November 2001 posts
The moment you know (marriage)
spoilers?? -- Neaux, 07:40:10 11/09/01 Fri
When Xander decided to announce his engagement, there was a moment
that he looked at Anya and realized that was She was the one.
It's a shame that moment didn't come before he first proposed..
but regardless... He had that moment.. and it was televised for
the audience to see..
So He announces to the group they are getting married.. and we
get to this weeks episodes.. where Anya and Xander are singing
out their worries..
What I don't get is, It was obvious to the audience that He had
the Defining moment of Yes!! She's the ONe... but I guess that
Anya didn't realize it.. So in her song she sings about Xander
(hiding behind his buffy).. .
I dont read spoilers so I don't know what will happen in future
episodes.. but any mention of Xander and Buffy will make me go
crazy.. because I dont believe the writers on BTVS would have
included that "special moment" of Xander's realization
of the woman he plans to marry.. with any more Xander/Buffy hooha!
There better not be anyay.. Thank you for this little rant. -a
hopeless romantic and happily married of 6 months, Neaux (who
yes had a similar She's the One Moment)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The moment you know (marriage) spoilers?? -- maddog,
08:02:15 11/09/01 Fri
I think people are making too much about the hiding behind Buffy
line. You know when you're in a relationship and there are just
a few things about your partner that bother you...like an annoying
friend...or an annoying habit. I think that's where Anya's getting
that. I wouldn't look too far into it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Are you worried about future storylines or other posters'
opinions? -- Isabel, 08:46:46 11/10/01 Sat
The reason I ask is, there's a difference. Are you worried the
writers will put them together? You obviously feel that Xander
and Anya are terrific together, and I totally agree, but ultimately,
there's nothing we can do about future storylines.
Other people's opinions on the other hand... There are some people
who think that Buffy and Xander would make a good couple. Xander
had a huge crush on Buffy in early seasons and, and while Buffy,
in her right mind, has never returned his ardor, the fans of a
Buffy/Xander relationship haven't given up hope.
What I'm trying to say is, don't get too worried about other people's
opinions unless you see evidence, yourself, on the show to back
them up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> mazel tov, neaux! -- anom, 10:28:46 11/11/01 Sun
May you & She who's the One for you have a long & happy (& silly,
if you like) life together!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: mazel tov, neaux! -- Kimberly, 12:20:03 11/12/01
Mon
Silly is vital if you're going to survive. :-) (From a 14-year
veteran. And still going strong.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF*
(Longish) -- Kimberly, 08:12:56 11/09/01
First of all, this was a fantastic episode. I have watched the
whole thing through twice, and the last three big numbers four
times. And my plan is to watch it all the way through again tonight,
at least twice.
While my husband and I were watching last night, we started noticing
how many of the songs evoked songs in other musicals we know.
It is my belief that, in addition to writing wonderful music and
lyrics that made the best musical use of the musical talent he
has and moved the season's arc forward in a significant way, he
was also mocking/honoring (in a forum like this,the two are close)
various musicals and musical genres. As an exercise, we tried
to figure out the specific song for each of the episode's songs.
Some of them ARE a stretch, and since I don't know a lot of the
current musicals (like Rent), I also suspect some of them are
off. So I'd like to hear what others have to say.
Going Through the Motions: Belle from Beauty and the Beast (Did
you notice that the demon had horns, similar to Beast's?)
I Have a Theory: I Hope I Get It from A Chorus Line
Under Your Spell: On My Own from Les Miserables
I'll Never Tell: No specific song, but any of the old Doris Day-type
50's/60's comedy musicals--right down to the costuming and set.
Rest In Peace: Gethsemane (I Only Want to Say) from Jesus Christ
Superstar
Dawn's dance: The fight scene in West Side Story
Sweet's Song: Magic to Do from Pippin. And it wouldn't have surprised
me in the least to discover that the actor playing Sweet was Ben
Vereen. (I know he's not, but I STILL hear and see Ben Vereen
in his numbers.)
Standing In Your Way: I Know Him So Well from Chess
Walk Through the Fire: Couldn't come up with one for this one.
However, as has already been pointed out, the beginning and last
few notes evoke The Sound of Silence by Paul Simon--incredibly
appropriate considering everything that's NOT being said this
season.
Play a Part: Pinball Wizard from Tommy.
Where Do We Go From Here?: No idea.
One other thing I noticed, the part of Walk Through the Fire where
Giles is leading to Scoobies to help Buffy reminds me strongly
of the scene in Primeval in which Buffy is leading the others
to the Initiative Lab to stop Adam. The echo feels deliberate
to me.
OK, everyone. Comments, disagreements, elaborations? An episode
like this cries for 100% of your attention. At least until Joss
pulls the next rabbit out of his hat. (Joss Whedon creative? Couldn't
be.) ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) -- Rob,
08:38:01 11/09/01 Fri
Very good comparisons! I'd like to add a few myself.
"Walking Through the Fire" I see as similar to the reprise
of "Tonight" in West Side Story, or "One Day More"
in Les Miz. Right before the climax of the show, every character
sings in a huge number about what is about to happen.
Also, in "Where Do We Go From Here?" I heard a little
bit of "Tommy." Namely, the song, "Tommy, Can You
Hear Me?"
For "I Have a Theory," you said "I Hope I Get It"
and ya know? You're right! I hadn't even thought of that. I think
it also has a bit of a Sondheimesque quality. That Sondheimishness
(I know it's not a word! lol) pervaded the whole score, I think,
especially concerning the lyrics and the great wordplay.
"(Joss Whedon creative? Couldn't be.) ;-)"
LOL. EW.com said that Joss should have called the episode "Hey,
Look At Me! I'm A Freakin' Genius! (Part Three)" (pts 1 and
2 being "Hush" and "The Body") How true, how
true!
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Thanks -- Kimberly, 10:13:37 11/09/01 Fri
Thanks for the kind words.
I'm afraid I don't know a lot of musicals: I only know two songs
from Tommy, and "Tommy Can You Hear Me" isn't one of
them. And I don't know any of Sondheim's, or if I do, I don't
know they ARE Sondheim.
On "Walk Through the Fire", I'd be more inclined to
say "Tonight" than "On My Own", but that may
be because I can't remember the Reprise version of it.
Have you noticed that all three of the episodes play with what
is "heard". Hush, of course, has no voices for about
half the episode; The Body has no soundtrack; Once More with Feeling,
musical. Maybe he should use that as the subtitle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "Tonight", definitely -- listening,
11:37:45 11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: "Tonight", definitely --
RichardX1, 09:36:59 11/11/01 Sun
I've never heard "Tonight", but I definitely saw the
parallels to "One Day More" from Les Misarables
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) --
Nadya V., 06:15:33 11/10/01 Sat
I noticed another one in the final song between Buffy and Spike,
Spike makes reference to a parade with "76 trombones".
This is a recurring song in the "The Music Man", a musical
about a somewhat sleazy immoral man who is changed by the reluctant
love of a "good" woman. In fact the whole scene reminds
me of the scene in "The Music Man" were the two lovers
declare their love and how it has made them feel alive again in
a song which was something of a breakaway pop hit of it's era.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) -- Solitude1056,
08:44:58 11/09/01 Fri
Sweet's song reminded me, actually, of "It Ain't Necessarily
So," from Porgy and Bess... right down to the soft-shoe tapping,
the silent beats between phrases, and the quiet sardonic laughter
after each phrase - not to mention the fact that at first it sounds,
like Ain't Necessarily So, like it's a 'good' thing... it's only
once you get in farther that the singer reveals he's actually
on the other side of the argument. (Sportin' Life, in Porgy and
Bess, starts out by singing about the 'grandfathers' of the Bible,
talking about how Methusaleh lived to be a hundred, blah blah
blah, and then nails it by saying that this ain't necessarily
so. He's gotten everyone to agree with what he says, and then
shows that he's got different intentions/interpretations behind
his original position.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Thematic vs. Music *Spoilers* -- Kimberly, 10:33:00
11/09/01 Fri
First, the only songs from Porgy and Bess that I know is "I
Got Plenty of Nothin'" and "Summertime", so I can't
comment on the song itself. However, from your description, thematically
you may be absolutely correct.
I was responding to something else: The fact that when I watched
this, from the first, I saw and heard Ben Vereen as the Leading
Player in the movie. That image and association is now stuck in
my head and won't go away.
BTW, since you obviously know more about musicals than me (not
hard, although my husband's trying), do you know what the "Showtime!"
is from. I could swear it's from a musical, and I could swear
Ben Vereen's the one who said it. Or am I just crazier? ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "It's Showtime!" -- Vickie, 10:40:54
11/09/01 Fri
I don't know if this is the originator, or if the line was an
homage there, but "It's Showtime!" is from All That
Jazz.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Thanks (NT) -- Kimberly, 11:05:20 11/09/01
Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: "It's Showtime!" -- Solitude1056,
11:24:54 11/09/01 Fri
It may an homage, since I've also heard it in Chicago, and some
other musical or play that now I can't recall... uh, the Fantasticks,
maybe?
