeky,
awkward young girl who excells at science and computers, to become
a strong,
self-assured woman who fiercely protects the one she loves and
has the power
to even harm a god when one of her loved ones is in danger. Like
Willow's
magic, her strength usually remains hidden as well. While she
still has the
same quiet demeanor she always has on the outside, on the inside
her power
can make her sometimes even stronger than the Slayer herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group... -- Froggy, 23:05:38
05/29/01
Tue
i absolutely agree with everything you say. You say it all :)
Willow rools!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group... -- Halcyon,
05:00:27
05/30/01 Wed
Willow may be strong magically but she is extremely reckless with
her
magical abilities witness Something Blue, Fear Itself, Forever
and Tough
Love for four prime examples of her reckless attitude towards
her magical
ability. Also she can sometimes be extremely bitchy towards people
particularly towards Anya, Cordelia and Faith before she went
off the deep
end.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group...
-- Kerry (with a y),
05:18:02 05/30/01 Wed
But it was Willow who took charge and got everyone organized
when buffy went catatonic.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group...
-- Rob, 08:45:19
05/30/01 Wed
I don't see Willow as being reckless. She has been fine tuning
her magic
abilities over the years. Sure, in "Something Blue,"
she went a little
overboard, but she was in a very emotional state at the time and
was not
thinking clearly. She has reached the point now where she can
handle
stronger magics, and try to control her emotions. The first time
she went up
against Glory in "Tough Love," yes it may not have been
wise b/c she could
have killed herself, but if she had not the SG never would have
known that
Willow could harm Glory, which proved pivotal in the final battle.
Willow
put the blocking spell on their "fort" in "Spiral,"
Willow revived Buffy in
"Weight of the World," Willow did the reverse brain
suck on Glory...Just b/c
she may have in the past been reckless with her magic does not
lessen the
strength of her powers...or her own inner strength.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group... -- change, 03:42:45
05/31/01
Thu
And best of all, she's becoming evil. She's going to be the big
bad either
this coming season or the next (IMO).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group... -- Halcyon,
04:24:13
05/31/01 Thu
Willow's attitude towards magic worries me. She seems to view
it as a toy
instead of something that has the potential to cause immense harm,
she has
seen numerous examples of how dangerous magic can be particularly
in the
hands of Ethan Rayne and Giles in his youth but she does not to
seem grasp
that somethings are better left off unused viz using dark magic
against
Glory in Tough Love. Would you give the equalivent of something
so powerful
to something with the viewpoint of the scientists in Jurassic
Park. To quote
from Jurassic Park " Just because you could, does not mean
you should". Tara
seems to have learnt this lesson, when will Willow grasp basic
principles of
the tool she is using?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow as the strongest of the group...
-- maddog, 09:35:00
05/31/01 Thu
I don't think she's using it as a toy, though she doesn't always
use it
wisely. I think she does realize how powerful she is, and Buffy
telling her
how strong she is backs that up. I think she does misuse it because
she gets
so emotional over certain things and decides she can fix it with
magic.
That's not toying with it, that's letting your emotions run your
life.
Buffy and Angel -- Maude & Betsy,
12:30:54 05/29/01 Tue
When oh when are Buffy and Angel going to get it on again!!!!
Spike has no
chance and Angel should(and could) kick his ass if he tries it
on again. The
funeral reunion was not enough. We know that Buffy and Angel still
love each
other..... WE WANT MORE PLEASE!!!
P.S. If Buffy is finished with Angel can we have him PLEASE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy and Angel -- Roger Edwards, 12:43:40 05/29/01
Tue
I too agree that the love between Buffy & Angel is as strong now
as it ever
was, but despite the fact that Buffy, at her mother's graveside
told Angel
that she wished he could stay forever, it could never be. These
two are the
original star crossed lovers and we must keep in mind the consequences
of
this couple's passion. The whole "will they wont they, should
they should
they not" saga is a big tease which keep us all on the edge
of our seats. As
long as it is acknowledged every now and then that each is still
special in
the other's heart, then we can ask for no more.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy and Angel -- Mishka, 12:15:41 05/30/01 Wed
True, they are the original star-crossed lovers, but its also
foolish to
think that anyone else could replace them for each other. Angel
gave up
mortality for the chance to save Buffy`s life, and Riley never
spoke a more
truthful line when he told Xander, "She doesn`t love me..."
Xander never
said anything, but you knew that he was thinking of Buffy with
Angel. I like
the plotline with Spike, but again, she may learn to love him
as a friend,
but it will never replace the destiny of the Angel/Buffy ideal.
They can`t
be together now, but its a constant tease that we know they will
be together
eventually. Probably not until the series finale, but at least
its there. We
always know in the back of our minds that in the end, apocalyse
or no, it
will be Buffy and Angel together saving the world and/or dying
together for
it. Its not a growing apart kind of love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy and Angel -- Casey M, 12:53:01 05/29/01 Tue
NO WAY. Angel is out the picture he has had enough already and
its Spikes
turn now. Anyway it adds a bit of spice to the programme, when
it was Angel
and Buffy this and Angel and Buffy that you always knew that there
would be
no passionate climax, where as with Spike we could see a bit of
action. He
deserves a tiny bit of love after all he has done for the Slayer
and the
Scooby Gang. Just a thought wouldn't it be interesting if Angel,
Buffy &
Spike .......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy and Angel -- Naomi, 06:03:29 05/30/01 Wed
The problem with reuniting Buffy and Angel(aside from the fact
they have
different lives and shows now)is that it is inevitable that after
a few
seasons their love would stagnate. Many other shows have been
forced to
break couples up in order to keep tension and interest in a pair
of
"star-crossed" lovers(eg Friends,Dawsons Creek). Personally
the reason Spike
and Buffy appeal to me more is because the two of them could in
my opinion
keep our interest more than Buffy and Angel who aside from kissing
and and
telling each other how much they love each other can't actually
do much. You
can bet that Spike and Buffy will be constantly arguing and making
up which
makes for better drama than slushy scenes between Buffy and Angel.
Besides
Spike has more in commom with Buffy than we might think. The two
of them
despite of Buffy's protests both get off on violence(check out
"The I in
team" for conformation of this). Spike is also more clued
in than Angel on
the modern world and often uses pop culture references. Aside
from Buffy's
slaying duties Buffy and Angel didn't exactly have much to talk
about.
Demon Dimensions -- Destiny,
16:56:04 05/29/01 Tue
Demon Dimensions. Question - how they hell? When Angel was sucked
into
Acathla's mouth and later returns, Giles says he was in hell,
a world of
torment, made up of these demon dimensions. But can Pylea really
be
considered hell? Yes, humans are regarded as cows and slave animals,
but you
could be happy there. Fred was driven crazy by it, but is this
the fault of
her own unstable mind or the effect of being in a dimension that
has been
specified as hell and therefore must be eternal torment for humans?
Will Cordy's handing over of the kingdom to the grusalog(spelling?)
actually
accomplish anything in the way of progression, or will Pylea stay
as it is
because it has been predetermined to be hell? Furthermore, what
if reform is
possible? Is Pylea then hell? If so, this would require a very
specific
religious defintion of hell that is not constant with Giles' description
of
eternal torment. Or are there multiple dimensions of heaven as
well? Can a
demon dimension become part of heaven? Does access to it then
change? It is
possible that Angel, Cordy, Wesley and the Host could have ended
up in
heaven? What does this mean for Angel, given his lack of a soul?
Sorry for the digression. Opinions on any of it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Demon Dimensions -- verdantheart, 06:31:23 05/30/01
Wed
Perhaps it's just a different dimension rather than a demon dimension.
If
there are "hell" dimensions and/or "paradise"
dimensions, why should there
not be more than one "intermediate" dimension (such
as Earth)? That said,
Lorne would consider Pylea hell because it has no music; come
to think of
it, I would too.
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Demon Dimensions -- Lazarus, 11:17:34 05/30/01
Wed
But they did have lots of nifty dancing, though... lol
Question about souls -- Kerri,
17:56:09 05/29/01 Tue
Ok-bear with me here-I'm not exactly sure how to put my ideas
into words,
but I'll try to make this sound as coherent as possible.
To me a soul is the essence of a person's being, but in buffyverse
it seems
to be something different, something more. The soul is presented
as an
actual thing, something concrete, almost tangable. The soul can
be captured
and manipulated-(as we know from Angel).
It seem, but to me this isn't really clear, that a person is born
with their
soul.
So then, does Dawn have a soul?
Did she have one when the monks first created her?
If so where did it come from?
But if not, is it possible that as she grew, and became more human
through
love and her relationship with Buffy that Dawn developed a soul?
Apply this then to Spike. Could his infatuation/love for Buffy
have caused
him to develope a soul-maybe not the same one that his human self
had but a
new one?
Theories? Ideas? Comments? Please.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question about souls -- cknight, 18:32:54 05/29/01 Tue
I agree with you. Spike does have a soul and
next season he's going to go through hell all season,
but by the end of the season he'll end up with Buffy.
But also, and I hope it's not true I heard that Spike
is going to be moving to LA. The actor's name was already
added to the cast list for Angel. Though that was before
the UPN deal was done.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Don't judge a book by it's bumpy faced cover. -- Rufus,
18:57:06 05/29/01
Tue
I'll give you the last thing that Joss said on the soul:
JW: "Essentially souls are by their nature amorphous but
to me it's really
about what star you are guided by. Most peopld, we hope, are guided
by, you
should be good, you're good, you feel good. And most demons are
guided
simply by the opposite star. They believe in evil, they believe
in causing
it, they like it. They believe it in the way the people beieve
in good. So
they can love someone, they can attach to someone, they can actually
want to
do things that will make that person happy in the way the know
they would.
they way Spike has sort of become, an example is Spike obviously
on Buffy,
is getting more and more completely conflicted. But basically
his natural
bent is towards doing the wrong thing. His court's creating chaos
where as
in most humans, most humans, is the opposite, and that's how I
see it. I
believe it's king of like a spectrum, but they are setting their
course by
opposite directions. But they're all sort of somewhere in the
middle."
So to understand what the soul is in the Buffyverse you have to
first not
assume it's the same as you may believe in real life. You have
to figure out
what Joss means. He has said as much as it is a guide a direction
that you
naturally lean towards but may, due to your actions end up going
the
opposite directions on the spectrum of good and evil.
I'll deal with Dawn first. The monks moulded the matter of the
Key into a
human form. The key is now human....I take that to mean she also
has a human
soul. But what truly shapes Dawn is the people around her. Her
actions at
the end of The Gift are directly motivated by what Buffy would
normally do.
I think that the monks were smart in putting the key in the best
nurturing
situation for the new human with a new soul. They may have built
Dawns
memories but it's her direct experiences of life and death that
shaped her
conscience to tell her that she must close the portal. Even if
it turns out
that Dawn doesn't have a soul it doesn't matter as I judge Dawn
by her
actions not just by a soul. The soul in the Buffyverse isn't a
guarantee of
a good person or demon just a start.
Now to go to Spike. If you look at vampires as blood and death
addicts then
you have to look at the vampire Spike has become. That of course
is strongly
determined by the human Spike used to be. Darla told Angel: "What
we once
were informs all that we become. The same love will infect our
hearts - even
if they no longer beat. Simple death won't change that."
I take that to mean that even though the vampire is without a
soul, the
person they once were still has input in how the vampire acts
out towards
others. Spike had always been bad news, the big bad, but something
happened
to him that took him out the the killing game. The chip only acts
as a
behavioral leash. Spike could have still continued to create chaos
by proxy,
which for the longest while he did. Think Yoko Factor and Out
of My Mind.
But in Out of my Mind, Spike found out one truth, he could still
be infected
by love. Now the love he has for Buffy is the sole reason he is
doing
anything at this time.
To say that the soul makes one better or is the only reason that
a being
will be good makes no sense given the behavior of the humans we
see all the
time in the Buffyverse. But the lack of a soul does predispose
the vampire
to desire evil, but it's not the only influence. The vampire is
a demon
human hybrid so is strongly influenced by the person the vampire
once was in
life. This would explain his ability to attach to Buffy but still
at the
same time rip off Xander and do other petty crimes. What the result
of the
influence of love has to the future of Spike with Buffy dead I
don't know.
But there is still Bitty Buffy to take care of.
So the best think I can say is that to understand the Buffyverse
throw out
your preconceptions on the soul based upon your current beliefs.
Try to
figure out what Joss means by the soul based upon the actions
of the
characters of his show. Just when you are sure of something in
the
Buffyverse, Joss throws out another curve. We have been shown
that the soul
is the auto pilot that directs the souled towards good acts, the
souless
have an autopilot pointed in the direction of evil. But both souled
and
unsouled start in the middle, their actions determining the type
of person
or being they are. Both can start at the same point in the middle
of the
spectrum, and both can loose their natural direction. So as humans
can
become evil by their actions you have to ask can demons become
good by their
actions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Don't judge a book by it's bumpy faced cover.
(Long and sometimes
a bit off topic) -- Lazarus, 21:37:48 05/29/01 Tue
"So as humans can become evil by their actions you have to
ask can demons
become good by their actions?"
We've repeatedly seen "demons" in the Buffyverse who
are "good" (although
primarily on AtS, i.e. Doyle, The Host, etc.), and humans who
are "evil"
(Emily Post, the lawyers at Wolfram and Hart). I think part of
the problem a
lot of people have with this issue, however, stems from trying
to decide
just what comstitutes "Good" or "Evil" in
some of the greyer areas in the
Buffyverse. To cite a recent example, in The Host's world we have
a planet
full of "demons" (a term which I'm getting rather sick
of being used to
describe just about any intelligent being in the Buffyverse that
isn't
human) who, in the normal course of their lives, subjugate a large
segment
of their population into abject slavery (an "evil" act).
Now where in the
world would Joss come up with a crazy idea like that? Oh, yeah...
A rather
nasty, but sadly recurrent theme in human (Good AND souled by
definition in
the Buffyverse) history. And, it seems to me that Joss is implying
that
"Demons", by definition, completely lack that mysterious
bundle of mystical
mojo commonly referred to as a "soul", and therefore
"They believe in evil,
they believe in causing it, they like it." Yes, we have seen
many of his
"Demons" being almost undeniably "evil". (Remember
The Scourge? Demons who
believed in racial purity to the point of exterminating all demons
not of
pure (by their definition) demon blood? Something that "good"
and "souled"
humand would never be a party to...)
Sorry about the rambling, but I hope you might be beginning to
see my point,
that "Good", Evil", "Souled", and "Unsouled"
seem in general to be pretty
malleable terms, both in the Buffyverse and IRL. For example,
are "Demons"
considered automatically evil (by humans)because their personal
interests
are not always for the good of humanity but for their own? If
so, that seems
to be a rather racially-centric view. Humanity, at least the seeming
few who
are aware of the existence of a whole multitude of other intelligent
beings
in the multiverse, seem to have little or no regard for the hapiness
or
well-being of these "Demons", so why should the "Demons"
give two figs about
humans? Again, I'm not denying that many "Demons" commit
acts that most
people would consider "Evil", but don't humans commit
just as many? If
Joss's reasoning for calling "Demons" "Evil"
is that their interests are
self-derving, then should the label not equally apply to humans
in general?
I've wandered quite a bit here, and I apologise, but it's one
of the main
things (and just about the only thing) that bothers me about the
Buffyverse.
The idea that a being (i.e. Spike) can not be truly "Good"
because he lacks
a "Soul" is rather blind considering the ambiguity the
Buffyverse displays
in general on the subject.
And just in case I haven't veered from topic enough in this post,
I see an
interesting parallel between the Human/Demon conflict in the Buffyverse
and
the Isreali/Arab conflict in the middle-east. In both cases, you
have an
entrenched population (Demons/Arabs) being ousted from their home
of long
standing by newcomers (Humans/Isrealis) and trying desperately
to regain
what was theirs originally (and being vilified by many for that).
It's a
theme that has played out many timed in history IRL, and the side
of "Good"
is rarely apparent, if the term even really applies in most cases.
Who is
right? The original/long standing inhabitants, or the interlopers?
And what
then happens when the interlopers decendants are the long standing
residents
and the original inhabitant's decendents decide they want back
what is
"theirs"? Who is "Good" and who is "Evil"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> hee hee... emily/gwendolyn post confusion --
dan, 20:30:29 05/30/01
Wed
chuckle, chuckle... You meant to say *Gwendolyn* Post, aka everyone's
favorite evil fake watcher. *Emily* Post is perhaps better known
by her nom
de plume, Miss Manners.
although some might argue that etiquette columnists are kinda
evil... ;->
-d
ps - nice post, by the way!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: hee hee... emily/gwendolyn post confusion
-- Lazarus,
20:41:19 05/30/01 Wed
Oops... My bad... lol... I'm a little under the weather today...
Must have
had a bit of brain fog there...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> No foggier than I.....I never noticed
the mistake........:):)
-- Rufus, 20:56:53 05/30/01 Wed
I just automatically translated it into the correct name.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Don't judge a book by it's bumpy faced cover.
(Long and
sometimes a bit off topic) -- keth, 12:11:35 06/01/01 Fri
Great analysis. However, I don't see the demon/human conflict
as being quite
parallel to the Arab/Isreali conflict.
Yes, the demons were somehow kicked out of Buffy's demension,
but there
doesn't seem to be any concerted pan-demon effort trying to retake
it.
Granted, we don't know how much popular demon support the Scurge
might have
had, and according to the Host there do seem to be some religous
movements
to that effect (Happy Aniversary). But most demons that we've
seen tend to
be looking for more personal power or chaos-for-the-sake-of-chaos.
The slayer is constantly at war, but she normally doesn't face
an organized
enemy. Rather, she seems to be protecting humanity and the world
as we know
it by fighting a variety of demons who have a variety of agendas.
So my point is that while I agree with you on the ambiguity of
"good" and
"evil" in the jossverse, it doesn't seem to really be
a fight over territory
so much as a fight over conflicting life-styles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Lifestyles????? -- LoriAnn, 15:16:44 06/01/01
Fri
"So my point is that while I agree with you on the ambiguity
of "good" and
"evil" in the jossverse, it doesn't seem to really be
a fight over territory
so much as a fight over conflicting life-styles."
The difference between human and demon can't be reduced to "lifestyles"
any
more than the difference between humans and fish can be summed
up as fish
choose to live in the water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Don't judge a book by it's bumpy faced cover.
-- LoriAnn, 13:44:18
05/30/01 Wed
Rufus, Read the first sentence of Joss's quote carefully again.
I think he's
blowing smoke or smoking blow, one or the other. All he says about
souls is
that they do not have a form, they're amorphous. Then he says,
"but,"
indicates a change of direction or contradiction, "it's really
about. . .."
What's really about. . .? He says "it" is. Since he
was writing about
"souls," plural, what's this "it"? The rest
of the quote seems to be about
"it" and not about "souls" at all. He seems
to be saying that "souls,"
whatever they are, play little part in "it," probably
good and evil in the
Buffyverse. He is more speaking about natures: human nature means
an
orientation toward good, demon nature toward evil. Yet, someone,
it may have
been Lazarus, gave several excellent examples of demons, some
of whom were
considered evil by other demons, doing the same mega-evil things
humans do
at humanity's lowest. Joss seems to clearly be using demons to
show human
evil; demons actions are a reflection of us at our worst. That
is, he is
using demons the same way Gene Roddenberry used alien cultures
to make
points about Earth cultures. I think I'm giving myself a headache.
Demon possession, as in vampires, seems to be more a numbing of
conscience
and relaxing of inhibitions than anything else. This numbing and
relaxing
give the demon an opportunity to influence greatly the former
human's
actions. Add that to an overwhelming physical need for blood,
preferably
human, and, voila, we have a vampire. Is any of this how JW would
explain a
vampire? I haven't a clue, but I think it makes more sense than
all the
puzzling over souls does.
It seems to me that Joss was saying in the quote that this isn't
really
about souls at all. One wonders if he regrets ever having brought
the term
up in relation to the Buffyverse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Don't judge a book by it's bumpy faced cover.
-- Rufus,
17:58:19 05/30/01 Wed
Actually the answer Joss gave was in reaction to a question about
the role
of the soul in the vampire and if it was a conscience. The reply
is telling
in that he says it is a direction but not destiny, it's the choices
the
indvidual makes that decides just how evil or good they will be.
This is in
contrast to fans who have projected their own definitions of the
soul onto
the vampire in the Buffyverse. You can't do that, you have to
go by the
definition the writers give and show you by characters actions.
The souls importance is that it is the instinctual nature of the
being, be
they souled or unsouled, but it's not impossible of either to
change sides.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The Soul -- Rufus, 21:36:01 05/29/01 Tue
I went back to one of the previous posts to find what I thought
of when I
consider the soul. It was Solitudes post on Existentialism in
the
Buffyverse. We have put a lot of import on the soul but what we
have been
shown makes one pause. In the Buffyverse we were told that the
vampire was
souless and evil, period. In existentialism we are taught that
"existence
preceeds essence" in Solitudes words "the bottom line
of existentialism (or
at least one of them) is that you start out with a clean slate,
and what
youd determines who you are. Your existence defines you essence."
I think
that is important when you consider human and demon in the Buffyverse,
it
also explains Buffys method to her slaying. Buffy kills the threat,
she lets
their actions determine what she does with them. She has let Spike
live
because some of his actions have shown her that it would not be
the right
thing to kill him. Now if you only see Spike as a souless being
that has to
be killed because of it's souless state then you have to wonder
who the
monster is. When it comes to Dawn, Buffy doesn't care if Dawn
has a soul,
she only loves her sister. Buffy cares about the person Dawn not
the state
of Dawns soul. Dawns actions have been that of a normal teenaged
girl. In
the Gift she showed that she understood sacrifice and was willing
to die to
save the world. So to me her actions are the thing that influences
how I
feel about her. Same with Spike, if he was still happily killing
I'd say
slay him, but his current actions tell me that he has a value
that I never
thought existed before. I also have to wonder if Joss is saying
something
about prejudice when we get into arguements about the soul being
the only
measure of value in a being.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Soul -- purplegrrl, 09:50:07 06/04/01 Mon
***I also have to wonder if Joss is saying something about prejudice
when we
get into arguements about the soul being the only measure of value
in a
being.***
Excellent, Rufus. You may have gotten right to the heart of the
matter.