(And I'm not that up on musicals - I happen to think Andrew Lloyd
Webber is just high-priced muzak, and that Gilbert & Sullivan
wrote some of the silliest ditties.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And remember that Ben Vereen played ...no
wait...Jessica Lange played death but... -- A8, 16:07:18 11/09/01
Fri
Ben Vereen had a major dance number in the middle of Roy Scheider's
(as Bob Fosse) heart attack sequence. Scheider would pop those
pep pills, put in the visine, look at himself wearily and say
that line quite a few times. This, in turn, conjures up the image
of the wannabe cheerleader choreographer in 'Bring It On' (starring
Faith, I mean ED, as the cheerleader slayer).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: "It's Showtime!" -- anom,
10:39:47 11/11/01 Sun
Doesn't the line go back farther than that? I seem to remember
a WB cartoon character calling out, "Iiiiitt's Showtime!"
back in the original Bugs-&-Daffy days, which means they got
it from something even earlier. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised
if it dates back to vaudeville.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) -- Becky74,
10:51:25 11/09/01 Fri
There is a song in Evita that I think is called "Where do
I go from here" that even sounds a little similar. If I start
singing one of them in my head, I end up singing the other.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Where Do We Go from Here -- LoriAnn, 13:07:14 11/09/01 Fri
Isn't "Where Do We Go from Here" reminiscent of "Superheroes"
from "The Rocky Horror Picture Show." The meaning is
certainly similar, as is the general tone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) -- Doug
A Scott, 15:45:57 11/09/01 Fri
As well as the "West Side Story" fight, Dawn's dance
with the demons kept reminding me of the nightmare sequence in
"Oklahoma."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Mockery/Homage *SPOILERS for OMWF* (Longish) --
Kimberly, 19:45:08 11/09/01 Fri
Actually, that was my first call when my husband and I were discussing
it, but he convinced me to go with West Side Story. Both are good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's Face the Music and Dance:
Couples in OMwF Part I -- rowan, 08:47:23 11/09/01 Fri
Using timeless classical patterns, Joss focuses the action around
three pairs of couples:
1. Anya/Xander 2. Willow/Tara 3. Buffy/Spike
Each couple can be described by their purpose within the musical:
Anya/Xander as the Stable Couple, Willow/Tara as the Disintegrating
Couple, and Buffy/Spike as the Forming Couple. Clearly, Buffy
and Spike are the *lead* couple: both their introduction and their
denouement are held off for last.
Anya and Xander are the Stable (Maintaining) Couple. Of the three
pairs, they are the only ones to sing a duet together. Granted,
there are hints of trouble in paradise; but throughout most of
the musical, they are together. They do very little in the musical
on a solo basis. Of all the couples, they are presented as the
most static and stable.
Willow and Tara are the Disintegrating Couple. This couple does
not really have an interactive duet. They frame a scene where
Tara sings to Willow of her love. Willow is an active partner
in the scene, but she doesn't sing or reveal herself. This hints
at the trouble that Tara later reveals in her solo. Willow is
the actor and Tara the acted upon. This is reflected in the fact
that Tara does the majority of the singing in this couple; she
has a lot to reveal about her reactions. We hear only about her
side of the relationship, her perception of it. Willow really
has no meaningful lines at all. Eventually, she comes to realize
through the musical that she must leave Willow. It's really quite
wonderful how Joss managed to incorporate AH's reluctance to sing
into one of the major thematic arcs of the season.
Buffy and Spike are the Forming /Lead Couple. They both have strong
solo appearances that outline their major themes. For Buffy, this
is her acknowledgement that she is detached from life ('going
through the motions') and her desire to feel again ('get her fire
back.'). For Spike, this is his acknowledge that he is detached
from life (dead) and his torment over feeling again ('you [Buffy]
make me feel alive"). They also have several numbers together.
Spike's duet, of course, actively includes Buffy, even though
she does not yet sing with him at this point in the musical. Buffy's
major solo, where she burns to death, incorporates Spike in its
resolutions. Their one true duet (while very short) is held off
as the conclusion of the entire musical, in the classical fashion
for all lead lovers.
As the story plays out, we have two other couples who feature
prominently in the mix: Buffy/Giles and Dawn(Buffy)/Sweet. These
couples are also used to illuminate the issues faced by the Lead
Couple. Buffy/Giles as a couple represent the dynamic of Child/Father.
Giles' song about Buffy, while she trains, reflects his worry
over her continued detachment and his sincere desire to connect
in some way to her. His attempt to 'penetrate her heart' ultimately
fails, however, since Buffy doesn't hear him at all. She's cut
off from the paternal love he offers. She is eerily out of step
(as demonstrated by her slaying moves) with his emotions and his
meaning. Buffy also refuses to let Giles penetrate her heart for
much of the musical. She doesn't reveal what she sang about 'going
through the motions' and when they discuss the nature of the problem
they face, she responds with the easy platitudes about 'facing
things together.'
Let's compare this with how Buffy reacts to Spike's song. Although
she does not sing during Spike's song, her expressions and actions
show she is actively engaged. She is at once annoyed, angry, aroused,
and amazed. She's irritated that he's confessing his love again;
she's apprehensive when he breaks the bottle; she's in active
Slayer mode when she pulls him off the priest. Then, in the conclusion
of the scene, she's afraid to answer the question he's really
posing when they are lying together in the grave: 'even though
I'm physically dead and you're emotionally dead, are we going
to live again by becoming lovers?' She flees.
TBC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Let's Face the Music and Dance: Couples in OMwF Part
2 -- rowan, 08:48:35 11/09/01 Fri
Part of the musical pits the Forming Couple against the Child/Father
Couple. When they all meet up and hear Sweet's nefarious plan,
Giles and Spike have opposing opinions about what to do. Giles
advocates that Buffy go alone. Spike thinks this is crazy. When
the group (reluctantly) sides with Giles, Spike tells Buffy he
will 'watch her back' and to 'forget them.'
This is an important moment. Buffy can either follow her father's
advice, her lover's advice, or her own course. She rejects her
lover's advice. But the way she rejects it is telling: not on
the basis of its worth, but because Spike has hurt her by saying
he wanted her to 'stay away.'
Buffy turns to her father for his advice. Buffy does finally hear
Giles. What manages to penetrate is his insistence that she face
the troubles alone. Since Buffy didn't hear the earlier message,
she takes his advice, but again, she is acting our of emotion,
not intellect. She leaves and perceives that she has been abandoned
by everyone.
The other interesting couple is Dawn(Buffy)/Sweet. Dawn's themes
of feeling invisible are quite touchingly portrayed by her interactions
with the demon who wants to make her his child bride (a al Beetlejuice).
But beyond her own self, Dawn represents Buffy. This is later
made abundantly clear when Buffy consciously repeats the choice
of The Gift: to substitute for Dawn. Buffy's desire to submit
to Sweet and his song is her death wish come back with a vengeance.
She can literally emote herself into a flaming death; she'll feel,
but it will be an unchanneled, frenzied world of feeling where
getting mustard out and being torn out of heaven are equally 'things
to sing about.' Then, once she receives the blessing of this sweet
oblivion of song, she can return to bliss.
This is where all the themes intersect in the penultimate scene.
Giles' quickly repents his (erroneous) fatherly advice and shepherds
everyone down to the Bronze to provide 'backup.' But this course
of action is ineffectual as Buffy begins a frenzied dance of death.
Suddenly, her abandoned lover appears (having gotten over his
snit), to grab her and save her both by deeds and words. Spike
tells Buffy that life isn't about songs or bliss, it's just this
- living, with all its messy complications. And his best advice
is his last advice: fake it until you make it. But Buffy hasn't
just been saved by her lover; he's helped, but she really (like
Dorothy) knew the way home all the time: her alternate self, Dawn,
repeats her dying words that 'the hardest thing to do in this
world is to live in it.'
In confusion after this big revelation, the gang continue to sing,
asking 'where do we go from here?' even though the spell is broken
by Sweet's departure. They can't break free of the song world.
Tellingly, it is again Spike (who can never tolerate too much
human society for any period of time!) who breaks the chain and
flees the scene. Buffy, now ready to choose her lover over her
father and her death wish, chases after him, confessing that she
does want 'to feel.' Spike, with the good sense of all romantic
heroes, responds that he wants 'to feel' alive also. They sweep
into a life-affirming, very sexual embrace - because after all,
there's no sex in heaven or in songs, is there?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> That was great! -- Rahael, 09:23:47 11/09/01 Fri
Reminds me of another famous poem (it must be my quote poetry
day!)
"The graves a fine and private place, But none do there embrace
I think"
(from memory, could be wrong....)
Thanks Rowan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> ack! -- Rahael, 09:37:10 11/09/01 Fri
*Now* I remember..typical! The quote is, of course,
"The grave's a fine and private place But none, I think,
do there embrace"
That's better. From another favourite, Andrew Marvell.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Marvell and 'Carpe Diem' -- Aquitaine,
14:22:41 11/09/01 Fri
I love how BtVS is returning to the theme of 'carpe diem' (albeit
in a much more mature context) that it began exploring in Season
One. The great part of it all is being able to see just how much
the series and the characters have developed, and just how much
they haven't. Very neat.
-Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> More Marvell -- Brian, 09:44:02 11/09/01 Fri
To His Coy Mistress
HAD we but World enough, and Time, This coyness Lady were no crime.
We would sit down, and think which way To walk, and pass our long
Loves Day. Thou by the Indian Ganges side 5 Should'st Rubies find:
I by the Tide Of Humber would complain. I would Love you ten years
before the Flood: And you should if you please refuse Till the
Conversion of the Jews. 10 My vegetable Love should grow Vaster
then Empires, and more slow. An hundred years should go to praise
Thine Eyes, and on thy Forehead Gaze. Two hundred to adore each
Breast: 15 But thirty thousand to the rest. An Age at least to
every part, And the last Age should show your Heart. For Lady
you deserve this State; Nor would I love at lower rate. 20 But
at my back I alwaies hear Times winged Charriot hurrying near:
And yonder all before us lye Desarts of vast Eternity. Thy Beauty
shall no more be found; 25 Nor, in thy marble Vault, shall sound
My ecchoing Song: then Worms shall try That long preserv'd Virginity:
And your quaint Honour turn to dust; And into ashes all my Lust.
30 The Grave's a fine and private place, But none I think do there
embrace. Now therefore, while the youthful hew Sits on thy skin
like morning [dew] And while thy willing Soul transpires 35 At
every pore with instant Fires, Now let us sport us while we may;
And now, like am'rous birds of prey, Rather at once our Time devour,
Than languish in his slow-chapt pow'r. 40 Let us roll all our
Strength, and all Our sweetness, up into one Ball: And tear our
Pleasures with rough strife, Thorough the Iron gates of Life.
Thus, though we cannot make our Sun 45 Stand still, yet we will
make him run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Thanks Brian -- Rufus, 14:42:46 11/09/01
Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> More poetry for Buffy... -- Arachne, 07:51:14
11/11/01 Sun
the fire is out at the heart of the world; all the tame creatures
have grown up wild. the lives I trusted, even my own, collapse,
break off or don't belong...
the fire is out at the heart of the world, all the tame creatures
have grown up wild, all except you, your life like a cloud I am
lost in and will never be found.
- Andrew Motion, I can't remember the title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Let's Face the Music and Dance: Couples in OMwF
Part 2 -- Rob, 09:24:41 11/09/01 Fri
Wonderful essay, Rowan! I really enjoyed reading it, and I agreed
with everything you said.
I started a thread farther down called "Deconstructing OMWF."
If you haven't read it yet, I think you'd enjoy it. I'd also like
your opinions on it. I basically focused on a comparison to Buffy's
death in "The Gift" and her death wish in OMWF. But
if you have time...please read it.
Rob :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Let's Face the Music and Dance: Couples
in OMwF Part 2 -- rowan, 10:02:17 11/09/01 Fri
Thanks for the suggestion. I just got back from 2 weeks of vacation
in the UK, so I haven't been keeping up with all the postings.
I'll take a look tonight!
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Excellent analysis. Thank you. -- Ryuei, 10:36:11
11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Let's Face the Music and Dance: Couples in OMwF
Part 2 -- pr10n, 11:01:23 11/09/01 Fri
Thanks Rowan that was a lot of great thought.
> They can't break free of the song world. Tellingly, it is
> again Spike (who can never tolerate too much human > society
for any period of time!) who breaks the chain and > flees the
scene.
It seems that Spike is closest to the truth about himself -- he
can break free of the singing spell, while the others seem compelled
to stay in the "truth zone" a little longer. Does Buffy's
exit mean she's close to understanding some truth about herself?
About her relationship with Spike?
Just typing out loud.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Isolation & Alientation vs. Differentiation
-- rowan, 11:26:20 11/09/01 Fri
Well, good question. It's always hard to know how to interpret
when the Scoobies isolate themselves. The vampires are symbols
of alienation per ME, which is not a good thing. So Buffy leaving
with Spike could be a very bad sign. On the flip side, it could
be part of the growing up lesson: you have to differentiate yourself
from your friends at some point so that you can eventually reconnect
in a more mature, healthy way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Isolation & Alientation vs. Differentiation
-- verdantheart, 11:35:00 11/09/01 Fri
Great, as always, rowan.
I, too, thought it was interesting that Spike seemed to be able
to resist the spell -- except when it came to the subject of Buffy.
As we know, Spike has no qualms about stating his opinion on any
subject -- other than Buffy, where he's been keeping his mouth
shut out of respect for her feelings (and probably a sense of
hopelessness).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Bursting Into Song *Spoilers* --
Kimberly, 11:56:58 11/09/01 Fri
My impression throughout the episode was that people burst into
song when they were caught up in the emotions. (This even includes
Mustard Guy and Parking Ticket Lady, BTW.) Until he started talking
to Buffy, Spike was unemotional; faced with Buffy, he got caught
in the music.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> It's all there to see... -- rowan,
12:02:49 11/09/01 Fri
Thank you. *g*
Interesting point. Spike is so blunt, he had nothing else to reveal
to anyone -- but he was keeping something from Buffy. I give him
high marks for having kept this secret from Buffy (even though
secrets are usuallly bad in BtVS). This secret was kept in order
to allow Buffy to continue to have one undemaning friend available.
It showed Spike was willing to put Buffy's needs above his own
desire to get into her pants, so to speak (his critic's biggest
complaint against him, I guess).
But now that it's out -- whew! Interesting times ahead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Immunity -- CW, 13:45:04 11/09/01
Fri
It's interesting the claim of immunity came up again. The last
time I remember it was in Something Blue when Buffy claimed to
be immune from the craziness of Willow's wishes. And that time,
too, Buffy and Spike found themselves kissing each other.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Isolation & Alientation vs.
Differentiation -- Rufus, 14:52:10 11/09/01 Fri
There is no mistake that Spike was drinking when Buffy arrived.
The fact that his inhibitions were lowered a tiny bit helped him
finally confess in song what he had been feeling. His song was
also unselfish in that he was trying to keep his love to himself.
He tried to get Buffy to leave but as usual she wanted to stay.
His confession..hey there was even a priest there to hear it......was
that his unbeating heart could still be broken. He has also assumed
that Buffy's attitude hasn't changed from Crush where she told
him he was disgusting. No matter how angry he got he quickly resolved
to help Buffy. Love can be a crazy thing where emotions and words
switch from love to hate back to love again. But in the end both
parties want to feel alive, Buffy expressed that wish in Going
through the Motions and Spike in Rest in Peace..then again at
the end where they kiss.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Let's Face the Music and Dance: Couples
in OMwF Part 2 -- anom, 10:56:56 11/11/01 Sun
"It seems that Spike is closest to the truth about himself
-- he can break free of the singing spell, while the others seem
compelled to stay in the "truth zone" a little longer."
And Spike has always been the one most aware of human emotions,
often speaking truths others are unwilling to deal with about
their feelings. I wonder if that's part of why he's the 1st to
break free of the spell--he doesn't need it to be in the "truth
zone."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Excellent! A welcome break from my day. -- Deeva,
11:05:38 11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Ah, beautiful. Great to have rowan back. :) --
mundusmundi, 13:37:43 11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> *blushing* ....thank you. -- rowan, 13:49:22
11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ATPoBtVS Archives Oct 2000-July 2001 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deconstructing OMwF (cont'd from
Rob's below) -- rowan, 11:28:13 11/09/01
Please note: I'm posting this as a response to Deconstructing
Once More with Feeling by Rob. That post is falling to the bottom
of the page, so I didn't want my response to this great post to
get lost in the shuffle. :)
Well, Rob, I seriously wish I had read your essay before I posted
mine on the couples, because we're obviously on the same page
in major ways.
"I think the most brilliant aspect of this episode's plot
is how it echoed The Gift. Buffy was once again here given a chance
to die, and possibly regain heaven. And once again, when given
the choice, she chooses to take Dawn's place...The last time Buffy
died, it was for a purpose."
Great point. ME loves to repeat the same essential story, but
play with the elements and the choices to make an entirely different
point. We had a lot of debate about suicide vs. sacrifice at the
end of last season; I'd say Joss is weighing in with his intent:
sacrifice. Last season, we learned about the Slayer death wish
from Spike and about Buffy's gift for death from the First Slayer.
We were left wondering: which is it when she leaps from the tower?
Buffy certainly thinks she has found her meaning through her death.
It doesn't on the surface look like the dark fascination with
death that characterizes Spike's "one good day." And
of course, The Gift was brilliant because it presented the choice
of S2 again: kill the beloved or let the world go to hell? Whereas
in S2 Buffy chose to sacrifice Angel, she refused to in S5. Instead,
she sacrificed herself.