Joss' "life messages" are much, much subtler than that
other oft quoted
"morality" show, Star Trek (the orginial, not the subsequent
spin-offs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question about souls -- verdantheart, 06:26:28 05/30/01
Wed
My take is this. The soul is the motivating force within a creature
that is
the basis of that creature's actions.
In the case of a human, that motivating force tends naturally
toward the
light; in the case of a demon, it tends toward darkness. However,
I do
believe there *is* such a motivating force within demons/vampires,
but
because it is not a *human* soul, they are called "soulless".
How else do we
explain Angel? He has a human soul, yet has a demon component
(which we even
saw embodied in Pylea) which continues to torment him and push
him toward
darkness. My argument is that this demon component is the demon
counterpart
for a soul.
For Spike, this demon soul has been influenced by his love for
Buffy. His
natural tendency to move toward darkness has been modified. Can
we explain
this? Miracles are difficult to explain; love is difficult to
explain.
In the case of Dawn, because the key is energy, I don't see why
that energy
itself could not serve as her soul. After all, she *is* the key.
I find that
idea interesting, anyway. How would it make her different from
ordinary
humanity?
Anyway, that's my 2 cents.
- vh
Don't Worry everyone..the sixth
season is going to be 5x5 -- cknight,
18:41:27 05/29/01 Tue
I think Buffy will be tainted next season. But with her supposed
death FAITH
will return to Sunnydale to become the slayer she was suppose
to be. Of
course no one will trust her...but she'll be the one to see the
evil in
Buffy and in a cool twist she'll be the one who pulls Buffy back
to the
good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Ohh, I'd *love* to see that. -- Wiccagrrl, 20:56:05 05/29/01
Tue
Actually, I was hoping they'd bring Faith back this season to
help Angel
when he lost his way (total war Angel fans notwithstanding ;))
I think a lot
will depend on ED's schedule, and if she wants to and is able
to come back
for a while. But I do think there is more story left to be told
about Faith.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love* to see that. -- Halcyon, 04:53:45
05/30/01 Wed
Given that Faith has only been in jail for just over a year I
doubt that she
would be released so soon particularly after the crimes she committed
in LA
and Sunnydale.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love* to see that. -- Naomi, 06:44:38
05/30/01 Wed
I would personally love to see Faith back slaying vampires. After
all how
much use is she in jail? Perhaps the Watchers Council could pull
some
strings. After all whats the point of them if they don't have
some power in
the world?
Maybe I'm reading to much into this but I find it interesting
that Faith has
been portrayed as good in Buffy's dream and of course she is eventually
reformed. Maybe Faith's dreams of Buffy being evil will also turn
out to be
true. The two girls both have more power than the majority and
the potential
to be good or bad so perhaps it's Buffy's turn to go off the rails
and the
two slayers can propehcise each others future actions. Anyone
agree or am I
just reading to much into this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love* to see that. -- OnM,
08:20:08 05/30/01 Wed
Don't see Buffy doing the darkness route at this time, more the
Bodisattva
(sp?) route if anything, which is what I have always suspected
Tara of
being. So to a certain extent I see future Buffy as more Tara-like,
with a
sort of internal assuredness. This, of course, doesn't mean she
won't
continue to kick Evil's scaly little backside at regular intervals,
she's
just going to be more self-assured.
I am certainly hoping they find an intelligent and creative way
to get Faith
out of the slammer. There is just too much unfinished interaction
due
between her and Buffy, and Buffy's sacrifice might provoke interesting
emotional reactions. Awe? Envy? Sorrow? A greater feeling of personal
unworthiness? Always hard to say for sure with Faith. Here's hoping
ED isn't
too busy making movies next year!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love* to see that.
-- maddog, 09:06:43 05/30/01
Wed
I can't see Faith coming back either. Getting her out on parole
this soon
wouldn't make any sense at all unless she's going to break out
and become a
repeat bad guy. What we should expect (because Joss is so good
with
continuity) is another new slayer. The first two times Buffy died
we ended
up with Kendra and Faith. The question remains as to if that slayer
will
find her way to the Scoobies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love* to see
that. -- Darrick, 09:25:57
05/30/01 Wed
Buffy didn't die twice. The first time Buffy died, we ended up
with Kendra.
Then when Kendra died, Faith appeared. It's not clear whether
both Buffy and
Faith can "produce" new slayers. I tend to think that
it's just Faith who
can make a new Slayer with her death. Who knows though, anything
is
possible.
As for Faith, I don't think it's clear what she was actually convicted
of.
It could be anything from assault to murder. As far as I know,
the show has
never stated what charges were brought against her, nor what she
was
convicted of. Even if she confessed to murdering the professor
in season 3,
we can't be sure if the Mayor suppressed that evidence or not.
Confession,
by itself, may not have been enough to convict her of murder.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love*
to see that. -- Naomi, 09:42:43
05/30/01 Wed
Sorry but I can't see a new slayer coming into the series as it
has it has
already been done twice. Both times it was interesting with Kendra
representing the rigidly obidient side of slaying and Faith representing
the
dark sie of slaying or power being corrupted. Is there really
a new story to
tell in that area. Anyway logically I can't see a new slayer being
called as
surely Faith is the official slayer and Buffy has already techniqely
died
and been replaced.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love*
to see that. -- Malandanza,
12:51:45 05/30/01 Wed
"As for Faith, I don't think it's clear what she was actually
convicted of.
It could be anything from assault to murder. As far as I know,
the show has
never stated what charges were brought against her, nor what she
was
convicted of. Even if she confessed to murdering the professor
in season 3,
we can't be sure if the Mayor suppressed that evidence or not.
Confession,
by itself, may not have been enough to convict her of murder."
Faith is younger than Buffy, right? She never went through the
Slayer
Killing test by the council (she may have turned 18 while working
for the
mayor or while in a coma, but she may have been a minor at the
time of the
crimes). Add to that, that she is clearly mentally unstable (especially
if
she talked of accidentally stabbing the mayor's assistant because
she
thought he was a vampire) so her confession may be suspect --
and thrown out
on appeal. What does that leave her charged with? Beating up a
pimp? I tend
to think that she is in a maximum security prison because she
was charged
with murder, but it seems to me that the murder charge would be
the easiest
to overturn (how well did the Sunnydale police keep evidence?)
I think a
reasonable case could be made for releasing her -- even a public
defender
might be able to get her out of prison.
Another concern is whether or not the WC wants her back -- or
if they'll
just send assassins in to kill her while she is in prison (if
Buffy's death
does not result in another slayer, Faith's will -- and the council
just
might prefer a new slayer to a tainted one with every reason to
despise
them.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh, I'd *love*
to see that. -- Darrick,
18:03:33 05/30/01 Wed
Malandanza,
Excellent points. I think it's clear that the writers have left
themselves a
great deal of wiggle room if Ms. Dushku has time for the show.
The point
about Sunnydale police is well-made. Corruption must be the norm
if the
mayor was running the place for all those years. I'm not sure
on what
grounds an appeal might be sought, but there are many opportunities
to bring
back Faith.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ohh,
I'd *love* to see that. -- Cee, 04:50:59
05/31/01 Thu
If Faith is to return, one way or another, i can see her in an
Angel
storyline rather than a Buffy one at least at first. My thoughts
about a new
slayer are null and void in the Buffy dept, she died, is officially
dead to
the "powers that be" and only Faiths death will ressurrect
a new one.
How Buffy will be returned to "our dimension" who knows,
but i will enjoy
the anticipation as we wait to find out the outcome, maybe Dawn
will be the
link, as she gets to grips with who she is, maybe she will find
a way using
her power and knowledge to help her sister, she tried with her
Mother, who
knows, pure speculation, we could all go on about until the first
airing of
the new season...
Look Between Spike and Dawn --
Justin, 18:56:49 05/29/01 Tue
I have to say this again because where else can I vent this?
Sublime. You know, in the classical sense of involving death and
terror and
stuff?
There was too much power in that one moment, and I think it almost
killed
me. I had to pause the tape and sort of dance around the room
for a while. I
always love the one-liners in Buffy. But as Rowen has said below,
the most
powerful moments in the final episode were the quiet moment when
Spike steps
across the thresh-hold and the look that Spike and Dawn share
that, I'm
sorry, is just almost indecent. How can you portray that kind
of pain and
fear and love all in one moment. That's why I had to dance around.
Too
terrible to sit still. Next season I want Spike to get to tenderly
hold Dawn
and comfort her so he can see she's still alive and he's still
alive and
also I want an apology written to ME for doing writing that was
too
terrible.
And whose fault is it? I mean it was mostly Joss I'm sure but
JM and M(can't
recall her last initial) really made this season, I think. I've
just been
blown away by poignancy too many times. I think Joss wrote a Hamlet
of a
part for JM this season, and he was brilliant. And I'm with Rowen
that I
don't know if the soul mate FEELING that you get from Spike and
Dawn is
intentional or just chemistry that makes you have to hide behind
the couch.
Justin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Jazz, 03:53:29 05/30/01
Wed
I was re-watching Season 3 Buffy over the weekend, and your post
reminded me
very strongly of a scene in 'I Only Have Eyes For you':
Angel's mansion garden, night. Dru is having one of her visions,
watched by
Spike, sitting in front of her in his wheelchair, and Angel, behind
her.
Angel then comes to her, kneels, runs his fingers up the front
of dress,
tauntingly jibing at Spike. And the look on Spike's face! Oh,
lordy, that
one look spoke such volumes. Hatred for Angel, anger and bitterness
at both
Angel and Dru, and hurt, baffled love! Who said vampires couldn't
love!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Halcyon, 06:01:50
05/30/01 Wed
I think you mean Angelus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Jazz, 06:40:46
05/30/01 Wed
I stand corrected! Thanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- maddog, 08:30:51 05/30/01
Wed
The other moment that just spoke volumes without words was that
moment when
Dawn realized what Buffy was about to do. That look on Dawn's
face, the way
her eyes just got so big. That was powerful in itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- rowan, 10:09:20 05/30/01
Wed
"There was too much power in that one moment, and I think
it almost killed
me."
"How can you portray that kind of pain and fear and love
all in one moment.
That's why I had to dance around. Too terrible to sit still."
Yes! You've expressed this so well. I felt the same way -- it
was so
great/uncomfortable/moving that I just couldn't even sit still
to watch it.
I finally know what the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand
words"
actually means, because that look was worth 1,000 words. I was
floored that
two actors could convey so much in seconds without saying anything
beyond,
"no!"
I'm not sure if it's the characters, or the way MT and JM play
them. I
suspect that alot of it is MT & JM, because they seem to have
really great
chemistry with alot of the other actors as well. Granted, they're
lucky,
too, because they have gotten rather flashier roles than some
of the others
(as you say, JM has gotten a Hamlet of a part), but...wow, have
they
definitely lived up to the roles that they've been given.
"Next season I want Spike to get to tenderly hold Dawn and
comfort her so he
can see she's still alive and he's still alive."
Yes, me, too, and then I feel silly for getting so involved with
two
characters. But I really want them to be able to comfort each
other, because
they both seem so totally consumed with guilt and pain.
I love this show.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Cactus Watcher,
13:08:13 05/30/01
Wed
If Spike starts holding Dawn too tenderly, Buffy won't need any
magic to
come back from the grave. Spike will be lucky if she beats only
him to a
pulp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Yipe! -- Cactus Watcher, 13:15:12 05/30/01 Wed
Make that - Spike will be lucky if she only beats him to a pulp.
Sorry!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Yipe! -- Qwerty, 19:15:45 05/30/01
Wed
Buffy met Angel when she was 16.
Dawn is 15. Do the math.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Yipe! -- Cactus Watcher, 21:39:32
05/30/01 Wed
Buffy's mother was living in Bizarro. Buffy is horrendously overprotective
of Dawn. Do the math yourself!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yipe! -- Tom, 23:44:20
05/30/01 Wed
All Spike has to is wait one or two, or at the most three to four
years.
Vampires don't age.
Buffy met Angel when she was 16. Had sex with him at 18.
The show has been renewed for at least two years. Would make a
great season
final.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yipe! -- Cactus
Watcher, 06:00:55 05/31/01 Thu
Of course Dawn and Spike can fall in love. The show is part soap
opera,
people. The question is how do all the others within the show
react to that.
If Dawn and Spike do fall in love, certainly Xander, Giles and
Buffy, when
she returns, aren't going to like it one little bit. A Dawn and
Spike couple
would have to hide their relationship very well to start with,
which, of
course, would lead to great moments when they were caught. It
wouldn't
happen, but imagine an urn on Dawn's mantle 20 years down the
road with the
inscription - Beloved vampire, he got beat up, a lot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Just add Blood
-- Brian, 13:20:56 05/31/01 Thu
Hmmm - I wonder if Dawn had Spike's ashes in an urn that all she
would have
to do is add blood, and like Dracula, Spike would be up and punning.
Of
course, if she added her own Key rich blood to the mix, Spike
might come
back as an even more mutli-dimensional guy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- mundusmundi, 13:58:38
05/30/01 Wed
This may seem like a strange analogy, but the Spike/Dawn relationship
reminds me a little of a fairly recent movie called *Beautiful
Girls.* It's
an okay flick that either sends up or pays homage to faux macho
bonding and
commitment issues (depending on your POV), but all the best scenes
involve a
sweet friendship between Timothy Hutton and Natalie Portman's
characters.
Hutton's this 30-something guy who returns home for his high school
reunion,
and Portman (who was around 13 at the time) plays his neighbor
who
represents a kind of impossible ideal girl for him. In a totally
platonic
way, they're very much in love with each other, and that's what
comes
through to me re: Spike & Dawn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- rowan, 16:18:04
05/30/01 Wed
Yes! What a great parallel! I remember that movie!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Good analogy mundusmundi! -- AK-UK, 16:26:25 05/30/01
Wed
I've been very wary of people who say they can see a sort of S/D
ship
forming, but now I can see what they are getting at. For Spike,
Dawn is
someone who understands him and accepts him. She doesn't try to
change him,
in fact there are moments when she enjoys hearing about his evilness.
She
is, like him, something that wears the face of humanity to disguise
their
true nature. Couple to this the fact that Dawn is supposed to
have some of
Buffy inside her, and you can tell why Spike feels so close to
her (and why
she feels close to him, as he accepts her too....and he is a lot
of fun to
be around, and he is "cute") It's not sexual for Spike,
because Spike just
would not be able to view her that way......but it is something
different to
a friendship/family bond. Maybe Spike has fallen in love with
her
emotionally/spiritually, but not physically? Like in the film?
Oh boy......it makes a Spike/Buffy ship look a whole lot simplier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Aquitaine,
18:30:37 05/30/01 Wed
***...but it is something different to a friendship/family bond.
Maybe Spike
has fallen in love with her emotionally/spiritually, but not physically?
Like in the film? ... Oh boy......it makes a Spike/Buffy ship
look a whole
lot simpler.***
Which is interesting because a 'child' is usually a complication
to any
relationship. Here, Dawn is positioned as the facilitator, the
enabler of
any potential relationship. Moreover, Buffy has explicitly told
Dawn that
she must take care of her surrogate family. What a splendid role
reversal!
This entire season has been all about 'protecting' Dawn, after
all.
I agree with those who have noted the unsettling depth of feeling
behind the
single look Spike and Dawn exchange. I have heard a couple of
theories
regarding a possible blood connection between the two and have
my own
theory/wish on this subject. Regardless of whether the bond between
Spike
and Dawn is one forged of like spirits or like DNA, the bond seems
preternaturally profound and their shared 'love', at least to
date, is free
from the traditional complications of friendship and family obligations.
And, of course, the chemistry between MT and JM makes the relationship
as
tangible as it is unlikely.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Look Between Spike and Dawn -- Cynthia,
21:01:46 05/30/01
Wed
Most of the time we have a family, sometimes we make one.
The love of siblings or a father/child is as powerful and profound
as
romatic love. Knew this is my head when I was childless, know
in my heart
how that I'm a mom. And these relationship are no less powerful
when it's by
choice instead of biology.
For me, the look between Dawn and Spike on the tower was powerful
in part
because it showed so clearly the emotions of a family being torn
apart by
external forces, faced with the reality that sometimes you can't
protect
those you love. Of all the things I think shown in the scene is
the horror
of each not being able to protect and save the other, more than
the
realization that they were going to be saved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Can I be exonerated now? -- rowan, 16:32:53 05/31/01 Thu
Okay, I've been posting for a while about how intense this relationship
appears to be between Spike and Dawn. I've even gone so far as
to say they
appear like platonic soulmates to me, and that, technically, if
the show
lasts enough years so that Dawn's character ages to about 18,
it's not much
different than B/A (except there's more age difference between
the actors,
which is definitely problematic).
And I've felt like I've been...shunned...for my views (many people
responded
'eeewww'.) Is the tide turning? Do more people actually see that
something
is going on here? Are Spike and Buffy being set up as the symbolic
parents
of Dawn? Is that what this is foreshadowing? Or is this the foreshadowing
of
a future S/D ship along the lines of B/A if the show goes 3-4
more years,
perhaps post-SMG years? Or should I immediately begin therapy
with a
qualified professional? Or is this just two great actors making
the most of
their roles?
Is anyone here a spy for BtVS and getting a good laugh?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Can I be exonerated now? -- AK-UK, 18:25:31 05/31/01
Thu
As a once-silent lurker who read your S/D comments and thought
"eeewwww,
freak" I do feel I owe you an apology. Sorry.
I think the writers have been quite openly setting up Buffy and
Spike as mom
and dad for Dawn......and I LOVE the theory that the monks used
DNA from
Buffy and Spike to make Dawn (who came up with that anyway?).
But I don't
think the writers were aware of the incredible chemistry between
MT and JM.
Two amazing actors who have, lets face it, stolen this season.
Soulmates. I like that phrase. A deep connection without a sexual
dimension.
Sounds about right.
Don't let any of this stop you from getting professional help
though,
Rowan....just to be on the safe side :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Can I be exonerated now? -- rowan, 19:35:20
05/31/01 Thu
"As a once-silent lurker who read your S/D comments and thought
"eeewwww,
freak" I do feel I owe you an apology. Sorry."
That's okay...I was only teasing. I just like to think of myself
as ahead of
my time! You know, on the bleeding edge (bad pun definitely intended).
:)
"Don't let any of this stop you from getting professional
help though,
Rowan....just to be on the safe side :)"
I don't know whether to be insulted or amused! Of course, although
I may be
a pervert, at least I'm not off writing that steamy, wish fulfillment
fan
fiction about B/S that was mentioned in a post above. Just so
that I can
report it to the proper authorities *cough,cough*, what was the
link again?
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Can I be exonerated now? -- Rufus,
20:13:42 05/31/01 Thu
Yes you need research to explain your neurosis to any
therapist...www.fanfiction.net....just don't leave a copy with
them.:):):):)
As for Spike and Dawn, they seem to be connected by first Buffy
then by the
fact that they both aren't considered normal humans. Now Spike
can't even be
considered a normal vampire.
Who else dislikes Xander -- Naomi, 06:31:20 05/30/01 Wed
I know that Xander is supposed to be one of the good guys but I personally
cannot stand him. This isn't an attack on Nickolas Brenden who does a great
job and I would miss Xander's jokes if he left the series but I find them to
be his only redeming point. He comes across as a judgemental, insensitive
hypocrite. His treatment of Angel (or "deadboy")was so blatenly motivated by
jealousy and he comes across as a typical teenage guy(as opposed to Oz who I
loved). I also didn't think much of his attitude towards Anya in "The Body".
His attitude towards Cordelia was also disgusting. It is often forgotten
that his love spell in "Bewiched Bewildered and Bothered" had nothing to do
with love but rather revenge(something he convienently forgot to mention to
the flattereed Cordelia). I also thought his behaviour was pretty low after
they broke up. He brought her flowers but never made any real attempt to
apologise to her. In fact in the very next episode he was attempting to
blame Cordelia and have the group be ganged up against Cordelia. It takes
Willow to point ot that "Cordelia belongs in the justified camp". Xander has
no right to be so judgemental of others when his own behaviour is so
frequently nothing to be proud of. I don't know about anyone else but I
wanted to slap him when he began childishly declaring his superiority over
Angel in "Graduation Day" on the day that a demon was about to attack a
bunch of school kids. My dislike of him really started when he kept rubbing
Buffy's face in her relationship with Angel especially when he was so
willing to give Anya and Faith second chances just because they are cute
teenage girls. In fact I don't remember him once questioning Anya's past
actions. Double standards much. Anyone else agree?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- LadyStarlight, 07:02:55 05/30/01 Wed
I just thought I'd poke my head out of the hole that I've been lurking in to
toss my two cents in. I don't *dislike* Xander, but I do find him to be
hypocritical (sp). The fact that he can forgive/forget about Anya and is
extremely hostile to Angel/Spike just grates on me. Although, he (and also
Giles) seem to be mellowing towards Spike.
In reference to an earlier post (forget which one)--if Spike does take care
of Dawn in some fashion, do you think someone should tell him that the four
food groups are NOT blood, that onion-flower-thingie at the Bronze,
cigarettes, and liquor?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Sorry, Xander fan here. I should only hope... -- OnM, 08:08:49
05/30/01 Wed
..that in the realverse, I could be half as noble and full of heart as the
XandMan. Xander is the most conventionally human of the SG, he has lots of
faults. This doesn't detract from his inherent nature, which over the last
several years he has increasingly grown into, and become a more mature,
better integrated person.
Xander took quite a while to warm up to Anya (who I also recall quite a few
viewers actively disliked a few years back), but his humanity has humanized
her in turn. I am suspecting that in season 6 we may finally get to see her
express some degree of remorse for her past actions as a vengeance demon.
This would not really have been possible earlier, since she actively worked
to keep her humanity at a distance. Xander has changed that.