"Why did the people combust? Because, in a musical, characters
wear their hearts on their sleeves. Their emotions are all extremely
palpable and overwhelming...It makes sense that if this happened
in "the real world" people's emotions would get too
strong, their passion would become so intense that they would
dance themselves to death."
But as you point out (rightly, IMO), this time it's not the honorable
sacrifice she's making. She's succumbing to the death wish. The
fire imagery (I wrote a bit on this below in Malandaza's post)
is confusing in this episode. The fire is both inspiration and
consumption at the same time: in its positive manifestation, it
is a passion for life: it is Buffy's desire to reconnect with
the world. In its negative manifestation, it is the frenzied (a
positive thing) where getting the mustard out and confessing you
were torn from heaven have the same emotional impact. It's those
red shoes you were talking about.
So Buffy's choice is now framed as a desire to succumb to her
death wish (her natural desire for rest) vs. the everyday of living.
It's interesting how ME gives Buffy the answer. They take Spike
(who imparted the original death wish and last season was its
main advocate as he expressed his desire for his 'one good day')
and put the truth in his mouth: living is just living, every day.
Fake it until you make it. Then Dawn, Buffy's alter ego, repeats
Buffy's dying declaration: 'the hardest thing in this world is
to live in it.'
"Each of them this year has been keeping things to themselves...Most
of these secrets are things the characters would never have been
able to reveal to anyone."
Secrets tend to be a bad thing among the Scoobies, don't they?
Usually when we see secrets, we see dissonance, disharmony, and
disunity, as in S4. But I also think part of the lesson here is
that we can't reveal all our secret things, because no relationship
can thrive in total honesty. It seems as if we must distinguish
between what is important and relevant enough to reveal and what
is hurtful and irrelevant. This is a hard thing to do, I think.
"I like the fact that Xander had summoned the demon."
Me too, and I wondered very much about all the meanings. You're
so right about the marriage issue: it's on his mind all the time.
But Xander also dabbled in magic without full understanding of
its consequences. That gives him quite a potentially empathetic
link to Willow, doesn't it? We talked before about Willow being
a fixer; Xander was doing a Willow here. Neither intend to kill
or hurt, but it happens.
When Xander learns about the spontaneous combustions and still
doesn't 'fess up, that gives him quite a bit of an empathetic
link to Spike, doesn't it? When Spike feeds, he causes harm. Xander
now knows, by concealing the information about the necklace, what
it is like to cause direct harm. Xander really almost gets Dawn
and Buffy killed. He has no excuse not to know this, after the
combustions are revealed.
Will Xander understand his lesson? I don't know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Deconstructing OMwF (cont'd from Rob's below) -- Rob,
12:25:07 11/09/01 Fri
First off, I have to thank you so much for all the kind words
about my humble little post. I'm really glad ya liked it so much.
*blushes* :)
Now, that I got that out of the way (hee hee)...
You said: "But as you point out (rightly, IMO), this time
it's not the honorable sacrifice she's making. She's succumbing
to the death wish. The fire imagery (I wrote a bit on this below
in Malandaza's post) is confusing in this episode. The fire is
both inspiration and consumption at the same time: in its positive
manifestation, it is a passion for life: it is Buffy's desire
to reconnect with the world. In its negative manifestation, it
is the frenzied (a positive thing) where getting the mustard out
and confessing you were torn from heaven have the same emotional
impact. It's those red shoes you were talking about.
I couldn't agree more, and you make a very interesting point about
both the positive and negative aspects about the fire. Buffy feels
empty, emotionless. As she sings, "I touch the fire and it
freezes me/I look into it and it's black/Why can't I feel?/My
skin should crack and peel/I want the fire back!" But, at
the same time, too much fire is a bad thing, and back to the red
shoes and Danse Macabre. Perhaps, then, the negative or positive
aspects are based on the manner and intensity with which the "fire"
is brought about. In other words, while "no fire" is
a bad thing, too much fire is bad as well. And too much fire too
quickly is the worst thing of all. It all comes back to what I
believe is the best line in the show's history, "Fire bad.
Tree pretty." Interestingly, in "Flooded" this
year, Buffy changed her mind about this line. When she jokingly
offered the idea that they should burn her house down to solve
the problems of her mounting bills, she said, "And, besides...fire
pretty." At the state of mind Buffy was in "Graduation
Day," after recently breaking up with Angel and battling
Faith, she had too much fire, too much passion, too much (fill
in the blanks)...At that point, fire is a bad thing. In "Flooded,"
Buffy sees it as a "pretty" thing. Something she desperately
wants back.
Buffy's dance at the end is a desperate attempt to reclaim her
fire, despite the cost. By forcing the fire to return to her life,
the intensity of her emotion/passion/fire-and-all-it-signifies,
etc. will destroy her. But as Spike sings, "The pain that
you feel/ Only can heal/By living." Time heals all wounds.
Buffy has been trying to force herself back into the world for
the benefit of her friends, so they will not worry about her,
and then being depressed that this act is not making her feel
any better. Spike, however, tells her that eventually she will
feel better. Only by returning into the pattern of living in the
world will she eventually reacquaint herself with it, and eventually,
get her fire back.
I believe that Buffy has been confusing her own definitions of
fire. On the one hand, she believes it refers to the passion of
being alive, and a zest for life. On the other hand, she found
that "fire," that overwhelming love in heaven. On the
one hand, she wants to return to the world of the living. As long
as she is doomed to stay on Earth, she wants to be happy. On the
other hand, she knows that whatever fire she reclaims on Earth
will never equal that of the joy she experienced in heaven. She
sees Earth now as "hell" in comparison to heaven. Therefore,
when she offers to take Dawn's place in hell, I could see her
probably reasoning that literal hell can be no worse than the
one she is experiencing now. After being ripped out of eternal
paradise, love, and warmth, every other place she could possibly
be seem to have the same degree of hellishness.
At the end, again, Buffy tries to reclaim her fire by passionately
kissing Spike. I read some posts debating whether she was right
or wrong to do this, but I do not consider what she did a bad
thing. For one, it is a far less self-destructive way of "trying
to feel" than the last way she tried. Further, I do not see
anything wrong with her seeing an opportunity to feel again, and
taking it. What's more, she has had feelings for Spike, and she
knows how much he loves her. She has entrusted him with her deepest
secret long before her other friends. She trusts him, she understands
him, and, what's more, he understands her. Although some may argue
that this kiss is just as artificial as the dance, the dance is
a self-destructive act. A kiss is the opposite. A kiss is a life-affirming,
wonderful thing. And that, I believe, is the major difference.
"Secrets tend to be a bad thing among the Scoobies, don't
they? Usually when we see secrets, we see dissonance, disharmony,
and disunity, as in S4. But I also think part of the lesson here
is that we can't reveal all our secret things, because no relationship
can thrive in total honesty. It seems as if we must distinguish
between what is important and relevant enough to reveal and what
is hurtful and irrelevant. This is a hard thing to do, I think."
I think your idea of revealing TOO MUCH as being a bad thing perfectly
blends into the symbol of the fire. Fire can be a good thing,
but too much, too fast is not. As hard as it is to differentiate
between whether fire is good or bad, it is hard to decide which
secrets are best left hidden and which are not. Buffy's revelation
about heaven, for example, should probably have been kept hidden.
For one, its only result is making the rest of the SG feel awful
for what they have done. Secrets that make others feel worse when
they are revealed are usually not a good thing. Further, by telling
her friends, it does not solve anything. That comes along with
the bad effects of this spell. Xander and Anya's revelations about
their doubts to each other? That may have been a good thing. It's
probably healthy to admit your doubts to one another instead of
keeping them hidden. These are things that can be worked out,
and discussed. A fall from heaven is not.
Anyway, I'm not sure where to wrap up.
Oh, but I would also like to say how much I agreed with what you
said, in your "Let's Face the Music..." post about how
ingenious it was that Joss was able to incorporate Allyson's not
wanting to sing into a driving force for this year's major story
arc so far. Willow is completely detached in a different way from
Buffy--she seems to be detatched from reality, believing that
magic can solve every problem. Why deal with an argument between
a girlfriend when you can just flush her memory down the toilet?
Why bother going to the store when you can whip up some magic
decorations in a flash? With that, I pose the question, does Willow
need to get her "fire" for life back also? Despite Buffy's
doubts, she has been, up to her dance, taking the natural way
of reincorporating herself back into reality...slowly. Willow,
meanwhile, has been distancing herself from the real world. Maybe
the problem is that Willow has TOO MUCH fire to play with, and
her use of it is too casual, too easy.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Willow and Fire -- Kimberly, 13:01:23 11/09/01 Fri
First of all, I have been reading this thread about fire feeling
like an idiot. Some incredible, provocative thoughts from all
of you (here and down below).