As to Spike and Angel, he had good reason to be hostile towards them,
charismatic or not, they both have a lot of evil heritage to account for. He
is only 'warming up' to Spike very recently because only very recently has
Spike ever performed any good acts that weren't also in his own
self-interest.
BTW, welcome to delurking-land, please feel free to throw in some additional
cents, or even nickels and dimes! I like your netname, very evocative.
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Poor Xander -- Cactus Watcher, 10:10:39 05/30/01 Wed
I think Xander's biggest problem is that they used him too long both as the
Zeppo and the Dr. McCoy (Star Trek's number one griper at bad moments). He
was better this year, but unfortunately not "cured." The show desperately
needs another strong male figure, say a new boyfriend for Buffy?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Loving Xander -- Diana Michelle, 15:45:38 05/31/01 Thu
I just wanted to put down my thoughts on why Alexander LaVelle Harris is and
has always been my favorite character.
First, he reminds me of myself. He used to put himself down all the time. I
still haven't completely broken myself of the habit. I can identify with him
because I know what it's like not to like yourself very much.
Second, yeah, he's tough on other people,but he's tougher on himself. And
when someone points out his faults, he always tries to correct them.
Even though he hated Angel, he was willing to help him when Buffy needed him
to. (Amends) He didn't have to. That was also the episode where we learned
that he sleeps outside at Christmas to avoid his parents drunken fights.
He doesn't give me and he gives his all. He is the 'heart' of the group. He
has made mistakes, everyone makes mistakes.
He's smart, even though most of the time he doesn't believe it. He's come up
with a ton of ideas. And he always stands by Buffy when she needs him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Joss is Xander -- mundusmundi, 11:12:20 06/01/01 Fri
One could even argue that Joss is Xander. I think he said as much in an
interview once. He has that blend of smart-assiness and sincerity that's
very much like the Xan-man.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> ROFLMAO! -- rowan, 10:11:41 05/30/01 Wed
"In reference to an earlier post (forget which one)--if Spike does take care
of Dawn in some fashion, do you think someone should tell him that the four
food groups are NOT blood, that onion-flower-thingie at the Bronze,
cigarettes, and liquor?"
Good idea! Seriously though, maybe she'll live with Xander/Anya, but get
brotherly guidance from Spike.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- maddog, 08:16:49 05/30/01 Wed
While that may make him less likeable I think you're missing the main point.
Xander is the normal teenager in that group. He's the ONLY one left now too.
I mean Buffy's the slayer, Willow went from super brain to wicca, Anya's a
demon, Oz was a werewolf...he's the only one that represents a normal
teenager. Teenagers are moody, they're annoying, they make mistakes, they're
judgemental, they can be hypocrites. All these things are qualities of your
average teenager. And I think that needs to be addressed. In a show that
deals so much with the supernatural, it's nice to have on "common man". And
he plays it perfectly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- Q, 08:57:06 05/30/01 Wed
Hi. First of all, this is my first time posting. I just found this board and
I like it better than anything I have found. You guys have many interesting
insights, and I look forward to the discussion.
Now, a few points on Xander.
I fell into the "I hate Xander" club many times over the past few years, for
many of the reasons listed earlier on this thread. I do not believe he can
be as easily excused as some have said. I do not buy the "normal, moody,
teenager excuse". Xander has lived in this supernatural world long enough to
understand the effects of possesion on a person. If not for blind luck, he
would have helped eat Principal Flutie, and he knows it. In "Bad Eggs",
Willow orders the Bezoar possessed lackeys to "kill them"--refering to
Xander and Buffy, and they all advance. All of the gang attempted murder
here, but Xander never held a grudge, because he knows it was not there
fault. He has forgiven everybody when this is the case, including Anya, who
has led a bloodier life than most.
So why not Angel? It is obvious that he does not hold Angel responsible for
the demon. He tries hard to say it is not his jealousy acting, but that
Angel's evil ways justify his hatred. But if this were the case, he would
not forgive EVERYONE except Angel. His hatred for Angel is deep, but for
very shallow reasons. This could be chalked up to "normal, moody, teenager"
behavior. Immature people will let jealousy dictate their behavior. But what
is eery about Xander is displayed in "Revelations", when he is willing to
kill Angel over his petty jealousy. He crossed the line from simple,
innocent, jealous teenager to inexcusable murderer way too fast for my
liking.
One more thought on Xanders future. I fear that Xanders character may be
shown to be abusive in the future, possibly soon after marrying Anya. We
have had many hints about Xander's past, and it seems more and more likely
that Xander was raised in an abusive environment, though he has never been
outright about this. We all know how abusive patterns tend to reemerge in
people who were themselves abused. Because of this, do not be surprised if
Anya becomes a victim of spousal abuse. I would like to back this crazy
prediction up with the episode "Bad Eggs". If you have it on tape, check it
out again to remember the scene I am talking about. Xander loses his temper
and hits the possessed Cordelia in the face. The self-defense excuse could
be used, but I didn't see it that way. He seemed to hit her harder than he
needed, and *because* he lost his temper. The look on his face after was
especially unnerving. He definately looked like a man who went too far with
his violence and regretted it after. His upbringing seems to back up the
possibility. We will see if they go anywhere with this, but I definately
think Xander is the least admirable of any of the Scoobs.
Just my 2 cents, thanks a lot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- AK-UK, 09:21:27 05/30/01 Wed
Hmmm, an interesting idea Q. However, I don't think enough evidence in
previous shows to indicate that Xander would go down this path. Abusive
spouses tend to be selfish people, and Xander has shown himself to be
anything but. He respects other people, is able to "feel their pain", and
does not like to take advantage of others (which is one of the problems he
has with Angel and Spike: Vampires are the very personification of "using
people")
No, the reason I despise Xander is his utter uselessness, coupled with his
lousy sense of humour and his inability to improve himself. For the love
of.......the guy has been on fighting evil for 5 years now: why doesn't he
get some karate lessons from Buffy? Why not learn a spell or two from
Willow? We talk about Xander representing the "Real, average guy" but I
think Xander is the most unrealistic character in the SG. If any real person
had a best friend who could do what Willow can, they would be begging her to
teach them a few tricks. That Xander, surrounded by Vampires and Demons,
decides to muddle through it all without seeking out any "extra-human"
abilities speaks more about his stupidity and unbelievability than his
bravery.
The best thing the writers could have done with Xander was make him the
flesh-prison for Glory, not Ben. I guess he could still be made into a
vampire.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- rowan, 10:23:44 05/30/01 Wed
"Hi. First of all, this is my first time posting. I just found this board
and I like it better than anything I have found. You guys have many
interesting insights, and I look forward to the discussion."
Amen to that. I've been here for about 3-4 months and I love it too.
Now, about Xander. I have to admit, I'm not the biggest Xander fan in the
world either. After all, Xander doesn't have the really obvious "uniqueness"
of some of the other characters -- he's not a vamp, he's not a demon, he's
not Wiccan, he's not a werewolf, he's not a Slayer, he's not a Watcher, he's
not a Key. But Xander is something really important on this show: he's
Everyman (like the medieval mystery play guy).
He lives in this, our magickal world (I quote Spike), yet he's fundamentally
different in the way he relates to it than the others, because he's not
magickal himself. Giles isn't magickal, either, but in Giles we see how an
intellectual copes with the relationship to the Buffyverse. Most of us will
never be Giles.
Xander is closer to us. Most of us are Xander. And in some ways we can
manage, IMO, our willing suspension of disbelief because we see Xander do it
a thousand times a day. Xander relates to things ultimately in a heartfelt,
compassionate way that often, it seems to me, mirror the fans. When Xander
can finally accept Angel, Oz, Spike, Anya (substitute your favorite name
here) that's usually around the time the rest of us can as well. Xander is
the better part of our own humanity shining through, as well as the
confusion & foolishness of that humanity. We want what Xander wants -- to
live a long, silly life with the person we love.
Xander's not flashy, but he has an important role to keep us grounded in the
Buffyverse and keep us believing in it. He's our touchstone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- Naomi, 11:20:20 05/30/01 Wed
I'm sorry but I find the argument that Xander is important to the scoobies
because of his compassion weak. As I have previously stated there are far
more compassionate characters. Willow was concerned for Buffy's feelings in
Revelations and has to tell Xander and Cordelia several times "this isn't
about attacking Buffy". In fact Xander couldn't wait to go behind Buffy's
back and join Faith in killing Angel. As far as Faith knew Angel was an evil
vampire Buffy had been forced to banish to hell. Xander made no attempt to
explain Angel's special circumstances(i.e that Willow had resouled Angel).
Buffy deserves a lot more understanding but Xander constantly lets his own
petty jealousy get in the way. And I don't want to be rude but anyone who
thinks that Xander had the right motives in not telling Buffy about Willow's
spell in Becoming is majourly deluded. Xander's worst character traits are
clearly seen when Angel is around. Xander made no attempt to see Buffy's
point of view in Becoming and acted as if it would be completely
disrespectful to Jenny's memory to even consider bringing back the man that
Buffy had lost. Jenny had actually created the new curse as a way of
redemption and Xander knew this. Imagine if any of us could bring back
someone we loved and how tempting and hard the dilema must have been for
Buffy and yet Xander made no attempt to even consider this. I suppose I'm
just sick of Xander always being the one to lecture others. In Anne the
judgemental tone he took was hardly that of a compasionate person. Xander
makes very little attempt to see anyone's opinion but his own. I would love
for Angel to confront him over his relationship with Anya. Anya discusses
punishing men by "boils on the penis" and clearly views this as nothing to
be ashamed of. Xander has made no effort to call her on her attitude which I
would have thought would be the first priority of someone becoming involved
with a former torturer and killer who needs someone to explain why their
actions are wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- maddog, 16:10:06 05/30/01 Wed
All I see is people upset at Xander for things that make him a normal
teenage guy (with much of it coming from when Angel was around). How many
mature high school guys have you all met? :) I rest my case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> I'll take that thought one step farther... -- OnM,
17:41:17 05/30/01 Wed
and ask: How many mature *people* have you met? I mean really, let's be
honest folks (and be assured I include myself in this) how many of us don't
on occasion exhibit just exactly the character traits Xander has in his
weaker moments? Teenage has nothing to do with it. The level of overall
morality and ethics the SG displays is far higher than what I've observed
for the world in general. It's one of the reasons we watch the show, after
all, we desire to emulate the actions of heroes, which they certainly are,
including Xander. Not perfect people, but heroic nonetheless.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Rowan you forgot.......... -- Rufus, 20:26:03 05/30/01 Wed
That it was Xander who pointed out to Buffy how thrashed Spike was and
showed some interest in the situation from Spikes point of view. He may not
like or trust Spike but he couldn't hurt him when it was obvious he had gone
through torture....it was his words that made Buffy go to him and see if he
had told Glory about Dawn. Xander is an everyman in a magical situation, and
he does a good job given his experiences. He dislikes vampires cause they
killed his friend, yet he does give Spike a chance. He dislikes demons, yet
he now is poised to marry an ex demon. He has judged Spike and Anya on their
current actions not just their past. He gave them both more of a chance than
others may have.
If you go back to the first episode, Xander went with Buffy to try to save
his friend. He felt fear and helped Buffy anyway. He may not always make the
right choices but I think that Buffy needs his council when she gets
stressed out. He also isn't afraid to tell Buffy that he admires her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Plus, he's "clocked field time." ;) -- mundusmundi, 06:35:41
05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Good point! -- rowan, 16:35:30 05/31/01 Thu
Just more evidence that Xander is the bellweather for the audience...he's
usually one step ahead of us. I really don't see him as necessarily
judgemental -- at least any more judgemental than most of us are every day
of our lives. Xander does take stands on things, but he is willing to change
as events change.
I have more problems with Tara's role than Xander's (*she said, ducking the
hail of flaming bullets headed her way*).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Good point! -- Rufus, 17:04:08 05/31/01 Thu
Yes Tara is still a bit of an unknown....also she will remain a character
that doesn't have regular status. With Xander I find going back to season
one and rewatching the first episodes helps make more sense of Xander as a
person. He doesn' like vampires, but when it came down to sharing his home
with one he did(though he did tie Spike up at night), when he could have
been the one to dust Spike he didn't. Xander is a character who is normal no
powers, only field experience, he also has been able to see things in a
clear way. He may not always be right, but he at least pays attention.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Good point! -- Aelith, 19:15:47 05/31/01 Thu
Oh, I like your reasoning, Rufus. I like Xander. He keeps the show from
being totaly fantascy.
Still, I would like to see Zander have acess to a power in times of crisis.
(Why only one swipe with the wrecking ball?) I could be like a Thor helmet
that transforms him, but good for only a small period of time and disables
the user with black outs and headaches.
Oh well, dream on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- Naomi, 09:10:09 05/30/01 Wed
I certainly don't mind Xander being presented as an ordinary teenager with
flaws. I do get riled up when Xander thinks he has the right to judge others
and speak for the group. Being judgemental is not a sympathetic character
trait and only encourages others to notice your own flaws. Apologies if I'm
causing offence but I was also surprised that Xander was chosen as the heart
of the group in Restless. I do recognise that Xander is usually a loyal
friend and the others do occasionally turn to him for advice such as Willow
in Wild at heart. However I would of thought Willow would have been the more
logical choice. It felt false to me as if the writers were trying to show
that Xander had a purpose in the group. Willow and Giles have been far more
understanding to Buffy and in Giles case he had the added grief of knowing
that Buffy's lover had killed his girlfriend. Yet not once did he throw
Jenny's death in Buffy's case and imply that she was to blame as Xander did
in Revelations and Becoming part 2. I am not completely blinkered though and
do recognise that Xander is at heart a good person I just struggle to find
him likeable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- mundusmundi, 15:33:12 05/30/01 Wed
Apparently, the majority here agree with Dracula's assesment of the X-man:
"You are strange and off-putting, go now." ;)
I'll go out on a limb. I'm a Xander fan. I look at his petty jealousies and
snap-judgments of people and see (uncomfortably, but truly) no small part of
myself as a teen. And, I look at his slow but steady maturation the last
couple years as an authentic and hopeful depiction of a person's
coming-of-age. Not to justify his faults, but the guy's family life didn't
exactly prepare him for adulthood. His biggest flaw, as I see it, isn't
hypocrisy: it's insecurity. Not having a real home to call his own, he turns
to the Scoobies as his support system; and the writers are always putting
him through all sorts of hellish challenges so that he has to justify (not
always successfully) his reason for being. We all know the bad side of
Xander (and I agree with you totally about that). Here's a few good things
he's done:
1. Saved Buffy from death. (The first time around, in "Prophecy Girl.")
2. Didn't take advantage of the Buffster (or anyone else) when she came onto
him in "BB&B."
3. Saved the world and didn't tell anyone about it in "The Zeppo."
4. Restored Buffy's shattered confidence in "The Freshman." ("I always ask
myself, 'What would Buffy do?'" he said.)
5. Was the first to spot Riley's unhappiness this past season and confront
him about his behavior.
6. Snapped Buffy to her senses about Riley (too late, alas) in "Into the
Woods."
7. Listened to B's criticism of his hypocritical treatment of Anya in same
episode and actually did something about it. Told Anya he loved her and that
she made him feel more like a man. (Interesting echo of Spike's line to
Buffy in "The Gift," BTW.)
Again, you raise some excellent points. I'm just explaining why I like the
guy, despite the validity of your argument, and why he deserves a little
sympathy. (His look of utter shock at the end of "The Gift" was, in it's own
low-key way, as wrenching as any of the other characters' reactions. He
saved her once before, and may find an especially hard time letting go of
the ghost this time around.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Dislike Xander - umm...well no -- fresne, 13:47:25 05/31/01 Thu
I like Xander because, well, I like him. I¡|m sure I could come up with some
reasons, but ultimately it would boil down to rationalization. Why do I
dislike cooking, but enjoy sewing? Who knows? That¡|s the way my script
writer wrote me.
And since I put it that way, I¡|m sure that¡|s why Xander likes Riley, but
doesn¡|t like Angel. Because he does. Because its like that sometimes. We
can come up with some reasons why he may not like Angel: the vamping/death
of Jesse, rivalry over Buffy, plain alpha male rivalry.
Actually if anything that¡|s where I¡|d place Xander¡|s dislike of Angel.
Angel has much that would be desirable to a teenage boy. Now keep in mind
these are not so much a list of Angel¡|s/Xander¡|s qualities, but my view on
how Xander may view Angel.
“h Angel has everyone¡|s respect. They come to him for physical support in a
fight. Xander gets sent to buy donuts.
“h Angel loses his soul, does some bad (yeah, yeah, major boil down), gets
his soul back, forgive and forget. Xander, well, this one¡|s intangible.
However, I¡|d agree with mundusmundi that Xander has been very insecure as
where he fits in. There has to be the thought that if he got vamped, well
they¡|d just stake him. Not mojo a gypsy curse.
“h Angel is an adult. Xander (up till now) has been a limbo transitional
teenager. Gawky, uncertain, uncoordinated, and lets face it in full hormonal
blossom.
“h Angel has no family. Xander¡|s family fights and drinks.
“h Angel has money (somehow). Xander does not.
“h Angel doesn¡|t have to work, or go to school. Xander struggles for his
D+s.
“h Angel has traveled. When Xander finally goes somewhere, he gets stuck in
Oxnard.
“h Angel has a cool coat and is Mr. Muy Suavo. Xander¡|s clothes are a cry
for help.
“h Buffy falls for Angel. She loves Xander as a friend.
I can¡|t say as I find it odd that he dislikes Angel.
And being Xander, he doesn¡|t hold back. Doesn¡|t hide. Is up front about
his dislike. I see Xander as the group¡|s heart, not because he is the most
empathetic (Willow is way more so), but because his actions are based on
what is in his heart. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are bad. The
pro and con Xander posts seem to list them adequately enough.
And because I like Xander, I¡|m inclined to forgive his flaws. If I didn¡|t,
well, then I wouldn¡|t.
For an opposite case in point, I had real problem with Angel¡|s behavior
towards Lindsey in Blind Date. (Not that I dislike Angel, its just that
although I find him intellectually interesting, I just don¡|t emotionally
click with his character.)
Especially since Blind Date came so soon the Faith episode. I saw Lindsey¡|s
actions as a first move towards some sort of, if not redemption, then
reformation. From, ¡§I will do anything,¡¨ to ¡§there are things that I will
not do.¡¨ It was as much a step as Faith torturing Wesley and trying to kill
Angel. And yet, instead of promoting and supporting a change, Angel (and the
others following his lead) belittled Lindsey¡|s little baby step. It felt
like Angel was saying that he only has to help the people that he likes.
Later of course I came to understand the arc long plot reasons, but that¡|s
an intellectual thing. At the time I was merely disturbed at a hero who
picks and chooses.
And since I¡|ve yet to really emotionally connect with Angel, I¡|m just a
little less forgiving.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Hmmm...it's never done that kind of odd formatting before. --
fresne, 13:49:39 05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- Q, 16:55:14 05/30/01 Wed
"However, I don't think enough evidence in previous shows to indicate that
Xander would go
down this path. Abusive spouses tend to be selfish people, and Xander has
shown himself to be anything but"
I admit I do not have a lot of evidence, it is just a theory. Every year
after the season finale's, I start on a giant re-watching marathon, watching
every episode again from the start. I just got through "Bad Eggs" yesterday,
and was uneased by the scene when he hit Cordy. It came after she hit him,
but also *after* he was in danger. She was not coming at him any more, so it
was not self defense. He shrieked "that's my bump!" and hit her. Obviously a
loss of temper kind of thing.
I also think you are exaggerating when you say Xander is "Anything but"
selfish. I think Xander has been shown to be EXTREMELY selfish, especially
in his relationships. The posting on this thread about the way he treated
Cordy shows how selfish Xander can be.
Also, I think it is a generalization to say that all abusive people are
selfish. I think there are a lot of seemingly normal, nice people, who in
private have a dark side. This is what could make it a compelling story
line. Alot of good people have a secret side, that may not be an evil
streak, but just a problem they need to get help with.
Also, I should let it known that I don't hate Xander and want him off the
show. I think it is realistic and compelling that somebody would have a bad
side...but just because I like the story telling potential involved does not
mean I will let Xander off as easy as some will. His behavior goes WAY
beyond "normal guy" or "moody teenager". It is definately an uncontrolled
rage that would be considered mentally unhealthy in anybody. It is not
natural. His behavior around Angel usually borders on psychopathic, and
needs dealt with!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- london, 16:25:42 05/30/01 Wed
I could say its only a TV series, but if you feel better, then hey!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> WHAT? It's only a TV series?? Oh, nooooo....... :p -- OnM, 17:44:11
05/30/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Just a note on Angel -- Diana Michelle, 16:50:41 05/30/01 Wed
*My dislike of him really started when he kept rubbing Buffy's face in her
relationship with Angel especially when he was so willing to give Anya and
Faith second chances just because they are cute teenage girls.*
Angel is also way more willing to give second chances to girls. Just compare
his treatment of Faith to his treatment of Lindsey.
And I think quite a bit of Xander's hatred stemmed from the fact that Angel
was a vampire. And if one vampire can be good, doesn't that mean that maybe,
he could have saved Jesse? So, I can see why Xander would be in bitter city
as regards to Angel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Just a note on Angel -- Halcyon, 04:16:57 05/31/01 Thu
Regarding Angel's attitude towards Lindsay in Blind Date, Lindsey made no
apology for his actions in the past from actively protecting Russell Winters
from prosecution to exploiting Faith in Five By Five. Lindsey had not chosen
the path to redemption he just would not play a part in the death of three
children. Faith has started on the path to redemption, Lindsey has not, not
even after the events of Dead End.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Just a note on Angel -- Halcyon, 03:38:49 06/06/01 Wed
Angel can not motivate people to seek redemption, they have to do that
themselves, Faith was willing to attone for her crimes.