What you had to say about Willow made me think. Willow herself
may be cut off from the fire, the fire of love. She thinks she
has it, but by hiding so much of what she is doing to prevent
arguments, she is cutting herself off from the fire of life, of
love. And I think the only way for Willow to save herself is for
her to get burned. Next week may start on that path with the inevitable
fight (and loss?) of Tara. I hope it happens soon; I have identified
with Willow since the beginning of the series.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Thought on Balance -- rowan, 13:36:16 11/09/01 Fri
Hmmm...I'm at work right now, so I can't really develop this idea,
but what you're saying is triggering some ideas.
First, is there a message in here about balance? I am reminded
of the Medieval/Renaissance ideas of medicine that see the body
composed of four (?) humours which must be in balance. Buffy may
have too much melancholy right now.
Following up on balance, the elements seem to need to be in balance
as well:
Fire (inspiration) Earth (grounding, materials, home/hearth) Water
(emotion) Air (intellect)
I bet we could really get some interesting observations about
the musical, Buffy, and Willow if we pursued this line of thinking...
rowan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Alchemical transformation -- Rahael, 14:50:24
11/09/01 Fri
I see a connection here with the neo-platonic obsession with alchemy,
(and, of course, the idea of the Aristotelian 'Golden Mean').
Alchemical belief wasn't just about making gold from lead....it
was a metaphor for transforming the ordinary, the human into 'gold'
- so that the greatest spiritual achievement of a human being
would be to transform the base metal into spiritual gold. That
of course came from a mysterious balance of different elements,
a peculiar spritual alchemy.
And here we come back to Andrew Marvell, and his most wonderful
poem 'Upon Appleton House' which is redolent with the images and
instruments of alchemical transformation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> bwahaha. -- Solitude1056, 17:54:09 11/09/01
Fri
Which is exactly why the Parts in Dark Alchemy have those oh-so-peculiar
titles. (Despite the fact that not one, but three different people
wrote me to tell me they were quite certain that "calcination"
should be plural, not singular, if it was even a word. Oh yeah,
it's a word... just an archaic, alchemical one.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> see...just another illustration
of how great this board is. Pure gold! -- Rahael, 05:59:29 11/10/01
Sat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Fire from Heaven or Willow as Prometheus -- Rahael,
15:21:03 11/09/01 Fri
I'm sure that in the course of previous discussions about the
'Hero's Journey', Prometheus has come up - the hero who achieves
his apotheosis, and comes back to earth with a heavenly boon (albeit
stolen)
He steals fire from the Gods, for the sake of humanity, and is
punished for his selfless deed by being strung to a rock for eternity,
with an eagle eating his liver every day.
Now Buffy has already been identified with love/fire......and
she too has been snatched from heaven, by Willow, dabbling in
the matters of the Gods for the sake of her own human comfort.
The only problem with relating this to Buffy is that Willow is
not suffering torment (only Buffy).........yet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> ah...just me then! -- Rahael, 06:39:54 11/12/01
Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> NO way should Buffy's revelation about heaven have
stayed hidden -- briseis, 15:54:28 11/09/01 Fri
"Hairy toes" can stay hidden. The deepest facts of your
experience can only stay hidden at the cost of being alienated
from all the people you hide them from. Also, how can Willow ever
learn about the effects of her actions if they are kept hidden
from her?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: NO way should Buffy's revelation about heaven
have stayed hidden (mild Spoilers - 6th season)) -- Tillow, 07:52:33
11/10/01 Sat
Buffy's revelation about heaven, for example, should probably
have been kept hidden. For one, its only result is making the
rest of the SG feel awful for what they have done. Secrets that
make others feel worse when they are revealed are usually not
a good thing. Further, by telling her friends, it does not solve
anything. That comes along with the bad effects of this spell.
Xander and Anya's revelations about their doubts to each other?
That may have been a good thing. It's probably healthy to admit
your doubts to one another instead of keeping them hidden. These
are things that can be worked out, and discussed. A fall from
heaven is not.
Briseis,
I absolutely agree that Buffy's secret had to be revealed. This
was not a fall from heaven; Buffy was taken from heaven (or wherever
she was that she has come to remember as a good place or state
of being). Some of the people at the Bronze were responsible for
that and some were not. I agree with Rob that some people will
be hurt by this who were not responsible for bringing her back,
like Dawn. Dawn most likely already feels guilty for the fact
that Buffy died for her and now will have to grapple with the
fact that Buffy has been "expelled from heaven." But
it's about empathy and Dawn has proven that she can pull Buffy
through just like Spike. This new knowledge will help her love
Buffy, instead of turning away in the face of her 'frozen' sister.
I believe we will see Dawn and Spike help Buffy 'get her fire
back' in the next episode and who knows what will happen in Smashed.
With Willow, it is crucial to push her story along. Now Giles
and Tara have warned her of the effects of magick. In the first
three episodes, she worried until it seemed like there were no
consequences that couldn't be handled. Once Buffy chopped the
head off that demon, Willow relaxed. To GIles "I was amazing;
I did what no one else could do." Only by this secret coming
out would Willow see the consequences of her actions/addiction.
(Plus Tara finding out about the forget spell.)
As for the others... in just about every episode, they have been
talking about her coming out of hell. If they don't understand
her at all, how can they ever bridge the gap? They also will need
to understand the extent of Willow's problem/addiction and their
own roles as enablers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> OMTwF - Death and the Slayer (Spoilers) -- RabidHarpy, 12:56:17
11/09/01 Fri
Some people seem to be suggesting that Buffy has some sort of
suicidal "death wish". I'm not so sure that I agree.
In Buffy's very first song, she clearly says:
"Will I stay this way forever?/ Sleepwalk through my life's
endeavour..." (Going Through the Motions)
She has already resigned herself to the fact that she is in for
the long-haul, or at least a long life...
"I can't even see/ If this is really me/And I just wanna
be/Alive!" (Going Through the Motions)
She expresses her desire to live, to continue, but with a sense
of renewal - she's tired of the old life - she needs change, some
sort of "spark" that will make this life that she seems
destined to live worth living...
"Why can't I feel?/My skin should crack and peel/I want the
fire back!" (Walk Through the Fire)
Can we assume that in "heaven", she felt more "alive"
than she ever has? Was it because she was finally complete and
had succeeded, not only in discovering her purpose, but fulfilling
it? Was it because she felt warmth, love, rest and peace?
How would you feel if you died twice and both times you returned
to exactly the same point you had just left? Buffy's moment of
clarity in "The Gift" answered the question as to her
purpose - after an epiphany like this, one would have thought
that she would have been ready to begin a completely new chapter
in her existence, (or be ready to move on to some sort of "nirvana").
One can compare it to playing a video game - once you've figured
out how to defeat the "big bad" and complete the level,
you expect to go on to the next one, only in this case, Buffy
is put right back where she left off - on the same "earthly"
level she thought she had completed. I don't at all blame her
for her frustration and depression!
The flippant way that Buffy shrugs off "Hey, I've died twice
", in "What Can't We Face" shows her resignation
to this life - she realizes that there is nothing to be done but
to continue to plod along, (remember, she's died before with the
same results - this is getting to be "old hat").
"To save the day/Or maybe melt away/I guess it's all the
same." (Walk Through the Fire)
She realizes that whether she "saves the day" or ends
up dying (melt away) again, she will end up returning to where
she had left off.
Later, when she is confronted by Sweet, she doesn't even have
to think twice about offering herself in Dawn's place, (even though
it means going to hell - she's been to heaven, and since she assumes
that she will come back from "the land of the dead"
again at some point, she's not concerned - at least hell would
be a "new" adventure - for a while). Sweet makes some
comment insinuating that he'll take delight in her death and she
shrugs this off as well with, "It won't help". Sweet
answers this comment with a cliche about life being a "miracle",
(a little throw-back to Buffy's joke to Giles about her return
as being "a miracle" in the Magic Box reunion).
At this point Buffy begins her song, (which incidentally lists
a ton of common cliches about life) - she already knows all those
songs - she begs for something NEW to sing about, but Sweet refuses
to help her. Even when Buffy breaks into the "wild"
dance, I believe that she is fully aware that she cannot be permanently
harmed -(even if she does instantaneously combust). For one thing,
all the Scoobies have arrived by this point - both Xander and
Willow have "resurrected" her in the past, so she has
no doubt that they will either intercede, or be the post-mortem
"clean-up" crew.
If you notice, Buffy's dance begins with definite, structured
choreography, but then it breaks away into undisciplined spinning.
This, to me, clearly shows her frustration - much like the little
"test" in the Magic Box (a microcosmic metaphor for
Buffy's entire existence thus far), where we noted her frustration
each time the scene looped - (to the point of her crushing Giles'
glasses and breaking down in tears) - Buffy's entire life seems
a continual "loop". She hasn't yet figured out that
she will eventually find a solution and be able to move forward,
as she did in the "test".
It is also interesting to note that Spike, the outsider, is the
one to intervene and provide words of renewal and hope. He has
not arrived with the SG, and is, after the seeming betrayal of
the resurrection events, no longer a part of them, (he has even
avoided Dawn, whom he was closest to, and who was innocent of
Willow's plans).
"Life isn't bliss/Life is just this - It's living/You'll
get along/The pain that you feel/Only can heal by living./Have
to go on living" (Play a Part)
Spike understands what Buffy is just learning - "have to
go on living". He has died and returned, (possibly numerous
times), and yet each time he returned, it was to the same world,
and with the same knowledge that he is a vampire and doomed to
all that entails, (ie. avoiding sunlight, preying on humans, living
in darkness....) Spike too has been in a 200 year loop - despite
the fact that he's lived dangerously and with the possibility
of death at every turn, and most notably, with the mundane repetition
of existence. Living just "is", (although in Spike's
case, it's more of an "existence" than a life) - that
is why he is drawn to Buffy - she is the something "new"
that is not only inspiring all of the sincere changes in his character
- something he had never tried before - but the "life"
in her, makes him feel renewed. Her life gives him a reason to
live, (or at least remember and try to emulate what life is).
"So one of us is living." (Play the Part)
I took this line to be another one of Spike's attempts to make
Buffy smile - a little "pun" if you will. He does not
hide from the fact that he is dead, (we saw him "vamp"
out for the first time this season, he calls her for whispering,
"in a dead man's ear", he's wearing the red shirt of
evil - lol!) He is reminding her that yes, he is a vampire and
different from her - he places himself in the category of her
nemesis, (being the Slayer and all), but also brings to her attention
the fact that they are not as different as she once assumed -
they are, in fact, equals of a sort. His tenderness lets her know
that he understands her frustration, and that he cares for her
and is available to share any knowledge he has with her in order
to help her cope - he will be there for her.
At this point, Sweet interrupts, (now that the final secret has
been revealed - the undeniable similarity between the Vampire
and the Slayer), and the SG once more breaks into song, not knowing
what to do - no one, not even Buffy seems to have the answer to
this question...
"Where do we go from here?/When does the end appear?/~Heh.
Bugger this.~" (Where Do We Go From Here)
I wonder whether it was intentional that Spike left at this point
in the song? He had just revealed to Buffy that "life is
just this - living", and here everyone is asking for some
sort of resolution, "when does the end appear?" Spike
already knows that there is no "end" for him, he's already
dead - he's already sung this song - so he leaves. Buffy realizes
a little later that this song has no meaning for her either -
she has "to go on living" too, so she joins Spike outside.
She tells him that she doesn't want to sing that same old song
anymore - she is ready to move on. As Buffy reiterates her feelings
of emptiness and how she feels she is "dead" inside,
Spike repeats how he died (literally) "so many years ago"
- and both join in the confession that they each just want to
"feel" (the implied next word is "alive" -
which neatly completes the arc-like framework of the musical which
began with Buffy's desire to be alive). Both Buffy and Spike share
the desire to feel alive.
"You can make me... But I just wanna... - Feel!" ( Walk
Through the Fire - Reprise)
Buffy, for a brief moment, surrenders to her need, (the exciting
possibilities of mouth-to-mouth contact with Spike, someone she
finds herself attracted to physically, and a companion who cares
for her and understands and supports her) - she leads the embrace.
Spike reciprocates, (love is what motivates him - even this meeting
of their bodies, though brief, is enough to thrill him, and with
their new understanding, and this small break in the wall between
them, there is hope, and a possibility of a deeper relationship
in the future).
Buffy allows for a deeper relationship with Spike while accepting
his support and friendship (?) Spike gives Buffy his heart and
receives her acceptance of his declarations of love and support
(?)
"Where do we go from here?" (Where Do We Go From Here?
- Reprise)
That remains to be seen... :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Death Wishes and the Slayer (Spoilers) -- Aquitaine,
14:00:47 11/09/01 Fri
Great posts and great thread!
*** Some people seem to be suggesting that Buffy has some sort
of suicidal "death wish". I'm not so sure that I agree.
***
Now, I haven't seen OMwF yet (and won't 'til Saturday) and I only
fell off the spoiler-free wagon 2 days ago but I think I can still
venture to respond on this question of fire and death wish vs
suicide:)
First of all, let me say that while I don't believe that Buffy's
leap from the Tower in "The Gift" was entirely altrustic,
I never saw it as a suicide. There was something fatalistic about
her choice that was foreshadowed in the plotting of the series.
Remember how, back in S4, Fuffy's credit card had a 05/01 expiration
date? In Season 6, I now see Spike's death wish speech from FFL
in a slightly different light. It is one aspect or part of the
necessary balance between light and dark in the Buffyverse. In
order to survive and be effective, the Slayer must almost be a
neutral force, not neutral as in passive but neutral as in comprising
both a fierce 'fire' for life *and* a magnetic connection to death
as well. IMO, Buffy has systematically avoided committing to living
a normal life and rebelling against it. One thing she repeatedly
does do, however, is withdraw emotionally (Riley and Xander cited
her for this lack of passion in ITW). When Spike said slayers
have a death wish, I think he is referring to more than just the
compulsion to seek death, but the sheer *passion* that drives
slayers.
In many ways, Buffy is a stranger to herself. The cataclysmic
outcome of her relationship with Angel may have helped her paint
herself into a corner emotionally and it has taken a death and
rebirth (and Spike:p) to bring her back to the crux of her identity
and motivations. Insofar as this is true, Buffy needs to reconnect
with the people around her and build relationships that aren't
about the need to 'protect' (shielding her friends from the truth
or slaying demons to protect society at large) but about acceptance.
Curiously, perhaps because he is dead and 'gray' etc, Spike is
in a unique position to see Buffy's true colours but I think that
each member of the SG has the potential to connect with Buffy
in a more genuine manner (Xander seems to next closest at the
moment, Willow the furthest). I'm looking forward to seeing how
these relationships evolve onscreen in OMwF and in the future.
-Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> agree & disagree -- anom, 19:52:46 11/11/01 Sun
I was a little surprised to hear Buffy sing at the beginning that
she wanted to be alive. It seemed like that was just what she
didn't want, what she couldn't deal with. But I don't think that's
the same as a death wish--more of a heaven wish. When she goes
into the dance at the end of Play a Part, I'm not sure it's by
choice. She hesitated before telling them about having been in
heaven. She's reached the stage, where Sweet & Dawn sit, & she
pauses. He makes a hand gesture, curling his fingers, & then she
goes on to the "heaven" part of the song. To me it looks
as if Buffy is trying to resist, but Sweet reasserts his control,
which may still be in effect when she starts the wild, "macabre"
part of the danse. His shaking his head when she asks for something
to sing about may be another gesture of control, or her dance
may be her own reaction to it. True, she doesn't look horrified,
the way the 1st "customer who just went combustin'"
did. So my considered opinion is that I don't know.
But I do know I disagree about Buffy assuming that if she dies
again, her friends will just resurrect her again. (If she does,
she's wrong--no more urns of Osiris, even on eBay.) Not that that
would make it OK for her to die again--from what we've seen so
far this season, she wouldn't want them to resurrect her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "supporting evidence" from dawn's
dance -- anom, 21:46:24 11/11/01 Sun
"When she [Buffy] goes into the dance at the end of Play
a Part, I'm not sure it's by choice."
Something else occurs to me. As Dawn tries to escape from the
Bronze, she passes the staircase at least twice. If she headed
up it, she might have a better chance of getting away--the banisters
would keep the puppet-minions from getting in front of her as
she ran. But she doesn't go that way. Is Sweet controlling her
dance, making her run where she can be intercepted? Does he do
the same w/Buffy's dance, in which case he's the one driving her
to the point of combustion? That would mean she's not self-destructing
by choice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Deconstructing OMwF (cont'd from Rob's below) -- bible
belt, 15:30:11 11/11/01 Sun
"I'd say Joss is weighing in with his intent: sacrifice."
I agree.
I still see a theme about suicide in there, but it is being dealt
with in an honest, compassionate way. The hardest thing to get
across to a teenager is that they still have their entire life
ahead of them, whereas, the hardest thing for a young adult to
deal with is to know that they have their entire life ahead of
them. No matter how bleak life seems, you have to, "walk
through the fire. A lesson to be learned." The scene in The
Gift works well for teenagers too because even though it was Buffy
that jumped (not a suicide but the point is being made) she turned
to her teenage sister and said, "the hardest thing about
this world is to live in it. Live for me." Kudos for Joss
and them to deal so responsibly.