Lindsey was not, at no point has Lindsey expressed any remorse for his
actions from protecting Russell Winters from prosecution in City Of,
defending a drug dealer and murderer in Five By Five, hiring Faith to kill
Angel in Five By Five, hiring an assassin to kill Faith in Sanctuary, sicing
Kate on Angel in Sanctuary, defending Vanessa Brewer on murder charges in
Blind Date, almost getting Cordelia killed in To Shansu In LA, getting the
actor killed in Dear Boy, assisting Drusilla in turning Darla back into a
Vampire, attempting to defraud Anne's homeless shelter and hiring Boone to
kill Angel in Blood Money, going all red neck on Angel in Eiphany and
shooting the Security guard in the foot in Dead End. Angel was right when he
said that people always have a choice, Lindsey did have a soul and still
made the decision to stay with Wolfram & Hart in Blind Date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- change, 14:55:45 06/02/01 Sat
The main reason people have for not forgiving Xander is the fact that he has
never forgiven Angel, and dislikes and distrusts him. I think it is
consistent with Xander's character for him not to forgive him.
Consider all of the bad things that Angel or Angelus have done to Xander and
to the scoobies.
1. First, as so many have pointed out, Angel gets Buffy, the object of
Xander's affection.
2. Angel did little to help Buffy and the scoobies throughout most of season
1.
3. Then Angelus emerges and tries to kill Buffy several times during season
2.
4. He murders Jenny Calendar in Passion.
5. Tries to kill Willow in Innocence.
6. Tries to kill Xander in BBB.
7. Tortures Giles in Becoming 2.
8. Helps Drusilla kill Kendra in Becoming 1, and almost kill Willow.
9. Inflicts emotional torture on the whole gang throughout most of the
season.
10. Tries to bring hell on Earth.
11. Then, after he gets his soul back, punches out Xander in Enemies.
12. And beats the crap out of Riley in the Yoko Factor.
To me, the question is not why does Xander dislike Angel, but why does
anyone like him. There are several answers to this. For us, the viewers, we
can forgive him because we are too distant from the actual events for them
to have much emotional impact for us. We know it's just a TV show, so we can
easily forgive and forget. In real life, if someone had done these things to
us, we would find it very hard to forgive them. Willow represents the spirit
of the group. She can forgive him because as the spiritual center, she
represents Good and Good always is willing to forgive. Giles represents
reason. He can forgive Angel because he knows that Angel is not really
responsible for the actions that Angelus committed, and he knows that Angel
had good reasons for doing the things he did when he was not Angelus. Xander
represents the heart, or emotional center, of the scoobie group. As such, he
absorbed the full emotional impact of all of Angel's and Angelus's actions,
and, as the emotional part of the group, cannot accept that Angel is not
responsible for his own actions. So, Xander, can't forgive Angel.
The next question is: If Xander can't forgive Angel, then how can he forgive
Anyan. Well, Xander did not actually witness any of her actions as a demon.
This makes them emotionally distant for him. It is a rational function to
hear of the actions of somebody doing something that has no effect upon you,
and to then draw conclusions about that person. Willow and Giles can do this
and decide to distrust or dislike Anya, but Xander can't because the events
are too distant. Xander is in love with Anya and that also blinds him to her
past.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- Brian, 15:12:09 06/02/01 Sat
Plus, as I recall, Angel is not very fond of Xander either.
Sort of like two Alpha males in conflict over territory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who else dislikes Xander -- purplegrrl, 14:44:16 06/04/01 Mon
***Plus, as I recall, Angel is not very fond of Xander either.***
I think a lot of Angel's dislike of Xander stemmed from Xander's annoying
habit (at least to Angel) of calling him "Dead Boy."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> You mean there is something wrong with that term???......:):):)
-- Rufus, 16:12:34 06/04/01 Mon
Angel and Xander were in a pissing contest all the time. They saw each other
as a threat. Angel took Buffy out of the reach of a hopeful Xander. Xander
was a mortal who may have been more suitable for Buffy, except she didn't
love him. Plus Xander lost a friend to vampires and still hadn't lost that
anger when Angel came on the scene.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: You mean there is something wrong with that
term???......:):):) -- Halcyon, 01:12:34 06/05/01 Tue
One of Xander's flaws is that he can be somewhat two faced, Anya was a demon
for 1120 years and if we apply simple maths her body count will be in excess
of 1120 people. Angel/Angelus was a killer for 145 years, you do the maths,
Anyanka probably killed more that Angelus ever did, but Buffy did not deal
half as much of the shit that Xander dealt out to Buffy regarding Angelus.
Xander is somewhat hippocrytical regarding Angel when he is dating and about
to marry somewhat like Anya who killed thousands of people in her time as a
demon and he does not seem to realize that he is setting a double standard.
Him realizing what a bastard he was towards Angel and Buffy and apologising
to Buffy when she comes back would go a long way in making me tolerate
Xander.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You mean there is something wrong with that
term???......:):):) -- change, 03:48:11 06/05/01 Tue
A couple of points. First, we don't know how many people Anya actually
killed. I think spurned women are more likely to want to torture and
humiliate their men rather than kill them. Boils on the penis probably don't
kill. Although Anyanka probably was responsible for some deaths, she might
not be in Angelus's league. Secondly, Xander hasn't witnessed any of the
things that Anyanka did except for the events in Doppelgangland. One of the
points I was trying to make earlier in this thread is that Xander represents
the heart of the SG (Primeval). As such, I think he will be more effected by
the things he actually witnesses rather than things that are told to him as
history. Maybe I'm reaching here, but I think the process of feeling concern
for things that you don't witness is more of an intellectual process. For
example, look at how difficult it is to get western countries to pay for
AIDS treatment in Africa. Although the situation in Africa is a hundred
times worse than here, it doesn't evoke the same response as the AIDS
problem here because it is so far away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You mean there is something wrong with that
term???......:):):) -- verdantheart, 09:06:46 06/06/01 Wed
Just a comment. It just isn't human nature for people to judge others on an
objective scale. Xander loves Anya, so he forgives her demon past. Angel was
a rival who, by the way, did some *personally* unforgivable things as
Angelus. Buffy loves Angel, so she can forgive his actions as Angelus,
resoning that Angelus was technically a different person because he lacked
Angel's human soul. Xander doesn't make this distinction. Like Xander, we
tend to forgive those close to us for things that we find unforgivable in
others. For example, mothers forgive their sons terrible murders. It may be
hypocritical, but it is definitely human to behave in this manner. Should we
condemn Xander for doing what most of the rest of us are doing?
- vh
Musings on the Future of Buffy/Angel -- Mishka, 08:07:06 05/30/01 Wed
I don`t know guys, but it seems fair to say that it will be up to Angel to
ressurrect Buffy. As he did with Darla (I forget which episode) he could go
through those three tests to bring her back.
I think Spike and Angel will come to the same sort of understanding that
Spike and Riley came too. There is only and will only, ever be one true love
for Buffy, and that is Angel. The only reason he isn`t human right now is
because the PTB said that if he stays human there will come a time when she
will die because he isn`t strong enough to save her.
I don`t see Dawn in foster care though. I think Spike truly sees her as a
kid sister and will be constantly watching out for her secretly, like a
childs imaginary friend. Spike is just cool. When all else go mushy and
whiny, he brings us back with quick wit and ruthlessness. Although there is
the potential for Mr.Summers to return and disturb things.
I miss Oz. And Doyle. I hope they somehow visit us in the next season. Also
I hope there is more plot line with Cordy`s pet ghost. (aside)
I don`t see Tara and Willow lasting. They are too much alike. Relationships
like that get boring. They`ll drive each other crazy with sweetness and cool
teen-speak. (they`ve been driving me nuts for awhile) Or maybe if Tara could
just get a little less wussy and needy, it wouldn`t be so bad.
Maybe Faith will have to step in to help the team somehow, you never know.
Without a slayer in town, its only a matter of time before Armageddon number
7 comes around. Although I really like that Willow is getting Uber-powerful.
I think Xander should join martial arts or something, maybe Spike could
train him for awhile, I think its time, especially without Buffy not being
around. Anya`s spunky, she`d probably be better at it. And I wish he would
lighten up about Spike and Angel. He`s too judgemental, I think he`s under
the impression that he`s the alpha-male or something. He keeps threatening
Spike, which is extremely laughable. The only think good about his tirades
are that they usually lead to a great one-liner from Spike. Although, he is
amazing with Anya. I`m sure Giles can figure out a way to keep Dawn with
them, if all else fails. She still is super human after-all and there are
many other baddies that would probably kill/use her for some reason.
Just some musings...
p.s. why isn't Giles going to be around next season, I missed the reason?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Musings on the Future of Buffy/Angel -- Wiccagrrl, 08:52:19 05/30/01
Wed
Doubt Angel will have much to do with Buffy coming back. With Buffy moving
to UPN, and them being on different networks, crossovers are unlikely.
Disagree about W/T- I think they're adorable. And if Tough Love and the eps
following it didn't show you that this relationship was for the long haul, I
don't know what will.
Loved Oz, loved Doyle, wouldn't mind seeing both of them back. I want to see
Faith and Amy back, too. If Oz comes back (which, I think, is doubtful, but
still...) I'd love to see how he interacts with the gang as someone other
than "Willow's boyfriend" Don't see Wills dumping Tara to fall back into Oz'
arms. Just not gonna happen.
Agree about Xander, he can come off kinda heavy-handed and judgemental-
especially when it comes to the men in Buffy's life.
Don't know what they're gonna do with Dawn...I mean, none of the scoobs have
any legal right to be her guardian. I do hope we get lots more Dawn/Spike
interaction next year. Spike is so good when dealing with her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Musings on the Future of Buffy/Angel -- Unsung Hero, 08:53:00
05/30/01 Wed
Faith's in jail. For murder. She's going to be there a long time, unless she
escapes, which isn't very redemption-y, is it?
Joss(in that TV Guide interview) had already said Angel and Buffy will not
be crossing over early in the season like it looks, so don't expect Angel to
be doing The Trial or anything to get Buffy a second chance.
Xander IS the alpha-male. Spike certainly isn't, and neither is Giles. Giles
is a Dad, but not a leader. Willow is powerful and ok in a crisis, but
Xander's second in command. Willow, while good at taking charge of
situations, isn't a good leader because she can't shut down her feelings for
people. Xander has been the only one willing to ALWAYS speak his mind to the
group(In "Becoming" he pointed out about her wanting to wait with Angelus to
try and get her boyfriend back, in "Intervention" it was he that they all
looked to for guidance, during some of fourth and fifth season his role was
problem solver, people coming to talk to him about things, like the Riley
thing...), and now that's becoming more adult(which was his role in season
5, becoming a grown up). And remember, kids, Xander can kill Spike. Spike
can't hurt him. Spike isn't a second in command or alpha male simply because
no one besides Buffy and Dawn trusts or cares about Spike. It's not so
laughable his threatening of Spike. He doesn't want to kill him, so he
doesn't.
And I don't see Tara as whiney and needy at all. Tara is a strong woman,
she's just quiet and unassuming. And actually I think they'll last a long
time. While they may be a lot alike and maybe some relationships like that
get boring, they don't usually get boring if you're in love. And Willow is
the only one I find irritating with her "Cool teen speak".
And Giles is going to be a re-occuring character because he's making a BBC
mini-series.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> If Angel can't crossover then -- Aelith, 15:02:30 05/31/01 Thu
Dawn is the only one who has the Power to bring her back. She IS the Key.
aelith
In retrospect, what was the best
season so far? -- Rob, 09:01:10 05/30/01
Wed
Without a doubt, I would say that season five has been the best
overall
season to date. It had one of the strongest story arcs the show
has ever
had, and I thought the way the clues were subtly dropped throughout
the year
as to what was going on, how to defeat Glory, what the purpose
of the Key
is, etc, was ingenious. It also gave the characters one of their
most
dramatic, heartwrenching adventures to date, and we got to see
every
character grow and mature. The death of 2 beloved characters shook
up the
Buffyverse that we have come to know and love, and depend on.
Whoever would
have guessed (without reading spoilers of course lol) that Joyce
would die
of an anuerysm, and Buffy would sacrifice herself later in the
year? We have
come to expect that Buffy will always win the fight and save the
world, and
will always be able to save her friends and family when they are
in trouble.
This time, some interesting new dynamics were added: (1) Buffy
could not
defeat the evil by herself, or even hurt it (2) Willow was the
strongest,
due to her ability to hurt Glory with her magic, (3) bad things,
like the
death of her mother, happened: things which Buffy could not fight,
even with
her superpowers. She could not save her mother from cancer, she
could not
save her sister from Glory (at least up until the end). Also,
the character
of Spike and his love for Buffy has become one of the season's
more
intriguing subplots. Further, the addition of a new character
into the show,
which the audience wass supposed to accept appeared out of nowhere
with no
explanation for quite a bit of time at the start of the season,
succeeded
with flying colors. On a lesser show, this sort of thing might
not have
worked. But those shows don't have the brilliantly imaginative
mind of Joss
Whedon writing for them.
If I were to put the seasons in order from best on down, they
would be:
Season Five, Season Three, Season Four, Season Two, Season One.
(Note I
didn't say best to worst, because there was no "worst"
season. Every season
was great, in my opinion!)
I'd love to hear what some of you other guys thought was the best
season,
and some reasons. :)
------------------------------------------
[>Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far? -- Naomi,
09:32:14
05/30/01 Wed
A lot of people seem implied to claim season 2 was the best. I
think that
rather than being the best it is simply commonly considered a
favourite
because of the emotional arc but to be honest I wasn't impressed
with some
of the earlier episodes such as Reptile boy, Inca mummy girl and
Bad eggs.
In my opinion season three was the best because it was so well
written and
it had an interesting overall arc. Of coure the main villians
is often what
can make a season popular and this may be why season 4 is not
a favourite
for many viewers. I personally think the writing was better than
ever and
some otstanding episodes were produced(Restless, Hush)but because
the
overall theme was weak it dragged down a lot of viewers enjoyment.
It was my
second favourite season however and I think the adjustment to
college was
very well done. Season 2 comes next and season 1 was my least
favourite
season as the series was still finding its feet than. And of course
it
didn't have a particularly imaginative main villian. Spike,Dru
and Faith are
my three favourite characters and I was a huge fan of the Mayer.
I can't
really comment on season 5 because I'm a British viewer and still
waiting
for the boxsets of the first 11 episodes(coming ot next monday
along with
Angel if I can wait that long) I have studied all the scripts
in detail
however and hope people don't mind me commenting on various plot
aspects I
haven't seen yet such as Spike's hope of redemption.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far?
-- london,
16:03:48 05/30/01 Wed
I am going to be very unpopular but I did not think season five
was the
best,there was something missing ,something I could not put my
finger on
exactly.I thought Buffy was at her wimpiest and she took all this
time (five
seasons) to start asking deep and meaningful questions about her
role as
slayer.The scooby gang,apart from Spike and Willow,did not help
that
much,Zander becoming more sloath like with each episode,Anya wittering
on
about sex and money and Tara doing Ally Mcbeal impersonations.Giles,
a
fellow English person like me,is fading into the background only
to stammer
and stutter at the thought of any difficulties.Now Dawn ,where
do I start
about her?Seriously,I love em all.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so
far? -- darrenK,
11:42:37 05/31/01 Thu
I think it's perfectly natural for people to wait till their 20's
to ask
more meaningful questions about their role in life.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far? -- AK-UK,
09:45:58
05/30/01 Wed
I think season 5 has been the worst season by far. Yes, we have
had a very
strong arc this season, but that has come at the expense of strong,
seperate
individual episodes. As a friend said to me, this season felt
like one, very
long episode. Yes, "The Body" was a wonderful episode,
but the reason it
stands out so much is because of the same-ness of the previous
ones. Glory
has easily been the dullest major villian yet (yes, worse than
Adam!) and
the finale was spoiled by plot holes you could drive a bus through.
I'll reserve my opinions on Buffy's death until I see how she
is brought
back (the knowledge of her inevitable ressurection made her death
FAR less
meaningful or effective then Joyce's).
BUT, the evolution of Spike's character has been an absolute delight,
and
Dawn has been written and acted wonderfully. These two characters
have
really saved season 5 for me.
As for my favorite season......hmmmm, tricky one that. Probably
season 3.
However, 3 of my all time favorite episodes ("Hush"
"Wild at Heart" and "New
Moon Rising") are in season 4. Drat :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far?
-- london,
16:19:16 05/30/01 Wed
Hoorah,I am glad someone else thinks that season five wasnt all
that
great.You are right when you say that the series was held together
by
separate, strong episodes and all the way through its been up
and down and
sometimes I have been left feeling"well was that it?".Angel
went through the
same sort of thing but now I think they have got themselves together,of
course Angel could blame it on teething problems,not so Buffy.Rock
on
Spike,dig the accent.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far? -- darrenK,
09:49:00
05/30/01 Wed
I would say season 5 and season 3 are my favorites.
5 had such weird psychological resonance, it was so introspective,
so much
about character, the things that connect us and make us family.
The thematic
episode being "The Body." It even ended with "just
the family" going up
against the Big Bad
3 was the opposite. It was so much about finding connections
outside the family and learning to deal in society. The thematic
episode
being "Earshot." At the end, everyone--the whole school,
even people who
hate each other-- banding together to fight and conquer the Big
Bad.
"Earshot" might be my favorite single episode of Buffy.
Even now when I say
the words "Sometimes my life sucks beyond the telling of
it..." I hear
Buffy's voice and I get chill bumps.
dK
------------------------------------------
[>My pick -- Cactus Watcher, 09:55:48 05/30/01 Wed
While there were more than just one or two fantastic episodes
in the fifth
seaaon, I think there was a slight overall drop in quality in
the fifth
season from my favorite season number four. I got the feeling
that the
writers weren't communicating with each other very well this year.
There was
a lot of repetitive verbage about the Key. I don't mind the time
spent, but
it would have been better if we learned a little new each time.
The
previously-ons in the final episode were great. But, toward the
end of the
season they were getting interminable. My biggest gipe about "The
Gift" is
pretty petty, but Anya of all people called Olaf "the Troll
god." What show
was Joss watching this year? I also thought this season was far
too
depressing. Having Riley leave and one death "in the family"
would have been
plenty of gloom for one year. I'd probably put this season third
after the
Fourth Season, and the Third.
The Fourth season had a good mix of humor and seriousness. I liked
the
blooming of the romances between Riley and Buffy, and between
Willow and
Tara. Granted Adam wasn't the greatest villian, but that plot
was often well
in the background. The return of Faith was spectacular, and the
returns of
Spike and Oz welcome events. Also while far less emotional, I
liked last
year's last episode better. The overwhelming question for the
future this
year is how will Buffy get back. There were so many interesting
questions
last year that it was difficult to keep track of them all. And
the episode
before that was virtually a bonus season ending episode.
Just my oppinion.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: In retrospect, what was the best season so far? -- OnM,
17:22:17
05/30/01 Wed
I'll make this short, no big analyses, since I've gotta balance
out the long
posts!!
Good to best, 'cos you're right, there is no 'worst':
Good_______ Season 1
Better______ Season 3&4 (tie)
Still better__ Season 2
Best________ Season 5
I'm really nitpicking to grade them at all, they each have their
individual
strengths and qualities.
------------------------------------------
[>[> We are in complete agreement on the seasons.....:):)
-- Rufus,
20:54:55 05/30/01 Wed
Season five is my favorite hands down. Season two being a close
second. But
they were all good.
------------------------------------------
[>Hard for me to choose between seasons two and five. -- Wiccagrrl,
17:26:19 05/30/01 Wed
I thought the arc was slightly stronger season two, but it had
a few so-so
standalones (bad eggs and go fish are two of my not-so-favorite
Buffy eps.)
I can't really think of a weak ep this season, but the arc didn't
quite have
the punch for me that the Angel/Angelus storyline did.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Hard for me to choose between seasons two and five.
-- OnM,
23:10:02 05/30/01 Wed
A week ago I would have tied them, but as time passes and I ponder
S5 more
and more, it keeps getting better and better in my head. I just
rewatched
BvsD earlier tonight, first time since watching it twice in the
fall. I was
stunned, it was so much better than I remembered it. Now I'm looking
forward
to going through the eps all over again.
Plus, I also rewatched the 1st Angel ep, also better than I remembered
it.
What really hit me about it was something else that I had pretty
much
forgotten, but could turn out to be VERY important. Let you know
after some
more research!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Hard for me to choose between seasons two
and five. --
Wiccagrrl, 23:47:00 05/30/01 Wed
Plus, I also rewatched the 1st Angel ep, also better than I remembered
it.
What really hit me about it was something else that I had pretty
much
forgotten, but could turn out to be VERY important. Let you know
after some
more research!
Ooh, don't keep us in suspense. Please, do tell...
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Yeah, OnM ......spill.....I hate mysteries.............
--
Rufus, 00:37:28 05/31/01 Thu
Don't make me show you what Giles did to that minion.:):):)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> OK, OK, you got it. No devious plot
involved, it was just too
late... -- OnM, 20:21:36 05/31/01 Thu
...and I was too tired to look up the shooting script.
Also, I really need to follow up with the next several Angel episodes
after
No.5.1 to make sure that there weren't any other references dropped
that I
missed. I love to speculate as much as the next fan, but I really
do try to
make it a reasonable sort of thing, not just grab at any dubious
little
connection. I'm going to go look up the necessary stuff now, be
back in
about 20 min. or so with the theory.
Stay tuned!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Posted as new thread up top,
noted as continuing from
here. -- OnM, 21:37:29 05/31/01 Thu
Well, longer than 20 minutes or whatever I said. No sense of time.
Remember, you asked for this crazyness!
Enjoy! ;)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Inquiring Minds want to know OnM -- Aquitaine,
11:55:34
05/31/01 Thu
Don't keep us guessing! Tell us about your A:tS insight.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Hard for me to choose between seasons two
and five. -- rowan,
16:26:15 05/31/01 Thu
"A week ago I would have tied them, but as time passes and
I ponder S5 more
and more, it keeps getting better and better in my head. I just
rewatched
BvsD earlier tonight, first time since watching it twice in the
fall. I was
stunned, it was so much better than I remembered it. Now I'm looking
forward
to going through the eps all over again."