I apologize if I'm just restating what everyone is saying, they're
great posts, I just wanted to sing my praises too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Deconstructing OMwF (cont'd from Rob's below) -- cat,
13:00:35 11/12/01 Mon
>>>Xander now knows, by concealing the information about
the necklace, what it is like to cause direct harm. Xander really
almost gets Dawn and Buffy killed. He has no excuse not to know
this, after the combustions are revealed. Will Xander understand
his lesson? I don't know.<<<
Hmmm, the whole Xander summoning the demon reminded me of the
way the villainous trio operate; the kind of naive "because
it would be cool" type of thinking. Xander may be able to
relate more to them than to Spike. Frankly, he acted with the
immaturity of a kid, but maybe this was his way of dealing with
the stress and reality of the fact that he is getting married
and settling down - taking on the full adult mantle which he doesn't
feel ready for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Where do I go from here? LOL -- Rob, 09:35:59 11/13/01 Tue
Wow...I read everyone's responses. I am so glad everyone is posting
on this thread. This has been my most successful one I ever started!!
Yeah!! :) :)
But anyway, I have so much to say and no time at the moment to
say it, so I'll make this fast.
I also have a lot of people I want to respond to, but I don't
want to post scattered responses throughout the thread, b/c no
one'll read them!
So, basically, here are some of my ideas:
1) One person gave Buffy's "I just want to be alive"
line from "Going Through the Motions" as an argument
that she does not have a death wish. Personally, I don't think
that that means that she doesn't. At the end, I think it's very
clear that she wants to die, or at least sees dying as the only
way to solve her problems. At least for one, bright, shining moment
she will have her fire back. Of course, that fire will kill her.
Come to think of it, this reminds me a great deal of the musical,
"Pippin." Pippin spends his whole life trying to be
someone amazing, and to accomplish amazing goals, but just can't
seem to find his niche in the world. In the end, he is told what
he must do...Set himself in fire, and die in a blaze of glory.
For one moment, he will epitomize all the beauty and mystery of
the world. In the end, he decides he cannot do that: to settle
down and have a nice homelife with a wife and child who love him
is far more important. Buffy has a similar situation...She wants
to reclaim the fire of life. Yes, the dance would reclaim that,
but she would die soon after. Therefore, I think, she is conficted.
She does not care if she lives or dies. She just wants to feel.
If dying will bring her that, she welcomes it. Also, I think that
at the start of the episode, she wants to be alive, but by the
time we hear her sing "Walk Through the Fire," she views
that as an impossibility. She does not think she can ever be happy
again, and so chooses hell.
2) I think some people misunderstood what I meant when I said
that Buffy's revelation about heaven should have stayed hidden.
I did not mean that I think the writers shouldn't have revealed
it. In fact, I'm glad they did! For the sake of the story, that
was necessary. A secret that stays hidden will kill a story dead
in its tracks. And what is the point, narratively, to give a character
a secret and then never reveal it? No, I think it was great for
the story that the secret was revealed. What I meant was that
Buffy was right to want to hide this secret. Her friends brought
her back with the best of intentions. Telling them what they did
to her would solve nothing: It wouldn't bring her back to heaven,
and would only make her friends feel horrible about what they
had done. So I think Buffy was very mature, as she always is,
and wise when she decided not to tell them. In that respect, I
believe the secret should have stayed hidden. To protect your
friends, it is best not to tell them something that will only
hurt them. For the sake of the story, I am pleased as punch that
this was revealed. "Buffy" always works best when things
don't work out well for our main characters. It's ironic, but
true. These horrible things that shake up the relationships and
push them to the breaking points are what makes the show so special.
Not many other shows would test friendships as much as this one
has. In most shows, an argument would have been solved by the
end of the episode. Not so with this show. But I believe, in the
end, the SG's friendships will emerge stronger once the shock
of the revelations and their direct aftermaths have run out. They
have formed too strong a family to have it be permanently shattered.
And I wrote way too much, since I had no time, and still don't
LOL! I'm gonna go now...
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Where do I go from here? LOL -- WanderLost, 12:06:03
11/13/01 Tue
But, Rob, the Heaven revelation IS protecting them. Protecting
people isn't always about making them feel better. Willow NEEDS
to feel horrible. Not just to serve the story. Because she is
heading down a path that could get her killed. Or others. And
jarring her out of that by making her realize the magic she's
most proud of was an obscene screw-up will keep her safer, in
the long run, then letting her feel good about her good intentions(we
know where those lead).
Though I do agree, Buffy's motives were selfless, it was a secret
that needed to be told.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Where do I go from here? LOL -- Kimberly, 12:21:46
11/13/01 Tue
Thanks for this topic; it's been a real brain-stretcher. (And
isn't it great to have a TV show that leads to brain-stretching).
However, in the interest of debate, I'm going to play Devil's
Advocate on both of your numbered ideas:
1. As someone who has suffered from depression her entire adult
life (and has been effectively treated for it for the last six
years), Buffy's problem is anhedonia caused by depression. She
does want to feel; she just can't. Her clothing shows that there
is no color in her life; everything is gray. Her actions show
that there is no pleasure in her life; when I'm in the midst of
a bout, nothing is fun, nothing feels good, there is no pleasure.
However, she doesn't really want to die; she wants to live, to
feel. It will be interesting to see how she gets out of it. (Not
easily, I fear.)
2. "To protect your friends, it is best not to tell them
something that will only hurt them." I disagree. Buffy has
been angry and resentful of her friends ever since she was resurrected.
Until she tells them what has happened, she can't reconnect with
them and, I think, anyone else. Her friends now know why Buffy
has withdrawn from them and can begin to repair the damage done
to their friendships with her. I think that once that repair begins,
Buffy's depression may also ease. (Before everything is over,
she needs to have a really good screaming match with Willow and
Xander. And maybe Giles too.)
Again, great post, great thread, thank you for making my head
hurt. :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Where do I go from here? LOL -- Rob, 12:57:29
11/13/01 Tue
I've taken both of your points into consideration, and my brain
is hurting now also! LOL.
Where I was coming from was the psychological persepective of
the radio talk show host/psychiatrist Dr. Joy Brown. She says
over and over that a secret should be kept, if its coming out
will hurt other people, or, worse, destroy a friendship. A secret
of this magnitude has the possibility of destroying a friendship.
She says that if a secret is revealed, it should be done very
gently and the person should make every effort to see everyone's
side in the situation. For example, if you are telling a friend
that they hurt you, say, "I understand that you did not mean
to hurt me. In fact, you probably thought you were helping, but..."
Buffy was hurting. In many respects, I agree with you...she had
to tell her friends. Keeping this hidden was doing more harm than
good.
Perhaps then I think that if she had the option, and thought it
out, and had not been under the spell when she revealed the truth
to them, she should have gone about it differently. I understand
how hard it is for Buffy to realize it, but I really do believe
her friends had only the best intentions in resurrecting her.
The way she told them only made them feel bad. She scolds them
for not understanding that "once you've bowed/you leave the
crowd..." and that they denied her her right to be in heaven.
I think she should have made it clear to them that she understands
how pure their intentions were. She should have told them, "I
have to tell you the truth. I know that you thought you were doing
a good thing, and I really appreciate it. You thought you were
rescuing me from hell. But the truth is, I was happy. I am angry
at you for what you did, but at the same time I understand why
you did it..." or something to that effect.
I am not at all criticizing OMWF. As I said in my original post,
I think it was the best all-time episode. Further, I don't have
one problem with one thing that happened in the entire episode.
I completely understand Buffy's anger and why she revealed her
feelings the way she did. I'm glad that she revealed them, and
that the SG finally know just what they did. It will make for
a fascinating story...much more so than if she told them "gently."
Then there would have been less conflict, less huge emotions stirring.
Nothing ever runs smoothly in the Buffyverse, and it shouldn't
now.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Where do I go from here? LOL -- Kimberly,
13:41:14 11/13/01 Tue
I completely agree that the WAY Buffy told the Scoobies was probably
the worst possible way for that revelation to have been said.
They believed that they were saving her from Hell; they had no
intention of ripping her out of Heaven. And to find out in the
way they did was probably almost as devastating to them as having
it done was to Buffy.
IMO, Buffy decided not to tell them not to spare their feelings
(although she probably believes that was the reason), but because
the inevitable emotional storm was too much for her to handle.
Which meant that when it did finally come out, it was going to
come out the way it did: in anger and pain, not with any attention
to the feelings of those receiving the revelation.
The older I get, the more I believe that secrets kill the closeness
in a relationship. Yes, sometimes secrets are necessary, but every
secret is a wedge. At the same time, the manner in which a secret
is revealed is important; to just blurt out something hurtful
does the relationship more harm than keeping the secret. So, I
agree with Dr. Brown; I just also believe that secrets are damaging.
Well, one thing's for sure; the brain cells are dying from nonuse,
just hurting from overuse. Thanks for the brain food (along with
spinach and blueberries.) LOL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Where do I go from here? LOL -- bible belt, 17:04:38
11/13/01 Tue
I'm not sure where I stand on keeping a secret to protect your
friends. Not telling them in the beginning was admirable, but
then the secret became too much to bear. If concealing something
horrible leads to the destruction of the one doing the concealing
and that's a sacrifice they are willing to make for someone then
that's their choice. Sometimes being honest and blunt, while at
first may seem harsh and uncaring, can help move things along
in a positive direction.