Thank you! Now I know I'm not crazy. I was on another board, and
everyone
was trashing S5, and going on about plotholes, etc. I said: 'Wait
until it's
over. I think if you could see the eps in sequence without all
the reruns
and false spoilers, etc., you would see how great it really is.'
It reminds
me of The Sixth Sense -- alot of people said at the end of that
movie that
it didn't hang together once the surprise was revealed -- until
they watched
again and saw how carefully constructed it was.
I'm on the fence with S2/S3 and S5. I suspect that after I see
S6 I'll think
S5 was my favorite.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Plotholes......... -- Rufus, 16:55:51 05/31/01
Thu
It was driving me crazy when some of the posters were going on
about
plotholes when they had not even seen The Gift. Then after most
of them shut
up. Some things just don't have an explanation, but with BVS they
do tie up
most of the loose ends. Season five has been my favorite because
it took so
many chances. The first episode though funny showed just how dark
the rest
of the year was going to get. It also showed us the answer to
the question
that Buffy had to decide in the Gift. Then Joss took the chance
of adding a
baby sister for Buffy and I noticed the negative posts before
MT was
introduced and just how many people had to do an about face in
their
opinion. We now have to answer the question what makes a good
person, a
soul, or their actions? Then they gave us the scariest bad guy
in Forever,
with Joel Grey as Doc. Actually as a good guy Giles became the
most
frightening when he first got the minion to answer a few questions,
then
when he calmly dispatched Glory and Ben by the hands on method
of
suffocation. We should be investigating the darkness of Giles.
Then Buffy
chosing to sacrifice herself for her sister. I read the wildfeed
and tuned
out of the negative posting because I knew that most of the people
complaining would change their minds. Season five has been a treat
and left
us with a juicy cliffhanger that will make us follow the trail
of crumbs to
UPN.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Plotholes......... -- rowan,
20:42:16 05/31/01 Thu
"It was driving me crazy when some of the posters were going
on about
plotholes when they had not even seen The Gift. Then after most
of them shut
up. Some things just don't have an explanation, but with BVS they
do tie up
most of the loose ends."
Me too. I try to stay calm, because after all, it is only a TV
show &
everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I had to stop reading
those
posts. It was making my blood boil. I can't understand investing
the energy
in picking apart something you haven't even seen yet based on
spoilers and a
wildfeed. If we could get all the meaning from the wildfeed, there
be no
need to actual film an ep. After it airs, hey, be my guest and
go to it
(although I must admit that I'm not very fussy related to plot;
if I can
suspend my disbelief enough to accept vampires exist, I'm not
going to
quibble over Buffy substituting her blood for Dawn's. As long
as character
makes sense and the plot isn't too swiss cheesy, and I'm learning
something,
I'm content).
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Ahhh! She said it again! --
OnM, 22:01:00 05/31/01 Thu
That phrase that the Knights Who Watch Buffy cannot hear!
***It's only a TV show...***
Ahhhhh!!! Stop!!
***It's only a TV show...***
Agghh! Stop! Stop! Cover your ears! Neeeekkk! Neeeekkk!
;)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Plotholes, etc. -- LoriAnn, 10:59:35
06/02/01 Sat
There's a lot of difference between analyzing an ep and picking
it to
pieces. I've been thinking about this myself as I've read some
of the posts.
The world is full of negative people who tear things down because
they
themselves cannot understand what they're tearing down.
We may all need to spend more time reading, viewing and, horror
of horrors,
thinking and less writing, and I include myself.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but opinions based on "what
I want" or
"fiction about fiction" with no textual foundation aren't
worth discussing;
in fact, they don't facilitate discussion at all, only arguments.
Thoughts on the next slayer --
vampire hunter D, 12:14:27 05/30/01 Wed
I've seen a lot of you argueing over the last week on whether
or not a new
slayer will (or should) be called to replace Buffy. Well, I've
thought about
this in terms of the theme of next season, and here's what I came
up with.
According to articles I've read, the theme of next season is growing
up (I
think an exact quote from Joss was "oh, grow up!").
This impies to me that
the good ol' Scooby gang will be growing up and moving on to the
next stage
in their lives. I don't mean to say that anyone will be leaving
(other than
Giles, but I'll get to that), or that anyone will be giving up
the fight
against evil, but to say that they will start being more adult
and quit
thinking in the adolecent mindset they've been in since we first
met them.
We've already seen the begining of this when Xander proposed to
Anya. Giles
leaving will another step in this direction. He's always been
the parental
figure of the group, and sooner or later, we all must all leave
the
influence of our parents and act on our own.
So how does this relate to a new Slayer? Well, when one generation
moves on,
another steps up and takes their place. I see the new slayer as
the
beginning of a new, next generation Scooby gang (perhaps with
Dawn as
another one of its members), to take over the adolscent role soon
to be
abandoned by the elder Gang.
And yes, the new slayer would be in Sunnydale somehow, if for
no other
reason that if she wasn't, we'd never get to see her.
Again, I'd just like to say that none of this implies that anyone
is leaving
or will be replaces with a younger counterpart. I mean it in a
literary
symbolic way.
(I'm not very good at explaining my thoughts, so keep that in
mind when you
think about what I just said)
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Thoughts on the next slayer -- Mishka, 13:37:55 05/30/01
Wed
Has anyone thought that the next slayer may be Dawn? She does
have Buffy
blood afterall. It`s a bit cheesy, but with the two shows being
on different
networks, I suspect that there will be many a continuity error
and a
recycling of characters. Already people are forgetting that Angel
is only
human to save Buffy at some time in the future. If they can`t
do a crossover
to bring them together, it won`t be possible. And as much as I
like Spike, I
can`t see how they will be able to keep him vampy, while at the
same time
make him love someone. Ie/ How come Angel couldn`t love anyone
without a
soul but Spike can? Stuff like that bugs me.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer -- cuda8483, 15:10:34
05/30/01 Wed
What if there is no new slayer? Buffy already called her replacement
(Kendra), who in turn called her's (Faith). Faith is now the sole
Vampire
Slayer. When Buffy comes back, maybe it will be as "just
a girl".
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer -- mundusmundi, 15:39:07
05/30/01 Wed
>>How come Angel couldn`t love anyone without a soul but
Spike can?<<
A mystery the show continues to explore and deepen. A pair of
quotes this
past season come to mind:
From "Crush": Buffy: Angel has a soul. Dawn: Spike has
a chip. Same diff.
And "The Gift": Doc: I don't smell a soul on you. Why
do you care? Spike: I
made a promise to a lady.
It'd be interesting to see Angelus with a chip.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Chipped Angelus -- wilder, 16:10:48 05/30/01
Wed
"It'd be interesting to see Angelus with a chip."
Unlike the paler shade of grey Spike, I think Angelus would be
just as evil
as always - just more inventive in causing pain with his actual
use of
direct violence.
After all, his game was more in tormenting, the thrill of sadistically
stalking before killing.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Chipped Angelus -- rowan, 16:14:52
05/30/01 Wed
I think so too. I think Spike's ability to love even during his
vampire days
was demonstrated by his relationship to Dru. Although the object
of his
affection was evil, and some of the methods he used to ensure
the
care/feeding of his love were evil, his still exhibited all the
classic
loverlike qualities of caring for his beloved.
Now that Spike has been separated from his vamp cohorts (by the
implanting
of that pesky chip), he has reconnected to humans and now is beginning
to
develop caring/loving relationshiops with them again (instead
of vamps).
I don't recall Angelus ever displaying quite these same characteristics,
but
it's been a long time since I saw those eps...
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Chipped Angelus -- MartinO, 05:44:12
06/03/01 Sun
Just to extend your point on the reconnection. He has been resocialised:
he
is spending his time with humans, fighting on the side of humans,
the only
'things' he can hurt are demons therefore he begins to see them
as Other
implying he begins to see himself as closer to those he spends
time with.
this would explain his ability to love/care for humans. Think
of the people
you are closest to - those you spend your time with.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer -- Cynthia, 16:26:55
05/30/01 Wed
I haven't watched since the beginning, and rarely watch Angel,
so I'd be
happy to be corrected if I'm wrong but didn't Angel get a soul
due to a
curse on Angelus.
Angel had his soul imposed on him, while Spike's soul seems to
be developing
from within.
It, of course, could and has been aruged that the "chip"
is the soul and
Spike would revert back if it weren't in place vs. the chip only
forces
Spike into an environment where some sort of soul and/or conciousness
could
develop.
Both are rare expections to the norm.
It would be interesting to see, if morally challenged, which soul
would
survive a test of endurance.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer -- Rufus,
20:09:06 05/30/01 Wed
Angelus was cursed by the Romany gypsies because he killed a favorite
daughter. They didn't want him to live as a human they wanted
to torment the
demon. Angel said something to the effect of, you don't know what
it's like
to do the things I did and care about it.
Is the chip a soul? If it is not what is the difference between
that actions
of a chipped Spike and a souled Angel. It also makes one ask what
it was in
Liam that the demon was able to use to make such a remorseless
killer? What
is it that allows Spike the choice to do good acts when his nature
is evil?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer --
Cynthia, 20:31:51 05/30/01
Wed
Yes, one could argue for hours about which character's soul as
realer,
truer, stronger, and both sides would have vaild points.
I've always been interested in the "what seems to be illusion
is reality and
what seems to reality is illusion" aspect of life. For example,
a doctor or
nurse being a serial killer (time to stop watching the news) or
a pious,
extremely religious person being a mobster or child molester.
Although,
sometimes I have a momentary desire for my black-and-while heros
and
villians, where you knew who was who. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Re: Thoughts on the next slayer
-- Rufus, 20:39:45
05/30/01 Wed
Darn it....life is never just black and white...just like the
bad guys may
have good qualities it's their actions that tell the tale. I remember
when
I'd speak to women about bad choices in men I'd tell them to not
just listen
to what they say, but look at what they do, if they don't match
up....well
then the guy isn't what he says he is. It would be nice if all
the bad guys
in the world had bumpy vampire faces so we could tell them apart...they
don't. So we have to not only listen to what they say but look
at what they
do. I think that is a bit of what Joss is trying to say when he
has demons
that may not be evil and humans(Holland Manners comes to mind)who
show you
what evil is all about. We are now forced to look before we condem
in the
Buffyverse.
------------------------------------------
[>[> The difference between vampires -- darrenK, 11:30:07
05/31/01 Thu
Yes, but the issue of vampires with differing amounts of humanity
issue has
been with us since at least Season 2.
Remember how the Judge killed the bookworm vampire in Surprise?
It was
because he had too much humanity.
But I think the most important example, is Spike and Angelus in
Becoming 1&
2.
Angelus wanted to destroy the world and he was going to. Spike
loved the
world enough to want to save it as long as there was Dru and dog
racing.So,
ever since season 2, Joss set up the idea of Spike being a more
human
vampire than Angelus.
------------------------------------------
[>Sorry to rain on your parade (including my own), but... --
OnM, 17:00:10
05/30/01 Wed
Word up from both Joss and Steven DeKnight (sp?) is that the Slayer
line
will not be advanced until Faith dies. While another quote from
Joss shows
that he might be interested in Dawn as an eventual future Slayer
(when asked
this question by an interviewer, his reply was that "...that
would be a show
I'd watch", there will be no new Slayers called at the moment.
So, my previously proposed 'Slayer Trinity' idea will have to
wait, I
suppose. Oh well...
------------------------------------------
[>[> Where did you see this important info, OnM? -- Masquerade,
18:10:34
05/30/01 Wed
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> I was unable to locate the exact item I wanted,
but these refer to
it... -- OnM, 22:36:08 05/30/01 Wed
...and were posted at the Cross & Stake Spoiler Board:
Date Posted: 09:41:28 05/27/01 Sun
Author: Tensai
Subject: There will NOT be a new slayer.
In reply to: DT's message, "One slayer dies, another one's
called..." on
09:41:28 05/27/01 Sun
I hate to be rude, but seriously, you guys are beating a dead
horse.
Joss Whedon stated a year or so ago that the line now lies with
Faith, if
Buffy dies there will be no new
slayer. In addition, just two days ago, another writer also confirmed
that
there will be no new slayer.
It ain't gonna happen,
-Tensai
Date Posted: 17:29:27 05/26/01 Sat
Author: Kerri
Subject: Re: The Next Slayer?
In reply to: Tina's message, "The Next Slayer?" on 17:29:27
05/26/01 Sat
Steven DeKnight posted at the Bronze and said that no new slayer
will be
called until Faith dies.
Date Posted: 23:56:01 05/25/01 Fri
Author: Tensai
Subject: Tensai waves at Leoff - Answer to Slayer Lineage (DeKnight
Post)
Leoff,
Just when I thought I would never find that darn Joss reference
(it was
driving me crazy too, because I
want to get a solid confirm for the Spoiler Slayer. Luckily, and
I don't
know if you saw it, but Steve
DeKnight posted this today at the Bronze.
"Okay, way too many questions to answer individually, so
here's some general
responses:
Yes, Buffy's dead and rottin' away in her grave.
No, a new Slayer will only be called up when Faith dies."
So I guess that means it's confirmed on several fronts.
-Tensai
*******
So, that's my source. Obviously in the Jossverse you never say
never, but
this does look pretty sure, at least enough that I'm no longer
considering
it until I see better evidence.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Thanks! ...um who's Steve DeKnight? --
Masq, 08:52:19 05/31/01
Thu
Everybody thinks 'coz I know the on-screen aspects of the show
pretty well I
know the off-screen too. But I am woefully ignorant.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re:He's a new staff writer. He wrote
"Blood Ties" and
"Spiral"! :) -- Nina, 09:08:00 05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> 'k, now I remember seeing the
name at the top of a
shooting script. Thanks! -- Masq, 11:11:23 05/31/01 Thu
Wolvish Spike and Roguish Dawn
-- Justin, 20:23:46 05/30/01 Wed
A girl with a mysterious power that both creates and destroys,
that makes
her feel isolated from others, is strapped to the top of a large
tower where
her inner power will be used to destroy all of creation. Suddenly
appears a
hero, who isn't really a hero, or is he? Dark. Evil. Powerful.
Morally
ambiguous. Evil scientists have filled him with unwanted metal.
Now he has
been drawn into an inner circle of heroes by his love for one
goody goody
woman and his soft spot for the poor girl in front of him. In
the moonlight,
we see the tips of his sharp..... claws?
I was RACKING my brain trying to think where I'd had that feeling
I got when
Dawn strained to reach Spike and they looked at one another like
that. Does
anybody remember the TRAIN scene in X-Men? In a movie with WAY
too many
special effects, but a lot of promise, the scene where Rogue falls
into
Wolverines arms is the most poignent. They can't touch. But their
relationship is so touching.
Does anyone know how MUCH of X-Men Joss wrote? he MUST have wrote
that
scene.
And then I started thinking: I THOUGHT I saw Doc's goofy tounge
somewhere
else!
.... and what about Willow's oft discussed black eyes? Floating
through the
air, fired up with electricity, and scary colored eyes, is it
Willow? Or
Storm?
I mean Spike's whole recent character arch is WOLVERINE'S! What's
her face
the red head doesn't have any character whatsoever in X-men....
but
Wolverine's love for her, as undeveloped in the movie as it is,
is just like
Spike's for Buffy. At the same time, Rogue and Wolverine, the
center of the
movie, are Dawn and Spike. Poor, lost, isolated girl, frightened
by her
power that keeps destroying things is protected and understood
by morally
ambiguous man whose tenderness is brought out by her.
Reily and Spike? Cyclops and Wolverine? Clean cut boring guy is
given hard
time by WAY cooler way more witty jellous monster who is probably
right that
his girlfriend has a dark attraction for him.
Which will come out first so we can see how the Spike/ Rogue Wolverine/Buffy
story line will be resolved? And how old is Joss's girlfriend?
(don't misunderstand me. Spike is way cooler than Wolverine. Buffy
is
multifaceted and I can't even remember that other girls name.
And that
movie, sans the climb over the movie theater seat, touching train
scene, was
pretty bad.) Though I HEAR that it was cut about 1/3 of it's length
by the
producers. Which would explain why we never see Wolverine even
TALK to
whatserface before he vows his love. Also, Storm would never say
anything
like, "Big gun? Can't I be more of a cudgel? Or a pointy
stick!"
------------------------------------------
[>I'm right there with ya! -- Jen C., 20:49:33 05/30/01 Wed
I don't remember which episode it was exactly...but I was watching
Spike and
suddenly heard in my head..."Wolverine!" Good call on
the parallels.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Wolvish Spike and Roguish Dawn -- vampire hunter D, 11:40:31
05/31/01
Thu
My god, you're right! I don't know how I missed this. And the
worst part is
I was just watching X-men just a few days after "the Gift".
In fact, now
that I think of it, the special effects of the portal Dawn opens
look almost
exact;lyl ike the radiation field Magnetos's machine generates.
As for the train scene, I think it almost parallels the scene
in "Tough
Love" where Dawn and Spike are in the cave.
btw, the redhead's name is Jean Grey. ANd I know that the Jean/Wolverine
relationship was a bit dumb, but that's what happens when you
try to fit ver
30 years of comic book into a 2-hour movie.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Wolvish Spike and Roguish Dawn -- aelith, 13:44:09
05/31/01 Thu
Ouch, I wasn't going to see XMen because they weren't the FantasticFour.
(60's comic, same idea, red suits)
Now I'll have to get the vedio to check this out.
Could Joss have been reusing....
never mind.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> an other movie tie, (showing my age again) --
Aelith, 15:50:46
05/31/01 Thu
Problably need some movie buffs to back me on this one.
All through the the Camper Chase and Bus Station I kept flashing
on *tada!*
StageCoach.
Did Joss write that one?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: an other movie tie, (showing my age
again) -- Andy, 17:31:27
05/31/01 Thu
Yeah, I definitely thought of Stagecoach. The Mad Max films too.
I think
DeKnight wrote that episode, didn't he? I thought it was a very
fun episode,
even if I have no idea how the knights actually tracked the Scoobies
down in
the first place :)
Oh, my first post here. Howdy :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Howdy Andy -- Aelith, 18:32:09 05/31/01
Thu
Thanks for the conformation. I real new too. It's taken me a couple
of days
just to catch up on the current posts. This is a fantastic site.
Enjoy
Aelith
Silly question -- Cynthia, 21:19:20
05/30/01 Wed
As I understand it, Lian was the Angel's name when he was alive.
Angelus
when he was a soulless vamp. And Angel as a souled vamp.
So, if William was Spike human name. And Spike his unsouled vamp
name. What
do you think his (if he gets one)souled name would be.
Must go to bed, getting too silly.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Spike's New Name -- Lazarus, 21:23:14 05/30/01 Wed
How about Bill the Vamp? Tall, kind o' skinny, a bit of an outsider
to the
group, says "Ack! Phht!" a lot, coughs up hairballs
at inopportune times...
Oh... Sorry... Wrong Bill... ;)
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Spike's New Name -- Scott, 02:28:06 05/31/01 Thu
Great idea. I love Spike, but... to quote from the show, Did anyone
else get
a scary visual.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Silly question -- Aelith, 21:34:14 05/30/01 Wed
How about Ike. Then his groupies can chant We like Ike, We like
Ike, We like
Ike.
He He I'm giving away my age.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Silly question -- Cynthia, 05:17:25 05/31/01 Thu
Hey, I was born during Ike. Drat, there goes my age. Must be an
age admiting
curse going on.
I always thought that the name Angel was rather ironic, which
is probably
why JW named him so. So I would think Spike's new name should
be ironic for
his situation or reflect his personality. Somehow I don't think
Ike is going
to do it.
How about Sonny. It would probably drive him nuts considering
the "big bad"
image he has always tried to maintain.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: How 'bout "Chip?" ;) -- mundusmundi,
06:40:57 05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------
[>How about "hey you with the hot, tight body?" --
rowan, 14:13:53 05/31/01
Thu
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Blondel? um.. I know Ted! rimes with bed ;-) --
Aelith, 14:21:06
05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------
[>[> we could further test his soul and call him Yanni....
or Dubya. --
Justin, 14:32:06 05/31/01 Thu
------------------------------------------
[>Why not just call him William the Bloody again? -- Jack_McCoy,
20:03:11
06/01/01 Fri
I was never clear if he actually called himself that, or if it
was just a
passing nickname he used, but I always liked the way it sounded.
And, I
think it fits his new personality perfectly; Willam, in that he
is more
human than he has ever been, and Bloody because he is still dangerous
(although no longer the Big Bad)
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Why not just call him William the Bloody again?
-- Lazarus,
21:26:20 06/01/01 Fri
Only if he starts writing love poems to Buffy... (...The effulgence
of your
smile... The beauty of your spin-kick...)
Questions about Spike -- Aelith,
16:27:28 05/31/01 Thu
Anyone, please explain to me why Spike introduced Dawn to Doc
in the first
place. Don't buy his stated reasons. Which if memory serves was
'Do it the
wrong way could get you hurt' and 'And if you got to do it lets
do it
right'.
Why in the world would he introduce a powerful innocent to the
Devil whose
quizing hints speak of a long but secret relationship. Dispite
Spike's
denials he looked damm guilty.
Is it true what someone posted a couple of days ago, that Spike
will join
Angel's cast next year? Don't see him keeping any promisis from
there.
Does this not mean that next season starts out with Xander, Willow,
Tara,
Anya, and Dawn. And Probably Doc.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Questions about Spike (S6 speculation) -- rowan, 16:49:06
05/31/01
Thu
I'm fairly sure that Joss has said in very recent interviews that
there are
no cast changes for BtVS for next year except a reduced role for
Giles's
because of ASH's move back to the UK. I believe he also confirmed
that JM
moving to AtS was only a rumor. Also, JM said in a recent interview
that the
chip is staying in for a while since the writers still want to
explore
Spike's obsession with Buffy.
It might be in the TV Guide interview. Or perhaps one of the interviews
posted at slayage.com. There have been so many recently. But I
know I've
seen these comments in reputable interviews.
Here's how I interpreted Spike's motivations regarding the whole
Doc thing.
I think Spike's ideas of how to "protect" those he loves
are a little
different from the average person. He doesn't keep truths from
people or try
to stop them from doing things. IMHO, his idea of caring/nurturing
is to
have some skin in the game, so to speak -- he's there for those
he loves to
help them with the consequences and potentialities of their choices.
Let's go back to when Dawn broke into the Magic Box to check Giles's
diary.
Spike didn't stop Dawn. As he told Buffy later, he knew she'd
just do it
again. But he went with her, and he was there to be with her when
she found
out. He also counselled Buffy that she should have dealt with
the situation
better by telling Dawn herself, rather than leaving the whole
thing to
horrible chance.
I saw the Doc thing the same way. Spike found Dawn doing a spell
that could
have really terrible consequences. He's not in to forbidding things,
but he
found a way to be with her where he could accord Dawn her independence,
but
still protect her. He treats her like an adult, capable of her
own choices.
I suspect that Spike just viewed Doc as another "guy who
knows things."
Because Spike walks on the edge of the magickal world, he's not
as
threatened by these types of situations and probably felt he could
protect
Dawn.
I don't think he fully appreciated the depths of Doc until he
was finally
confronted with Doc's deception (which he figured out). Then,
he made the
fatal mistake of assuming that Xander had actually killed Doc.
Spike never sugarcoats things, even to Buffy or Dawn. It doesn't
come off to
me as nefarious; I just think that's his style & in some ways
he functions
as truthteller in the Buffyverse.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Questions (S6 speculation) -- Aelith, 18:57:43
05/31/01 Thu
Ok, I'm as guilty as any of reading my problems into the plot
lines. (can
never quite trust were I have been betrayed.) Lets just say there
is a good
chance Spike can still revert to evil, if he hasn't already.
Has any one given thought to the idea that DAWN cast the love
spell on Spike
as a reward for being nice to her and to lessen the tensions,
berriers
around her?
Glad to hear about the rummors. Couldn't really imagen Spike on
Angel. Hope
you are right about the rest too.
aelith
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Questions (S6 speculation) -- mundusmundi,
06:07:46 06/01/01
Fri
>>Has any one given thought to the idea that DAWN cast the
love spell on
Spike as a reward for being nice to her and to lessen the tensions,
berriers
around her?<<
Spike's Buffylove has been a long time building; if I recall,
his first
realization of it was in eppy 4 of this year, OomM. Can't remember
even when
he and Dawn first hooked up. The scene that comes to mind -- the
one where
they first got involved with each other -- was on B's b-day, when
Dawn found
him standing outside with a dented box of chocolates.
Anyway, if Dawn has any magic powers, she's certainly kept them
well hidden
up to now, even risking her life in the process.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Questions about Spike (S6 speculation) -- LoriAnn,
14:56:21
06/01/01 Fri
Of course, Spike has gone over to the other side or played both
sides for
his own ends a couple of times: with Adam and with Riley's surgeon.
Still, I
think you're right. Spike has been pretty straight with everyone
and is
often the "truth sayer." I was impressed with the scene
at Buffy's house
when he couldn't pass the threshold. Once Buffy invited him in,
he said,
"Poof, the barrier's down," and the barrier was down
between him and Buffy
resulting in some real communication. Buffy said something to
him she had
not said to anyone else, not everyone would survive the night,
and he said
he knew she didn't love him and he was a monster, but she treathed
him like
a man. I can't believe this candor between them would have been
possible had
Spike been a "double agent."
Some have used Doc's easy besting of Spike as evidence of the
two being in
cahoots. Had they had a knockdown drag out, as Spike expected,
probably,Doc
would have had a fight on his hands. But that isn't what happened;
as Spike
readied himself for the dukeout, Doc used blazing speed and a
couple of
wrestling moves to quickly dispatch Spike and, IMO, did it convincingly.
Spike simply got beaten, badly beaten. Buffy did so much better
than Spike
because she didn't give Doc a chance.
I don't discount the possibility of the writers taking Spike down
the
two-faced path again, but this story arc doesn't feel like an
instance of
that.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Questions about Spike (S6 speculation) --
Rufus, 15:36:13
06/01/01 Fri
I think you may be right. When I considered how to make Spike
more
acceptable for rehabilitation I had hoped the writers would take
Spike in a
different direction than Angel. We knew that Liam was an unhappy
guy with
repressed rage against his father that he kept suppressed with
alcohol. When
he got turned into a vamp the result was a bloodbath that took
out the
village. All because Liam never grew up enough to either get out
of town and
make his own fortune, or drink himself to death. With Spike the
way to go
was to make him the polar opposite to Angel. You ended up with
a toff nosed
upper class git who was afraid of his shadow. But on the whole
he was a good
person who had suffered rejection. When he became a vamp he chucked
the high
brow affectations and became a tough guy(think Giles as the Ripper),
but the
romantic guy was still there as you can see with Dru, now Buffy
and Dawn. I
really have to wonder if he would have hurt the mother who was
waiting for
him to come home the evening Dru found him, I somehow don't think
so. The
other fellows just may have found out what a railroad spike looked
like. But
with Spikes behavior with Joyce you can see that he has certain
soft spots.
Now if it wasn't for that chip we would never have seen it as
Spike would
have continued on his way killing to get the attention he never
got when he
was William. I will be interested in seeing how they would explain
any
permanent change, for the better, that Spike has, or if they will
blame it
on the chip.
"Family" in Season Five. -- Justin, 21:03:37 05/30/01
Wed
I was thinking about that final scene in X-men when Dawn is tied
up to have
all the life dripped out of her and Wolverine comes to save her,
sacraficing
himself, choosing what he believes is death, to save her.
But then... in Buffy... when Spike TRIES to save the poor helpless
maiden.
He's SO powerless that there's never BEEN such a one sided fight.
He can't
even TOUCH Doc. Absolutely as helpless as you could imagine helpless
to be.
Hmmmm.....
There's been some question on this board, and even some accusations
of bad
story telling, as to why Spike was so helpless against Doc. On
two occasions
he gets knifed and sworded about.
Welll.... what if we look at the fact that there are really no
fathers on
Buffy. Buffy's dad is gone. And nobody has a real Dad, and what
we have
instead are replacement father figures. Older males that step
in to guide,
comfort, and in turn be changed. Giles. Spike. Replacement father
figures.
Replacement father figures. I know from MY own experience, my
friends who
had these awful REAL father's, at some point in their life, they
choose new
ones. And they are incredibly important psychologically.
But in *The Gift* we have this limitation of the replacement father
figure
that we don't have in X-Men. In X-Men, it's Wolverine's sacrafice
that saves
Rogue. Doc... well, couldn't we see Doc as the doddering, scary,
mysteriously powerful real father. Dad's can be creepy that way.
Doddering,
helpless, sympathetic, almost lovable with their bath robes and
their coffee
mugs and then...
And...then... well.... um.... I know this is a family board....
but with his
large broad sword, his knife, and his probing icky tounge... not
a proper
father figure at ALL!
So here's Dawn on the precipice to be sacraficed, and who does
she first
turn to? The real father figure, Doc.
"You can save me!" she says.
And Doc, in response, asks her if she wants to see a "trick"
and starts
waving his phallis around. YUCK!
Then comes her chosen replacement father figure. To save her.
He's done her
some good in the past.
But the replacement father figure, in any contest, is absolutely
powerless
against the deep rooted and destructive power of the real father.
What
replacement father figure could ever heal the wounds caused by
being brought
up by a Doc? Powerless. Scratch at the surface. Look on helplessly
and then
get tossed off a building. Can't help the poor tortured girl he
wants to
save.
Ah, hm, who can fight the power of the evil father figure then?
For one, a
woman who has gone through the same struggle. And...more importantly
I'm
thinking....her sister. I think it's an important dynamic in families
with
emotionally or otherwise abusive fathers. The siblings get divided.
They
turn against one another. When their largest power to emotionally
and
psychologically fight back, and to heal, comes from one another.
Instead,
they learn by watching how their parents relate to them, and treat
their
siblings like wise. It can be, in an abusive house.... as if your
brother or
sister does not even exist as a real person... as the father denies
the
validity and reality of the children, so do the children deny
that validity
and reality of one another.
Until one day.... they seem to appear out of thin air. And you
find they are
your closest scooby in the struggle. And I think you maybe even
do come to
the realization, that the person you thought was most different
than you,
that you never thought had anything important to say, is more
you than
anyone else.
Whatcha think?
------------------------------------------
[>In the eyes of the beholder -- Aelith, 21:27:48 05/30/01
Wed
Yuk is right. You make a priety good case but if that is what
Joss intended
I hope it was developed out of a larger context of 'evil' and
not a specific
plot thread.
I think you are all way underestimation the importance of Doc.
He's not a
demon, he's a Devil. He has a hold on Spike and he wants Dawn's
power. He
didn't fight Buffy because he had already cut Dawn.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: "Family" in Season Five. -- LadyStarlight,
07:18:20 05/31/01 Thu
That's a very interesting point. I've been thinking about this
off & on &
here's my thoughts.
For one thing, Spike was beaten up REALLY bad by Glory. Now, vampire
healing
or not, that's got to have some effect on a guy. Also, his hands
were cut up
by that sword he grabbed, so wouldn't there be some lingering
nerve damage?
(remember Xander & the lighter). I'm not sure of the elapsed time
between
episodes, but I got the feeling that it wasn't much more than
3-5 days
between "Buffy-bot" and The Gift.
Well, my 2 cents anyways. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Time between episodes / Spike and Doc similarities
-- Nina,
09:53:37 05/31/01 Thu
Between "Intervention" and "The Gift" only
4 days went by. Most of the
action was set during day 3. The way Spike heals is a way to keep
track of
time (at least in the beginning).
Day one: end of "Intervention" (Spike is covered in
sexy wounds)
Day two: "Tough love" (Spike is half healed)
Day three: end of "Tough love" Glory finds out that
Dawn is the key. It's
around lunch time as they are ready to eat sandwishes.
Day three: "Spiral" It's starts right after TL (Spike
only has a few
scratches around the eye). They all spend the day in the Gas station
and at
night Glory captures Dawn.
Day three: "Weigh of the world" starts 1/2 hour after
the end of "Spiral".
It's still the same day as in the beginning of "Tough love".
(Spike hands
healed in half a day)
Day three: "The Gift" takes place right after WotW (it's
still the same
night) That's why Spike still has his scratches around the eye.
(though one
can wonder why they don't heal as fast as his hands!!!!)
Day four: The sun finally comes up in the morning.
--------
As for Doc, the more I think about him, the more I can't decide
what to make
of him. One think struck me though when I last saw that scene
between Spike
and Doc. Both dressed in black, both with white hair. Okay it
sounds weird
enough, but for a second it was like if Doc and Spike were some
kind of
family.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Time between episodes / Spike and Doc similarities
--
Aquitaine, 11:03:34 05/31/01 Thu
I hate to say it, but you have a point, Nina, about Spike and
Doc - although
I don't see Spike and Doc as being all that similar. I thought
the scene on
the tower really showed that their allegiances differed despite
their both
being 'demons'. Doc seems to be prescient about 'some' things
about Spike.
His reference to the cocoa in The Weight of the World especially
freaked me
out. Doc is some sort of devil all right. He is the most frightening
evil
creature to hit Sunnydale in a long while. ::shudder::
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Time between episodes / Spike and Doc
similarities -- Nina,
12:42:49 05/31/01 Thu
I don't like the thought either believe me. As I am always wrong
anyway, I
think it's safe to say that Doc and Spike are not related in anyway!
:)
The cocoa reference freaked you out? The China reference freaked
me even
more! He seems to know stuff without really knowing it! Maybe
at the end of
next year we'll have a scene where Spike learns that his father
is Doc!
After all we already got the part when Spike falls down a tower
how much
like Star Wars can it be! ;)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Time between episodes / Spike
and Doc similarities --
SDThu, 18:11:05 05/31/01 Thu
Perhaps I'm just dense, but what's so freak-inducing about the
cocoa? I'm
wracking my brain, but can't come up with the connection.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Re: Time between episodes /
Spike and Doc similarities --
Nina, 19:18:07 05/31/01 Thu
Joyce made some cocoa to Spike in "Lover's walk" when
he went to her and
talked about Dru. He reminded us of that fact in "Forever"
when he said to
Xander and Willow something like "she always had a nice cuppa
(of cocoa) for
me".
Per se it's not that weird, but considering that Doc seems to
know about
Spike's past (the hair color and China reference) it only adds
to the
creepiness.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Time between episodes
/ Spike and Doc similarities
-- SDThu, 19:54:02 05/31/01 Thu
Ah, I follow now. Thanks! The thread makes a whole lot more sense
now. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Re: Time between episodes /
Spike and Doc similarities --
Greta, 05:02:21 06/01/01 Fri
In Lover's Walk, Joyce made Spike cocoa "with some of those
little
marshmallows" and they had a nice chat about his abandonment
by Dru. Then in
"Forever," Spike reference that and kind of suggested
it was an ongoing
thing.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Spike healings -- Morgane, 06:12:38 06/01/01
Fri
Just a tought about the time it took to Spike to healed. He wasn't
quite in
good shape at the end of Intervention when Glory had her fun on
him... and
it took like 4 days to almost totally healed! well I agree with
special vamp
healing power but just remember season 2! When an organ fell on
him, it took
like monthes to healed, and even to be able to walk properly.
Back then, his
face was quite a mess too. But it took very long to go back to
normal. I
don't know if that's a script mistake or if it does mean something
but
anyway, that was just something I noticed.
What do we do to celebrate? --
rowan, 20:08:43 05/31/01 Thu
Okay, someone mentioned below that it's the 1st anniversary of
this board on
6/14. So what are we going to do to celebrate? Here are some ideas.
1. We post 12 threads (symbolizing the 12 months of the board's
existence),
one for each of the key characters on BtVS. Each thread would
discuss the
character's role in the Buffyverse, what we love about them, what
we hate
about them, how we've seen them develop over 100 eps, prospects
for the
character's future, what fictional or nonfictional person they're
most like,
what we've learned from them, and any other old illuminating thing
that
might occur to us. Someone starts it off, and then everyone jumps
in to join
the fun!
If we want to get really organized, 12 of us could volunteer to
each start
one thread. Extra credit for reasoned analysis based on research
into tapes
of eps, shooting scripts, etc.). That would get the fun & debate
rolling!
Dibs on Spike. ;)
The 12 characters could be:
1 - Buffy
2 - Xander
3 - Willow
4 - Giles
5 - Angel
6 - Oz
7 - Faith
8 - Tara
9 - Anya
10 - Spike
11 - Dawn
12 - Joyce
2. We could do something similar with nominees for the 12 best
eps, what
their place is in the canon, what they've revealed of the Buffyverse,
why
they were emotionally moving, or cinematically significant, etc.
We could let it be totally without structure (people just post)
or could
define a period to accept posted nominees, then vote on them in
some way
(e-mail or something maybe).
3. We could do a big post on the greatest one liners or funniest
moments
from the last 5 years (we started one below and it was alot of
fun). We
could also modify this to be the most significant moments, most
revealing
moments, et al.
------------------------------------------
[>Ooh, like the character idea. I'll start a Tara post if we
do it. --
Wiccagrrl, 20:38:59 05/31/01 Thu
Also, the 12 best ep idea sounds great.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Ooh, like the character idea. I'll start a Tara
post if we do it.
-- rowan, 20:44:59 05/31/01 Thu
Okay, if there's enough interest (and Masquerade doesn't have
a problem with
the concept), you're locked in for Tara!
We'll probably need to stagger the characters so we don't flood
the board, I
would guess. I'm hoping some of the posts will get alot of response
and get
very long and interesting.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Ooh, like the character idea. I'll start
a Tara post if we do
it. -- Masquerade, 20:54:52 05/31/01 Thu
I love it!
I'm just wondering what the winners will "win"... 'coz
the only thing I have
to offer is ice cream, puppy dogs, international fame when their
insightful
analysis appears on my site, and maybe Canadian chocolate if I
can get the
board posters to the North to sell me some. And if I don't eat
it first.
And I actually don't have any puppy dogs.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> That would be Jersey Milk for you.............
-- Rufus,
21:30:33 05/31/01 Thu
Yes, I would like to see what others have to say about the characters.
I
already took on Angel and Spike as well as Darla and Dru. I'm
not always
kind to them, but to understand how far they may have come you
have to look
at them at their lowest. I think Giles needs some looking into,
he has some
similarities to Spike that I find facinating.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Way cool ideas! My own humble suggestions
presented
forthwith-- -- OnM, 22:22:19 05/31/01 Thu
I'd suggest the characters as a good starting off point-- anyone
can pick a
character, write down their thoughts as previously suggested.
E-mail them to
Masquerade, who will pick what she thinks is the one best and
most
thought-provoking submission for each of the 12 characters, then
post them
on the anniversary date, or maybe at the end of June if 6/14 is
too early.
Then, discussion would go on from each post of the twelve. (If
your post
wasn't selected, here would be your chance to add it on).
Since only one poster per character wins the 'lead position',
you'd have to
give it your very best work to win out. Winners get to keep their
original
work on the ATPoBtVS website for the summer, in a new section
called
'Profundities'r'Us'-- Best of the ATPoBtVS Discussion Board -
Year One'.
Well, maybe not 'Profundities'r'Us'-- somebody just said that
once and I
liked it! ;);)
(Whaddaya mean, 'that was me?' Damn Evil Clone...)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Re: Way cool ideas! My own
humble suggestions presented
forthwith-- -- Lazarus, 07:42:49 06/01/01 Fri
How about introducing a new character discussion every week? Reduces
strain
on the board plus it gives us something to do until next season...
:)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Way cool ideas! My
own humble suggestions presented
forthwith-- -- rowan, 09:08:33 06/01/01 Fri
Great idea! We can kick it off on 6/14 and do one a week. That
way the
goodness will last until September (last character post will be
8/30).
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Way cool ideas!
My own humble suggestions
presented forthwith-- -- Nina, 10:42:03 06/01/01 Fri
Lovely idea! I'm in! :)
------------------------------------------
[>Re: What do we do to celebrate? -- Aquitaine, 22:09:35 05/31/01
Thu
Since you snatched Spike up for yourself, Rowan (harumph! LOL),
I'll put my
money on Dawn since I've really only watched Season 5 'in living
colour', so
to speak. Neat idea! And the anniversary practically coincides
with my
birthday too:)
Let's celebrate!
Shall we count on you to keep us informed as to our specific posting
duties?
- Aquitaine
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: What do we do to celebrate? -- rowan, 06:25:15
06/01/01 Fri
I was kidding -- you can have Spike if you want him. I think we
need to
resolve if we're just going to take the first volunteer for each
character,
or do what OnM suggests and submit to Masq and let her pick the
most
thoughtful one to lead off.
I vote for the first method because it's simplier and requires
less
coordination, but I'll leave it up to Masq if she has time to
take on the
second method.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: What do we do to celebrate? -- OnM, 07:45:42
06/01/01 Fri
This is very true-- not much of a celebration for Masq if we try
to dump a
lot of work and responsibility on her. So, I'm good whatever way
we go--
should still be great!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: What do we do to celebrate? -- Brian,
08:38:29 06/01/01 Fri
We need dark chocolate in the mix. (In anticipation of Season
6).
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: What do we do to celebrate? -- rowan,
09:11:08 06/01/01 Fri
Plus, what I was thinking is that regardless of who starts each
post off,
anyone can post a response with their view of the character, too.
I know
that Aquitaine would like Spike, but I will probably do some research
on
Spikey as well, so that I can add my two cents.
At the end, Masq would have a nice long thread that she could
(at her least)
go through to see if any pearls of wisdom are there for posterity.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> I like this idea best--but one "official"
thread per
character, please -- Masquerade, 10:14:06 06/01/01 Fri
Mud-wrestle amongst yourselves in a survival-of-the-fittest-bro
way to claim
first post for each "official" thread:
1. Buffy
2. Giles
3. Willow
4. Xander
5. Angel
6. Cordelia
7. Wesley
8. Gunn
9. Anya
10. Tara
11. Dawn
12. Spike
13. Lilah
14. Lorne/The Host
Also fair game, the dearly departed:
15. Joyce
16. Doyle
17. Oz
18. Riley
19. Faith
20. Ben
21. Jenny
22. Drusilla
23. Lindsey
24. Darla
25. Kate
Of course, this is my list of central characters from the Moral
Ambiguities
page. The truly evil are less fun to chat about (Glory, Angelus,
Master, and
the Mayor...maybe) but lots of fun to watch!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> Guidelines for Character Thread
Anniversary Celebration --
rowan, 13:54:13 06/01/01 Fri
Okay, I think we have enough interest to do a ATPoBtVS First Anniversary
Character Thread Posting Party.
1. One thread per character, please. We don't want overwhelming
board
traffic. Plus, this way we can keep all our great thoughts in
one place.
2. I (rowan) am the coordinator of the event. This will satisfy
my lust for
power. ;)
2. Originators of a character thread will be selected based on
who
volunteers (I'll resolve conflicts through negotiation or by first
come,
first served if no other way is possible).
3. Your thread can address any aspect of the character that you
find
informative, illustrative, illuminating, invigorating, and/or
irritating.
Extra brownie points for analysis based on sound research into
eps and
shooting scripts from the first five seasons.
4. Volunteers should e-mail me to request a character. I'm suggesting
this
because the thread might get long and I might inadvertently lose
somebody's
request. This will also cut down on confusing board traffic. If
you really
don't want to release your e-mail address, then I'll work with
you through
posts.
5. We'll just post one character thread per week, again to control
board
traffic, plus to spread the goodness until the new season starts.
If we get
12 volunteers, that will take us to the end of August at one a
week. If
people volunteer for all 25 characters listed, we can do two a
week.
6. I'll keep a schedule of the character, who is the post orginator,
and the
week the post will appear. I'll post updates periodically so we
all know
what's what.
7. Currently, we have 2 characters spoken for:
Tara - Wiccagrrl
Spike - Aquitaine
I hope this sounds good! I tried to incorporate all the suggestions
I
received thus far. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Guidelines for Character
Thread Anniversary
Celebration -- Masquerade, 13:58:49 06/01/01 Fri
"Extra brownie points for analysis based on sound
research into eps and shooting scripts from the first five seasons."
This is pretty much a pre-req for having your insightful character
analysis
featured on the ATPoBtVS site.
Links to transcripts and shooting scripts are on my links page.
Fun, fun, fun!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Problems with
email so... -- Nina, 14:28:11
06/01/01 Fri
...it's the best way for me to join you for now! I'd like to take
Buffy if
it's okay with everyone! :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> You've got mail...............
-- Rufus, 15:26:08
06/01/01 Fri
Hey, I picked Giles cause I had to research a fussy librarian
who has hidden
talents.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You've got
mail............... -- Brian,
14:56:31 06/02/01 Sat
Ok if I pick Faith? I started watching BtVS just before Faith
joined the
cast, so I have all her episodes on tape
Detour from 'In retrospect',
below-- Wild theory (but not really) on S6
Buffy rebirth -- OnM, 21:49:35 05/31/01 Thu
SPOILER SPECULATION FOR SEASON 6. COULD BE RIGHT, MAYBE NOT.
Please read at your own risk. This is based on items from Angel
S2 Ep 1
*Judgement* and some posts by Joss, plus comments he's made in
interviews.
I've been putting it together since seeing *Buffy vs. Dracula*
the other
night and some stuff made sense that didn't before.
We will start out with several excerpts from *Judgement*, the
1st ep of
Angel, S2. I'll note relevant
passages with >>><<< marks.
*******
WESLEY
>>>That's what Prio Motu's are. They hunt, they kill,
you best believe
they're torturing -- what, we're
supposed to think a creature like that can just change its modus
operandi
overnight . . . and turn into some
noble protector and defender of . . . <<<
*******
ANGEL
Not a lotta time tonight, Merl. Why'd you lie about the Prio?
MERL
There's a price on the woman.
ANGEL
The woman or the baby?
MERL
>>>Yeah, it's the kid - a daughter, she's supposed to
become some powerful,
benevolent . . . I don't know,
the Dark Ones want her out of the picture so it's a two-for-one
with the
mom. <<<
*******
Next, a scene between Jo and Angel where he tells her he feels
the necessity
to protect her:
ANGEL
I know . . . but I don't have a choice, either.
(beat)
Kamal's mission is mine, now.
A beat. She pauses in her search, glances at him.
JO
You sound just like him. You guys with your missions and ancient
laws and
medieval codes of honor.
Well, I'm not interested. I'm just trying to protect my baby.
She goes back to searching.
ANGEL
I understand --
JO
How could you? I don't even understand it. I mean, six months
ago I'm
working the register at Costco. Did
my time as a stockgirl, and I was moving up. A nice promotion,
you know? I
was going to be able to
provide for my baby . . . then these things start coming after
me . . . now
all I want to do is make sure she
gets born.
ANGEL
That's what I want, too.
JO
Right -- because she's some >>>seer or leader or Joan
of Arc. Well you know
what she is to me? My
daughter. Not someone's "holy mission".<<<
*******
Later, back at Caritas:
HOST
Well, who's a little curt? Who's a little Curt Jurgens in 'The
Enemy Below'?
The tribunal will be wherever
he is. She can't escape it.
ANGEL
Where is she?
HOST
(more serious)
My question first. And answer true, 'cause you know I'll know.
(beat) Why
'Mandy'?
ANGEL
Well, I know the words.
(quietly)
And I kind of think it's pretty.
HOST
And it is, you great big sap. >>>There's not a destroyer
of worlds can argue
with Manilow<<< and good
for you for fessing up. She'll be at Fourth and Spring. The trial
will be
there.
*******
OnM again, back in the present--
OK, now I haven't seen the movie Lorne is referring to here (I
might now!
;), but from a search on the
IMDB I found this plot summary:
Set during the Battle of Atlantic during the Second World War,
"The Enemy
Below" tells the story of the
cat and mouse Destroyer/U-Boat hunt. For the Americans, a former
Merchant
Marine who saw his wife
killed when his freighter was torpedoed by the Germans. >>>For
the Germans,
a veteran U-Boat
commander who sees no honor in the German aims of the war.<<<
Both of these
highly experienced men
must now battle each other, knowing that only one will survive.
(Summary written by Anthony Hughes)
Not sure how this fits in yet, but it's such an *incredibly* obscure
reference it has to mean something! I'll
get back to you on this, or if you have any ideas, please fill
me in.
*******
Back to the excerpts. This is after the battle Angel fights at
the ep's end:
The demon's body falls in a heap next to the two Talismans. Angel
looks up
at the judge.
ANGEL
She's safe now, right?
JUDGE
You have won, she is under our protection, >>>as is her
daughter until she
comes of age.<<<
*******
Present tense again. Sorry to keep flipping around, but I want
you to see
the original stuff I'm getting this
from so that you can make your own call with less influence from
my biases:
OK, now you will recall that Jo is African-American. Recently,
Joss posted
at the Bronze, and note this
really ODD little item:
Date Posted: 19:27:31 05/23/01 Wed
Author: Snax
Subject: Joss posts again today at the Bronze!!
joss says:
(Wed May 23 08:28:44 2001 4.41.196.128)
Somewhat more coherent now. Just want to say again, finally, definitively,
and in LIVING color that
BUFFY WILL BE BACK NEXT SEASON STARRING Sarah Michelle GELLAR
(of
television's "Buffy
the Vampire Slayer")on UPN, TUESDAYS at 8:00.
How will we bring her back? >>>With great difficulty,
of course. And pain
and confusion.<<< Will it be
cheezy? I don't think so. (I've loved some of the theories here
on how it
might be done.) The fact is, we've
had most of next season planned before we ever shot this ep. Same
writers
you know, same actors you
love, same crappy little warehouse we've been shooting in for
five years...
Different network. But we've
never been controlled by the network -- WB was great about that,
UPN has
already shown they will be
too. The only difference is that Marti will share exec prod credit
with me,
and it's about time she did. I'm in
charge.
Okay, that's a lie. The STORY is in charge, the story that keeps
on speaking
to me, that says there is much
more to tell about all these characters. An ensemble this brilliant
could
easily carry the show even without
the Slayer -- but the fact is, even though she reached some beauty
closure,
Buffy's story isn't over. When it
is, I'll know. And we'll stop. Til then, have faith. (not faith
the
character -- she's making movies and stuff.)
And to answer a few other inevitable questions:
Yes I am the real "Delusions of Grandeur". Er, I mean....
>>>Yes Buffy will be black. (Er... damn.)<<<
It's none of your damn business what kind of underwear I'm wearing,
but
please don't tell Kai.
This has been a public nuisance announcement.
Kisses, j.
*******
*******
*******
Last time, back to me, OnM, speculating in the present day:
OK, after all that, are you seeing an idea form here? Buffy dies
in the S5
finale ep. Joss announces that she
will be 'reborn' (not 'resurrected') in a number of posts and
interviews. In
Angel S2 ep 1, a character
named Jo that Angel fights a duel to protect is carrying a baby
supposedly
destined to be a 'seer, a Joan of
Arc, and is 'benevolent, dangerous'. The 'Dark Ones' want to kill
Jo to
prevent the birth of this child.
After this ep, to the best of my recollection, we never hear from
Jo again,
nor is any reference made to her
or her baby. (Please correct me here if I'm mistaken, I'm going
by memory
since I haven't gone through
the rest of the Angel eps yet). I think this is very deliberate,
so that we
forget about her, but it seems
obvious me me that there must be significance to her child in
the grand
scheme of things.
Was the line 'Buffy will be *black* a 'deliberate slip', and he
really meant
it, not a typo for 'back'?
THE MAIN CONCEPT: *** Will the child be related to Buffy's rebirth?
***
Will the references to Buffy's future capabilities by Dracula
(What you body
can do... Your power so close
to our own (vampires).. etc.) be related in how she might join
with this
child, if it is supposed to be a vessal
for her? This whole line of thought really freaks me out a bit,
and the
racial aspect could make this whole
thing really dangerous as to how it gets pulled off, but Joss
loves danger,
as we all know.
There you have it.
Ponder away.
If I made your head hurt
I hope it was in a good way.
(Burma Shave)
& goodnight all,
OnM
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Detour - I am *stunned* at the beauty of your argument
-- Aquitaine,
21:57:59 05/31/01 Thu
So stunned, in fact, that I can't say anything! LOL. Wow. It fits,
OnM. It
really fits. I'm glad I was up with late so I could read this.
::shakes head:: Wow!
------------------------------------------
[>Neat................. -- Rufus, 22:20:29 05/31/01 Thu
What you said has my interest....you have to really pay attention
to what he
says(JW)cause he is a trickster. Puts the truth in a bunch of
smoke.
Consider Buffy being reborn....I had a problem with it being Willow
bringing
Buffy back for the reason that she seemed to get her power boost
from the
"Darkest Magick". But then again, Buffy would truly
be dark in nature. So
how do you bring Buffy back? The Key? Willows magicks? The PTB's?
There is
the impression that Buffy and Angel would have something to do
with the end
battle, and Buffys death may be part of that timeline...she will
be reborn,
but different in some ways. Or then again you may have to give
Joss a
failing grade in spelling.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Neat................. -- AK-UK, 03:55:12 06/01/01
Fri
Wow, I love the theory (and would LOVE to see a new black character
introduced to BtVS) but wouldn't this just be incredibly hard
to pull off. I
mean, would the child grow up REALLY quickly? The woman in Angel
was
noticably pregnant, so what happened between her birth and Buffy's
death?
Did the child have a conciousness, or a soul? Would Buffy just
replace them
both, or would she inhabit the kid's body, Glory-like?
And I'm not overly happy with the idea of an obscure, briefly
seen character
in a different show being the cause of Buffy's rebirth.
And yet...........Joss's constant use of the word "rebirth",
his strange,
deliberate typo, the existance of a character, pregnant with a
female child
who has a great destiny ahead of her............oh boy. You could
be right.
Scary.
Rmember where you heard this theory first, folks!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Neat................. -- Lazarus, 07:56:47
06/01/01 Fri
"...or would she inhabit the kid's body, Glory-like?"
If it is a case of Buffy 'posessing' the girl, well, Willow Does
have a
rather neat Psyche Separation Spell on hand... The only problem
there would
be the lack of a body... Hmmm...
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Detour from 'In retrospect', below-- Wild theory (but
not really) on
S6 Buffy rebirth -- Mishka, 07:01:24 06/01/01 Fri
Wow....You really looked into this didn`t you....I`m going to
have to start
paying closer attention to the sub-plots of episodes. Your theory
is just as
possible, congrats on the headache you must have gotten thinking
it up. Your
observational capabilities are incredible.....Wow, just Wow!
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Detour from 'In retrospect', below-- Wild theory (but
not really) on
S6 Buffy rebirth -- purplegrrl, 07:22:30 06/01/01 Fri
Hmmm. Interesting theory, OnM.
If Jo is truly the instrument of Buffy's rebirth (and at this
point it is as
good a speculation as anything else), could "black"
refer to darkness rather
than dark-skinned?? And if Buffy is reborn (as Joss has stated),
meaning she
would come back as Buffy not as the spirit of Buffy in another
body, would
she not also return with the knowledge of the "other side"
thereby maker her
a seer, a Joan of Arc (hears the voice of God, or in this case
the Powers
That Be).
Of course Buffy cannot be reborn fully formed as we last saw her
- an
impossibility of biological functions. And unless there is a time
warp or
some dimension hopping going on, we wouldn't be able to see RebornBuffy
grow
up. I'm assuming there would be some magic stuff happening to
not only bring
Buffy back, but to bring her back as a young woman. (Perhaps Jo's
baby is
born in the regular way and then magic stuff/PTB intervention
happens and we
have RebornBuffy.)
Black referring to darkness: RebornBuffy must come back with her
memories
and faculties intact, otherwise I don't see much point. After
her sacrifice,
would Buffy *want* to be reborn? Giving herself to the portal
ended the good
and the bad in Buffy's life. True, she left behind her family,
friends, and
former lovers. But she also left behind the unending responsibility
and duty
of being the Slayer. Being reborn may really piss Buffy off. Perhaps
she
will go through a dark period (similar to Angel's this season)
that Dracula
predicted. Not that she would start killing humans or something.
But rather
that living would hold no joy for her - she thought she had performed
the
ultimate sacrifice only to be told no, you still have a job to
do. I think
she would definately have some 'tude about that.
Not sure my thoughts are completely organized this morning.
------------------------------------------
[>[> Wild theory (but not really) on S6 Buffy rebirth --
OnM, 07:42:12
06/01/01 Fri
*** "Being reborn may really piss Buffy off." ***
No, pg, organization-wise you're doing quite well. Your last paragraph
nicely expresses a portion of my own thinking on this. In fact,
since *The
Gift* I've had one of those attics in my brain working on a fan-ficish
spec
that has Buffy happily residing in the Overworld (see note at
end) having
nice conversations with her mother and God and Sartre and all,
and then God
hands the word down that it's time for her to go back to the Earthy
plane
and continue her calling. She is not amused.
Gotta do my Movie Thang tonight, so I won't have time to pursue
this theory
just today, but I will continue to gather my thoughts and post
some
additional ideas Saturday or Sunday. In the meanwhile, I urge
any and all
boarders to contribute ideas, or of course even say so if you
think the
whole line-o-thought is totally bogus.
(Note: In a previous post, I believe it was fresne who stated
that she likes
stories of the Underworld, I do too, but I don't think of deceased
Buffy
being 'under', so I'll say 'Overworld' instead. 'K with ya'all?)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Wild theory (but not really) on S6 Buffy
rebirth -- Brian,
08:31:42 06/01/01 Fri
And so Angel is a surrogate father to the reborn Buffy!?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> surrogate father -- purplegrrl, 09:43:48
06/01/01 Fri
Being a B/A shipper myself, that sounds just a little too weird
and creepy
for me!!
But in a sense, you're right - Angel took it upon himself to protect
Jo and
if she gives birth to what is or becomes RebornBuffy, then...
Yikes!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: surrogate father -- darrenK,
19:15:37 06/01/01 Fri
To be honest the part of this theory that makes it plausible is
the Angel
connection.
Joss works very hard to find ways to connect Buffy and Angel.
This would be
a good one.
dK
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Wild theory (but not really) on S6 Buffy
rebirth --
LadyStarlight, 11:50:56 06/01/01 Fri
I know I'm new on the board, but I felt compelled to toss this
in. That's an
extremely interesting theory, but--we all know that SMG will definitely
be
back (at least for 2 seasons), and I hope that Joss is classy
enough not to
put her in makeup to make her look black. Also, he's stated that
there will
be no major cast changes on BTVS (except for ASH in a recurring
role), and
changing Buffy to a black actress would be a change.
I think the "black" reference is either: a typo, or
a reference to her
"soul"/attitude about being brought back. Just my thoughts...hope
it makes
sense. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Ah, I was waiting for someone to think
of that... -- OnM,
23:29:42 06/01/01 Fri
..because the exact same thought came to me as this theroem was
a'brewin',
and I have no real answer for it. It is definitely a point on
the negative
side, and I hope to talk about it tomorrow or Sunday, along with
some other
stuff related to this rebirth topic.
Very, very late, just posted my Movie Thang, and now gotta sack
out most
imminently, but just wanted to note that your point is a really
good one.
Thanks!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: Ah, I was waiting for someone
to think of that... --
Humanitas, 09:52:14 06/04/01 Mon
The other possibility is that the "Buffy will be black"
quote is just Joss
messing with people's heads. He likes to do that sort of thing,
especially
with regards to playing with the classic things that tv shows
do to mess
themselves up in later seasons.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Wild theory (but not really) on S6 Buffy
rebirth -- fresne,
00:02:24 06/04/01 Mon
Yup it was me.
The real question I have is, when I finally finish Paradisio,
do I write a
parody in which Virgil and Dante wander through Sunnydale? Or
one in which
guides Buffy through a summer hiatus trip in the under, over and
sideways
worlds (in Dantesk style of course).
Hmmm...Perhaps, both. I have a few months to decide.
By the way, that counts as my season premiere speculation.
And since I don't want to start a new topic...
Marti Noxon and Brian DeKnight (both UC Santa Cruz grads) hosted
a wine
dinner at the buffy set for UCSC Alumni. I went. Here's what I
had to say
about it.
http://lifeamgood.com/01junbufset.html
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Great story! Thanks for the link! :) --
OnM, 08:08:26 06/04/01
Mon
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Hmmmmmm -- mundusmundi, 11:42:22 06/01/01 Fri
Wow. Extremely interesting idea. (Thinking out loud here, w/ a
lot of
"howevers" and "on the other hands" rolling
around in my mind....) The most
convincing part of your hypothesis may be the simple fact that
it was
dropped so quickly, that we're supposed to forget about it (Joss
must be
thinking: Damned reruns!) and that it's going to be sprung back
just when
we're not looking for it.
However.
The race issue (if that's what "black" means) is pretty
dicey. For me, one
of Joss's few flaws has been his depiction of Afro-Americans on
both shows.
To date, the only black characters who've even faintly registered
have been:
1) Mr. Trick, a pimp stereotype, with whom they introduced with
a bang and
then did absolutely nothing with, knocking him off almost arbitrarily
to
make room for Faith; 2) Buffy's counselor, a potentially great
character who
gave her sound advice about being "love's dog," only
to get mauled 5 minutes
later; 3) Gunn, always interesting but underused; and 4) the guy
who helped
unpack Dracula's coffin in BvsD, only to get deep-sixed as Drac's
first
victim. (Was Joss satirizing this cheap horror-film cliche or
respecting the
convention?) Not trying to sound PC, but having Buffy emerge as
this "chosen
one" sounds like prime fodder for Spike Lee to do a sequel
to "Bamboozled."
(I don't think Joss is racist, understand, just clueless.)
On the other hand.
It could be a way for Joss to introduce this element into the
show. Or,
maybe "black" simply means "dark" or "evil."
Or maybe it means nothing, or
he's jerking our chains. We fans analyze this show more closely
than the
Dead Sea Scrolls. He knows this. So, I guess this is my roundabout
way of
saying, I dunno. :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: got two more for ya -- vampire hunter D, 12:37:23
06/01/01 Fri
I noticed you missed two other black characters. the first was
the black
Slayer Spike killed back in 1977. the other was Dawn's friend
in "the Body".
While I'm on the subject of Dawn's friends, has anybody noticed
that that
was the only time we ever see Dawn hanging out with people her
own age. And
this is only the second time that the show even refered to her
having
friends outside the Scoobies. Did this strike anyone else as weird?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Don't get me started............ -- AK-UK, 14:00:48
06/01/01 Fri
Hey LadyStarlight! Don't worry about being new, all intelligent/amusing
posts will be welcomed with open arms and cyber-chocolate :)
Now then.....uh-oh. Black characters on Buffy.
Must......not.....mention....lousy.....stereotypical.......portrayal...and.....high........body.....count.....of.....black....people.
No, can't do it. We've had blink and you miss 'em victims (Kendra,
dead,
couseller, dead, Dracula handler, dead, Nikki the black slayer,
dead), Pimp
(Mr Trick, dead and dusted) and angry black man (Forrest, friend
of Riley's,
and errrr dead.....hey, anyone spotting a pattern developing here?).
*AK-UK quickly hops off his hobby-horse*
Where was I? Oh yeah, Buffy's rebirth. If it isn't to cancel out
the
finality of Joyce's death, it must focus on some unique quality
that Buffy
has. In Restless, the point was made that Buffy was different;
she said to
the first slayer "you're not the source of me", so.......hmmmm.
I still
wonder whether the fact that she shared blood with Dracula will
prove to be
significant.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Something to do with the non crossover?
-- Nina, 14:21:47
06/01/01 Fri
OnM, I haven't seen Judgement yet (I came to like AtS pretty late
in the
season) but you could be unto something. I like The "reborn"
thing. And Joss
himself said that he was planning a spectacular (maybe not the
right word!
Surely not the right word) non crossover for the beginning of
both series.
That could be it!
On the other hand.... you tend to have one of the most wonderful
imagination
I have ever seen (seriously) and I still remember your speculation
on
7-3-0... maybe it's a lot simpler than that. So simple that we
don't see it.
Still it's always fun to hear what you have to say! It surely
help us work
our cells everyday! 1-2 1-2 1-2, strech out here, some abs there...
can't
wait to hear more!!! :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> (~blush~) You are most, most kind.
Thank you! -- OnM,
23:34:55 06/01/01 Fri
------------------------------------------
[>[> In JW's defense re: use of black characters -- Anthony8,
17:38:26
06/01/01 Fri
In JW's defense re: the racial stereotype issue, I think people
tend to
write what they know, and barring extensive research, will tend
towards the
stereotypical with respect to those subjects of which they aren't
familiar.
I think that BtVS started out as an exploration of JW's own high
school
experiences (he has said as much in the interviews that supplement
the VHS
tapes of the series that have been released to date). Consequently,
the
characters he created most likely resemble aspects of his own
personality or
people he has known. Within that range of limited experience,
however, it
seems to me that tolerance has been the most important message
JW has tried
to communicate (alternate lifestyles, non-traditional family groupings,
spirituality, etc.) in the metaphors of the two series.
In any event, once you start discussing race on TV, you are always
wading
into perilous waters. Unfortunately, the networks tend to hire
and promote
people (and their ideas) most like themselves--mostly white, thirtyish
males. Notwithstanding the portrayal of blacks in both series...what
about
hispanics, asians, etc.? Both Sunnydale and L.A. are in Southern
California
where the majority of the population is latino, so there's whole
new issue.
I may be mistaken, but I believe Fox (the studio behind BtVS)
is owned by an
old white Australian--so there you have it. Until a consortium
of minority
groups pool their resources to form their own network, movie studio,
and
production infrastructure, we are going to be stuck with the tokenism
and
stereotypes presented on the major networks. Be mindful that even
shows that
have been produced by, written for, and starred African-Americans
('The
Cosby Show,' 'A Different World') received their own share of
criticism (too
middle-of-the road, too upper economic, too white) from the very
audience to
which they were speaking. As they say, no good deed goes unpunished
and
everyone's a critic.
I really didn't want to open further this can of worms. These
are troubling
issues that should be addressed in the appropriate forum. Unless
JW has been
particularly offensive in his use or portrayal of non-white characters
on
his shows (and I don't think he has), I don't see what the real
problem here
is. In any event, if you really analyze this issue, the most dedicated,
studious and virtuous Slayer we have seen portrayed to date, IMO,
was
Kendra. I'm just sorry she only lasted a few episodes. If you
think about
it, there was a nice sisterly chemistry between Buffy and Kendra
that would
have been fun to explore.
A8
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: In JW's defense re: use of black characters
-- Aelith, 19:34:29
06/01/01 Fri
Humm Just to keep the roster straigt you all have left out Rily's
second in
command, and that young leader of the streat gang first year on
Angel. I
really hoped he would get a recurring role.
Back to OoMm's therory, personlly I think its a bit of a strech.
Can't see
how it would work. Articulate men are alowed to flub now and then.
I am sorry to say I didn't stay with the Angel show. So I can't
judge the
importance of what you saw, OoMn. I do recall however that there
was more
than one ep. centered around a special child or children. In the
city of sin
protecting the innocent (and only the infants are that) would
be of supreme
importance.
There is only one true thing we know about next season. SMG will
return. But
she might return in visions, dreams, Spell callings, possessions.
After all
the gang has to find out she is not really gone somehow. And I
think it
highly likely that her return should mirror Angel's return, ie.
Demonic and
derranged. Saving Buffy's sanity should make a good story arc.
BTW is it all right to put contradictions at the end of a thread,
or should
my post be a new topic?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Yes, it could be a stretch, no doubt. But
Joss is nothing if not
devious. -- OnM, 23:44:31 06/01/01 Fri
I very much welcome comments as to potential flaws in my logic.
I support
the scientific method, and so if some fatal flaw shows up in an
otherwise
solid line of reasoning, so be it-- the theory must adapt or be
discarded. I
just saw this strange collection of apparently connected items,
and went
where it led me.
You may certainly respond within the thread, you don't have to
start a new
one just to disagree with a point being discussed-- that's part
of the
normal modus operandi here.
Thanks for your thoughts-- feel free to add on at any time!
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: In JW's defense re: use of black characters
-- mundusmundi,
06:57:43 06/02/01 Sat
>>In JW's defense re: the racial stereotype issue, I think
people tend to
write what they know, and barring extensive research, will tend
towards the
stereotypical with respect to those subjects of which they aren't
familiar.<<
I buy that. And I certainly agree with the tolerance issue that
is Joss's
M.O. on BtVS. I just feel trepidation whenever the race issue
is introduced
(or potentially introduced, as in OnM's theory)on the show. True,
Joss
writes on his own experiences, but part of those experiences includes
a vast
knowledge of horror movies. He knows full well that blacks are
knocked off
regularly in those films, as much as white teen girls, so I'm
surprised that
he's never given a twist to the former cliche the way he has the
latter.
(Just watched "The Havest" again the other night, and
at the Bronze feasting
ritual, it's the black bouncer that's the first to get drained.
)
Again, please don't mistake my tone for a rant here. I love the
show and
most everything that Joss does on it.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: In JW's defense re: use of black characters
-- Malandanza,
20:14:29 06/02/01 Sat
I think one of the problems with the portrayal of blacks (and
other
minorities) on BtVS stems from having an all-white cast. The show
doesn't
need any more good guys -- but each episode needs a villian and
some
victims. If blacks are to be included on the show, invariably
they end up in
one of these two catagories. In trying to make the show more ethnically
diverse, the writers have ended up using minorities for the bad
guys.
Should JW have made the original cast more diverse? I think that
to do so
would have made the show less believable. California is ethnically
diverse
if you look at the demographics, but if you walk through the streets
of its
cities, it is about as integrated as the Old South. Whites live
in white
neighborhoods, Blacks live in black neighborhoods and Hispanics
in hispanic
neighborhoods. Even when schools are not segregated (and schools
tend to
draw from the surrounding area, so they tend to have the same
ethnic make-up
of the neighborhoods), the children segregate themselves further
on racial,
religious, or any other socioeconomic factors. If Buffy had had
a Black
friend, an Asian friend and a Hispanic friend, the show would
not have been
realistic -- and there would probably still be complaints that
the heroine
was White while her minions were minorities. Furthermore, pandering
to
political correctness is an exercise in futility -- the harder
you try to be
PC, the more you reveal your own prejudices.
Having said that, I think the best way to have realistic minority
characters
on the show would be to hire some minority writers.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> See what you started, OnM! :) --
mundusmundi, 06:53:54
06/03/01 Sun
Never suggested the Scoobies' should be a rainbow coalition. The
victim
thing just annoys me, is all. But I agree with most of your points.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> [> Re: In JW's defense re: use of black
characters -- Cleanthes,
13:23:18 06/03/01 Sun
Dawn does have a black friend who's not been eaten so far.
Back in the bad old days of the 1970's, many of the main villains
in action
shows were black. Lotsa bellyaching changed this, but now, African-American
actors rightly complain that they can't get the main villain roles
because
such roles must be given to politically correct white supremicists,
played,
naturally enough, by white people.
Given the racial makeup of real-life California, the absense of
Hispanics
and Asians is substantially further from correctly diverse than
that of
African-Americans, I think.
------------------------------------------
[>Cool theory! (though the mom was hispanic) -- SingedCat,
06:25:32
06/02/01 Sat
------------------------------------------
[>Another theory (unrelated to OnM's) on S6 Buffy rebirth --
Lazarus,
22:40:48 06/02/01 Sat
Had an interesting (I thought, anyway... ;) ) idea re: how the
gang go about
getting Buffy back...
By combining Willow and Tara's magical knowledge with the Key's
power, the
Scoobies open a portal to where Buffy is (a 'find soul' spell?),
wander
around this odd/ethereal 'place' trying to locate the 'Essence
That Was
Buffy', and then try to convince her/it to return to the mortal
world. They
probably wouldn't try something this drastic unless, once again,
there was
some new Big Bad that only Buffy could deal with or one/some of
the gang
that only Buffy could save... Or maybe they discover that the
method of her
death (the jump into a portal that was some kind of random nexus
for ALL
dimensions) has scrambled her soul and they have to go in to save
her from
Eternal Randomization or some such and the only way to do that
is to bring
her back with them...
Thoughts? Comments? Anyone for a mint?
P.S. Maybe along the way, they could find a spare soul lying around
for a
certain friendly vamp we all know...
------------------------------------------
[>[> Re: Another theory (unrelated to OnM's) on S6 Buffy
rebirth -- AK-UK,
06:04:01 06/03/01 Sun
Just a few points.
If they find Buffy's soul, they would still need a body to house
it (I
suppose they could use the Buffybot), but we still have, what
I call THE BIG
PROBLEM:
Joyce.
Joyce died, and it was made VERY clear that death is the end.
Trying to
bring people back from the dead is a BAD idea. Now, if the scoobies
did find
Buffy's soul, the question would be "well, why can't they
get Joyce's? And
all the other people who have died?"
Also, I prefer Spike soul-less; the chip enables the writers to
to play with
notions of morality, free will and the nature of the soul. Leave
the
guilt-tripping to Angel :)
Mints are not a valid currency on this board. Only cyber-chocolate
is
acceptable :)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Re: Another theory (unrelated to OnM's) on S6
Buffy rebirth --
mundusmundi, 07:11:04 06/03/01 Sun
Yeah, I just don't see any of our heroes bringing Buffy back.
They've
already established the dangers of mucking with the dead, and
I think they
respect her sacrifice too much to risk tainting it.
The only possible exceptions for this are, natch, Dawn and Spike.
True, Dawn
learned a lesson in "Forever," but if she's desperate
enough anything's
possible. And we all know Spike, perceptive as he is, often charges
ahead
without thinking things through.
Which is why when she comes back I think it may be a villain who
does it.
(Hmmmm, someone who knows resurrection spells in S'dale?) Also
can't agree
with the idea (whoever said it) that Buffy will be purified. Not
much room
for drama - or fun - there.
The mucho big, really fun question is: How will they work Buffy
into the
season premiere? They need to establish the gang's loss and getting
along
without her, but Sarah's not getting paid the big bucks to stay
on the
sidelines too long. Joss isn't above upsetting and challenging
his audience,
but he's never risked outright alienating them (yet;)). Probably'll
work her
in slowly, maybe through Dawn's dreams or memories, but definitely
getting
her back by the ep's end. Any other ideas, anyone?
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> If we can't play with Free Will then why bother......:)
-- Rufus,
13:25:19 06/03/01 Sun
I think what has been said is amatures trying to bring back the
dead will
get mixed results, they did a pretty good job with Darla. So,
it takes lots
of power to return someone from the dead, actually, it was said
that Buffy
will be reborn, how will they do that?
Now for free will and a chipped Spike. I think that to talk about
free will
and the soul ect, you have to show different situations that either
question
or prove the rule. I think what they have done with Spike has
made the show
more interesting. This is a far cry from season one when all demons
were
considered evil, not just vampires. We have to question the things
we learn,
or life is going to get awfully boring.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Dead with a difference -- Brian, 07:15:24
06/04/01 Mon
Joyce is dead. Buffy is dead with a difference. She died being
toss around
between dimensional portals. I'm sure somewhere in that multi-dimensional
existence is the key to bringing her back.
------------------------------------------
[>Re: Wild theory on S6 Buffy rebirth - Part II - (S6 Spoiler
Speculation)
-- OnM, 21:48:59 06/03/01 Sun
So, I've had a little time to ponder this idea a bit more, also
the chance
to read the replies to the original
post that have appeared so far. Now, for some additional thoughts
on my
part:
LadyStarlight made what is the biggest and best argument against
the idea of
Buffy returning and staying in
the body of a different ethnic group than she one in which she
left us,
which is the fact that doing so would
essentially require SMG to submit to extensive makeup sessions
for the
remainder of the series. We know
that Sarah is going to be the actor playing the role of Buffy,
also Joss
stated that there will be no new
regulars added to the cast, which leaves out the possibility of
some other
actor taking over the role.
I still believe that the child Jo was carrying (presumably born
by now, she
seemed pretty far along in her
pregnancy) will have great significance in S6, if I were giving
odds, I'd
say at least 80-90%. Further, I'd
make it about 60-70% that the child will have something to do
with Buffy's
rebirth (this has been said
before, but bears emphasizing, that in several different interviews
since
season's end Joss has repeatedly
used the word 'rebirth', not 'resurrection' in connection to Buffy's
return), so the remaining stuff to figure
out is exactly *how* this 'rebirth' will be accomplished. Yeah,
I know,
details, details!
There are several possibilites, all of which could have potential
problems,
either story-telling wise or
practical, real-world-wise. I'll go over what I could imagine
these
possibilites as being, feel free to throw in
your own take, of course, as before, or pick apart my logic. I'll
start off
by describing how my humble self
(no Joss I, but hey, he ain't here, now is he?) would envision
the beginning
of the 'rebirth' taking place:
*******
After being born, Jo's daughter (here after referred to as J'sD
for
simplicity's sake) gives evidence of her
supernatural origin by maturing at a phenominal rate, say about
a bit over a
1 year for every month.
Assuming she was born shortly after the events of *Judgement*
she would be
about Dawn's age by the
time the new season resumes in the fall. She shows up in Sunnydale
and Dawn
meets her. They are
instantly drawn to one another, and become friends. Dawn doesn't
bring it up
at first, because it's still a
painful memory, but eventually tells her new aquaintance about
her sister,
leaving out some of the specifics
of how her death came about, of course. Later on, in a scene where
Dawn
visits Buffy's gravesite, J'sD
shows up unexpectedly. Dawn is a bit wigged at this, but the girl
seems very
calm and non-threatening.
"I'm not sure why I'm here", J'sD remarks to Dawn, "but
something inside
seemed to tell us to come
here."
"Us? To come to my sister's grave?" Dawn replies, getting
strange vibes
again. "Who's 'us'?" I didn't tell
you I was coming out here. I always come by myself."
"You want to be near her-- your sister. You draw strength
from her memory.
She was special, wasn't
she?"
"Of course she was special! She was my sister, and-- and--
she loved me."
Dawn starts to cry. "She gave
her life for me". Then more softly, almost too softly to
be heard, "she gave
her life for everyone".
"Yes she did, didn't she?"
Dawn looks up at J'sD, and freezes stone still. There is a soft,
emerald
green, glowing aura around J'sD,
radiant, beautiful. It grows. Dawn sits transfixed, the logical
part of her
brain is telling her to stand up and
run, but the intuitive part is telling her to stay right where
she is, that
this energy isn't dangerous, that
something is about to happen that is destined to happen. It makes
no sense,
yet it makes perfect sense
somehow. J'sD slowly reaches out a finger, moves it towards Dawn,
touches
her lightly on the forehead.
The aura expands, suddenly encompassing them both, then spreads
further,
encompassing the gravesite.
The light gets brighter, ramps into pale green, then paler green,
then
blinding white. Then vanishes.
Dawn blinks her eyes, recovering from the momentary blindness
caused by the
bright light. J'sD lies on the
ground by her side, unconscious. Dawn looks at her face, and is
stunned to
see what looks like the face of
her dead sister-- but the face, and indeed J'sD-- are still very
much alive.
"B- Buffy?" She reaches out slowly, still in shock and
disbelief. This isn't
possible. Buffy is dead, she
recalls all too painfully standing at this very place, weeping
uncontrollably, while her beloved sister's body
was lowered into the ground. It's been four long months since
that day. She
touches J'sD's face, ever so
gently.
And just as she does, her sister's face disappears, and J'sD's
face and body
reappear. Dawn is jolted back
to reality. "Oh, God. Oh. God... " She begins to shake
J'sD, trying to wake
her. J'sD stirs slightly, then
opens her eyes. She sits up, looks around, seems bewildered. She
turns,
focusses her eyes on Dawn, seems
genuinely startled to see her.
"Dawn? Where are we? What...?" She looks quickly around,
sees the headstone,
sees the graveyard, looks
back at Dawn. "Why are we out here? Why would I bring you
along on a patrol?
I..."
Dawn feels an icy cold tremor run up her spine, spread out to
her neck, her
arms, standing hairs on end.
This can't be happening. The girl looks like J'sD, but the voice--
the
cadences of speech, the inflections,
the tone-- it's Buffy's. J'sD has paused, looks confused again.
"The portal-- light, I remember this light, blinding... pain...
then the
pain was.. gone... there was peace...
beauty... like nothing I've ever felt. Then... I don't remember...
I...
I..." J'sD looks up at Dawn. "Dawn?
Oh my God, I'm alive! The portal, it-- somehow it didn't kill
me! I made it
through! Oh, Dawn, how...?"
Sees Dawn's face, a very much whiter shade of pale. A weak trembling
voice
responds to the question.
"Buffy? You... you.." Eternity passes in a microsecond.
"You... didn't...
you...". She turns her head,
indicating the gravestone. J'sD turns her head, following Dawn's
gaze. Sees
the stone again, but this time
reads the words engraved on it. Pauses, a long beat, looks back
at Dawn.
Eyes wide.
(Fade to black).
*******
OK, so now Buffy is back, reborn into J'sD's body, which at the
moment looks
just like J'sD, but it's
clearly Buffy inside. Hijinks, as it were, ensue. Options at this
point to
get back to the original Buffy, body
and all:
1 > They don't. SMG actually does do the makeup thing, and
plays Buffy as a
non-caucasian. Personally, I
very much doubt this, it would be a huge hassle because of the
extra time
involved during production, and
there is also the potentially nasty racial overtones of a white
woman
playing a long term dramatic role as a
woman of color. Many black and other minority actors very rightly
complain
that they aren't getting
enough good roles offered to them, now here's a white actor pretending
to be
non-white in a long term
performance. I might very well be offended, too, even though from
a purely
acting standpoint, it could be
challenging for SMG. Let's assume this one will be a no-go.
2 > In my speculation above, you will notice I have avoided
this dilemma by
assuming that J'sD will be a
temporary vessel for Buffy, and that somehow our original Buffy
will be
given her old body back, or a new
one that looks pretty much like it. (Meanwhile, I envision them
morphing
back and forth a la Ben/Glory).
This still leaves plenty of opportunities for drama and angstyness,
since
you could tack on all sorts of
obstacles that get in the way of this-- the original body couldn't
be
resurrected and reused, the BuffyBot
wouldn't be a suitable container for an actual human soul, J'sD
would have
to give up her life to allow
Buffy to have her body back, the powers of Evil discover Buffy
is alive
again in J'sD's body, and so try to
kill J'sD, the SG having difficulty accepting a Buffy who doesn't
look like
Buffy, etc. etc. A solution will
be found eventually that allows both J'sD and Buffy to reclaim
their
original bodies, and all's right with the
world, at least until the next big bad appears.
3 > J'sD dies to allow the original Buffy to return to her
body, and be the
sole soul present in it. This
would bring up much the same negative racial elements as in #1,
since yet
again, a person of color gives up
their life to 'save' a white person. Don't like this option either.
4 > Recalling the Katra spell/device for body-switching from
Season 4,
Buffy's mind/soul gets transferred
to Faith's body, and they now share one another's presence, like
Ben/Glory,
but not evil. Those who have
always seen Faith and Buffy as two different sides to the same
Slayer, or
even as potential lovers, would
have a field day with this story arc! Doubtful this will happen,
but it is a
pretty wild and intriguing thought,
is it not?
5 > Dawn uses her latent Key powers (does she still have them?),
which she
has been very slowly
beginning to utilize with some help from Willow and Tara to create
a new
body for Buffy, by recalling the
Monk's spell and 'reversing' it, i.e. she creates Buffy from herself,
and
places Buffy's soul and memories
back into the newly molded body. Blood ties, Monk's spell= NewBuffy.
6 > Angel somehow gets involved in the rebirth, but seeing
as how crossovers
may not be possible, the
odds are low on this. I tend to think it more likely that Angel
will try and
fail in any quest to return Buffy,
and that this will have happened over the summer months, and we
will only
learn of it through
after-the-fact descriptions or flashbacks once the new Angel season
starts.
7 > Your theory goes here!
*******
OK, some more to cogitate upon. Thanks to all for your thoughtful
responses
so far, keep 'em coming if
you have a mind to, or start a new thread with your own speculations.
Long
summer ahead, be here or be
square! See ya!
OnM
------------------------------------------
[>[> Still love it, but... -- Nina, 16:32:43 06/04/01 Mon
OnM, I have to clap my hands again to your wonderful imagination!
:) I have
one problem with your speculations though. It means that the whole
Buffy
coming back to live has its roots in a AtS episode. JW said that
the two
shows would find their separate roads and this perspective seems
to merge
the shows more than anything else. As I said the first time, I
came to AtS
very late and didn't see that "Judgement" episode. For
anyone who doesn't
watch AtS that view isn't that appealing. I also have a problem
with the
first episode of the season focusing around a character we don't
even know
in the Buffyverse. But it could be done, I guess! If Buffy had
to share a
body with someone, I'd rather have it with someone we know. What
about
Dawn's body? Or Spike (that could be a very painful way for Buffy
to come
back!) Why Spike or Dawn? Because of their blood. All three had
their blood
mixed into the portal.
Personally, I think that blood will have something to do with
bringing Buffy
back to life. There's been speculations about Doc being a time
traveler. I
love that one. Not just because it's a cool theory, but because
it explains
a lot of things. If Doc comes from the future, he knows what has
happened in
the past and he can make sure to do what it takes to change events
in his
favor. This could explain why he knew in advance that Xander and
Spike were
coming without even looking at them. It explains why he is so
confident when
Spike tries to defend Dawn. One detail striked me as being very
important:
the fact that Doc stabbed Spike and soaked the knife with Spike's
blood.
There's an angle on that knife at one point to show us the blood
on it. If
it's so easy for Doc to throw Spike from the tower why did he
bother to stab
him? Maybe he needed his blood to be in contact with Dawn's blood!
Later, Doc is thrown by Buffy really easily. I suspect it's not
only slayer
strenght, but part of Doc's plan. He doesn't care because he already
knows
what will happen "This will be interesting..." He somehow
needed to mix
three kind of blood in the portal: Spike, Dawn and Buffy's blood.
What if
Buffy and Spike are in fact what the monks used to create Dawn?
They needed
a woman and a man's genes. (now why would they choose Spike is
another
question though) It would explain why Buffy instinctively goes
to Spike to
protect Dawn and explain the father/daughter bond between Spike
and Dawn.
This theory isn't wonderful either because it's all based on a
Buffy/Spike
point of view, but it's based on blood. Maybe somehow because
of the blood
issue Buffy will be able to come back.
Maybe we just have too much imagination!!!!!! Your pick! ;)
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> Some more good ideas! -- OnM, 18:10:58 06/04/01
Mon
Yes, it could indeed be another body, I latched on to Jo's daughter
because
it obviously entailed a prophecy of some kind (it can't be a throwaway,
not
if an entire ep was dedicated to it). Remember that since the
shows will now
be on different networks, what you say is very likely true regarding
them
finding mostly seperate ways, but as of the beginning of last
season, they
were on the same network, and were probably expected to continue
as such.
The WB-- or someone-- dropped the ball, and so now things will
change, but
this story was already set in motion long ago.
------------------------------------------
[>[> [> [> Re: Some more good ideas! -- Nina, 19:07:52
06/04/01 Mon
Maybe something could happen on AtS regarding that storyline though.
Maybe
Angel could think about that. Really you've got me so interested
with that
storyline OnM that I'll go read "Judgement". You've
sparked my curiosity! :)
Current board
| June 2001