I have to add, I thought Buffy was doing the same thing when she
told Spike she thought she was in Heaven, as she did for the SG,
because he thought he couldn't save her from Hell. Man! Willow
and Me really know are Slayer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS
for OMWF) -- Shaglio, 13:00:27 11/09/01
With all this talk about singing, I forgot to mention my favorite
line of the night:
"Master the crueller; tame the doughnut."
That Xander is such a kook!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Lol! (Spoilers) -- RH, 13:22:53 11/09/01 Fri
I liked Anya's response, too: "That's still funny sweetie..."
Sometime's you've just got to humour them!
I also liked Giles' line to Spike: "If I want your opinion...
I'll never want your opinion."
Ouch! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- mm,
13:36:17 11/09/01 Fri
Master the crueller; tame the doughnut."
Was that a reference to the movie Magnolia, namely an unprintable
line by Tom Cruise's macho-guru character? If so, it should be
"Respect the crueller," but that's immediately what
sprang to mind. (It may or may not be worth noting that Magnolia
also includes a group-singalong scene, to Aimee Mann's "Wise
Up.")
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF)
-- Shaglio, 13:52:31 11/09/01 Fri
Magnolia was a really strange movie. The first time I saw it,
I thought, "what the hell was that!?!?!" But after seeing
it a second time, I realized how much I liked it.
Of course, having Julianne Moore in it didn't hurt either ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> My Favorite line of the night !(SPOILERS for
OMWF) -- SingedCat, 18:35:56 11/09/01 Fri
It's no contest--
"Buffy needs backup! Anya--Tara--"
("Ooooooooooo, Ooooooooooooo....")
I almost missed the rest of the episode, I was choking. :D
Oh, and, "I was able to examine the body while the police
were taking witness arias."
I mean, how can Tony Head deliver Joss Whedon's lines without
completely falling apart? He's English, is all I can figure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> He does say respect the cruller, I think --
JodithGrace, 21:00:11 11/11/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Mine is: "And what's with all the carrots?/What do
they need/Such good eyesight for anyway?" -- rowan, 13:52:18
11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Facing it somehow / She's not even half the girl she.. Oooow!
-- CaptainPugwash, 16:03:39 11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I'll take (*SPOILERS*)... -- A8, 16:24:48 11/09/01 Fri
Buffy's line about not quaking in her "stylish yet affordable
shoes" followed by the whole situation not being "all
hugs and puppies."
Honorable mention to Willow's "I think this line's mostly
filler."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I'll take (*SPOILERS*)... -- pagangodess, 18:53:00
11/09/01 Fri
I believe the line was "stylish, yet ill-affordable boots",
A8 :)
"the day you do decide what you want, there'll probably be
a parade, 76 bloody trombones" by Spike is one of my favs,
there are too many to settle for just one.
:) pagangodess
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Corrected, I humbly stand.;-) -- A8, 19:07:52
11/09/01 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I'll take (*SPOILERS*)... -- Solitude1056,
21:18:31 11/09/01 Fri
hm. the line as I heard it was "stylish yet affordable"
... guess we'll have to see, when the transcript gets posted.
and I agree about spike's line re the trombones!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I'll take (*SPOILERS*)... -- d'Herblay,
21:42:18 11/09/01 Fri
From the shooting script: "stylish, yet affordable boots."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- Kimberly,
20:03:55 11/09/01 Fri
"I gave birth to a pterodactyl." "Did it sing?"
"It's not just us."
Too many to choose just one; most of the better ones are already
chosen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- JBone,
20:36:18 11/09/01 Fri
While I was working very hard at work, I was downloading some
of the mp3's off of psyche's site for the musical. I was playing
the Let it Burn song for our secretary who humors me when I talk
about Buffy. When Spike part came up she asked, "Who's that?"
I answered, that's Spike. Then the line 'I'm free if that bitch
dies/I better help her out' came out.
She laughed, "He's got problems doesn't he?" Yes he
does. She also got a tickle out of the 'First, I'll kill her,
then I'll save her' lyrics.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I've gotta go with "Get your kum-ba-yayas out."
I never understood that song. -- Deeva, 00:09:33 11/10/01 Sat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I've gotta go with "Get your kum-ba-yayas
out." I never understood that song. -- Cactus Watcher, 11:33:09
11/10/01 Sat
That song hasn't aged very well, has it? Back in the 50's when
Harry Belafonte was singing it, it was great. A decade later it
was being sung an octave higher and with no semblance of the original
feeling by every folk singing wanna-be. Pretty much became the
we-a'int-got-a-clue-but-we-still-wanna-sing-folk anthem. The other
overworked sing-along song of the era, Michael Row the Boat Ashore,
held up better. But, I could stand to wait another ten years,
before I hear it again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I've gotta go with "Get your kum-ba-yayas
out." I never understood that song. -- Rattletrap, 20:16:45
11/10/01 Sat
That line was a pretty nifty double-shot pop culture ref. To the
uinitiated "Get Yer Ya-Yas Out" was a Rolling Stones
album, roughly early '70s I think, but I'm not sure. I think I
find Spike referencing Kumbaya more far-fetched than him referencing
the Stones :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I've gotta go with "Get your kum-ba-yayas
out." I never understood that song. -- anom, 18:25:23 11/11/01
Sun
"I think I find Spike referencing Kumbaya more far-fetched
than him referencing the Stones"
I don't find it at all farfetched for him to refer to it in a
derogatory way.
And yeah, that was a great line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- Tillow,
07:01:53 11/10/01 Sat
I liked just about everything Anya said... but I loved Spike declaring
his boundaries followed by the "So, you're not staying, then?"
*Honorable mention* to "Strong. Someday you'll be a real
boy."
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- Wynn,
07:02:56 11/10/01 Sat
I liked the line Spike says to a fleeing Buffy after his song-
"So does this mean you're not going to stay?" I also
liked Giles witness aria comment, and when Sweet says to Buffy
"That's gloomy" after his death threat doesn't faze
her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: It wasn't really a line but you could hear her say it...
-- bible belt, 12:16:41 11/11/01 Sun
When Anya taps giles on the shoulder, "there, there."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: It wasn't really a line but you could hear her
say it... -- mm, 13:01:46 11/11/01 Sun
When Anya taps giles on the shoulder, "there, there."
A beautiful example of why so many of us love the show.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Favorite line of the night (SPOILERS for OMWF) -- Isabel,
16:33:02 11/11/01 Sun
There's so many, but what makes me chuckle every time is:
Xander: You're the cutest of the Scoobies/With your lips as red
as Rubies/And your firm and supple ... tight embrace!
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Movie of the Week - November
9th 2001 -- OnM, 23:29:15 11/09/01 Fri
*******
As one character in Boys In The Band (Crowley, 1968) aptly puts
it, "Pardon me if your sense of art is offended, but odd
as it may seem there wasn't a Shubert Theatre in Hot Coffee, Mississippi!"
*******
All my life I wanted to be somebody, but I see now that I should
have been more specific
............ Lily Tomlin
*******
We swell about in a vortex of beastliness.
............ Noel Coward
*******
I don't think too many people are going to come and see this musical.
Why do you say that, Little Sally? Don't you think people want
to be told that their way of life is unsustainable?
............ an exchange between Officer Lockstock and Little
Sally in the off-Broadway play Urinetown
*******
Listening to you I get the music / Gazing at you I get the heat.
Following you I climb the mountain / I get excitement at your
feet Right behind you I see the millions / On you I see the glory.
From you I get opinions / From you I get the story.
............ Pete Townshend
*******
Nothing succeeds like excess, and certainly movie musicals present
a great opportunity for cinematic excess to occur.
I mean, the fundamental priciple of a musical is ridiculous in
and of itself. Just how many times here in the real world do people
spontaneously break into song, and what's more, spout lyrics that
range from the banal to the poetic, possibly within the very same
stanza?
It isn't just one simple song, either. A musical is traditionally
composed of a series of songs, thematically connected to one another,
establishing additional layers of meaning and intent, just like
chapters in a book, and organized in the same flexible manner.
The telling of these musical parables goes way back to at least
the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans, who were known to include
songs in many of their stage comedies and tragedies. In the Middle
Ages and later, minstrels and other roving bands of entertainers
put on plays that utilized not only their own original compositions,
but also the popular songs of the day, re-written to suit the
particular plot as needed. Regardless of the specific historical
times in which they actually took place, these fables could be
either very traditional or very avant-garde, with the music contained
therein acting synergistically with the spoken word to either
lull or inflame the passions of the audience.
So why do we like them so much? I must confess that I haven't
the foggiest, although of course I can offer some reasonable theories,
the first one of which is that we like them precisely because
they are disconnected from reality, much like a cartoon. Reality
gets to be a serious burden, and taking a legal trip away from
it is a pretty good mini-vacation from whatever happens to be
getting in your face at the moment. A little song, a little dance,
a little seltzer down the pants or maybe coyote + anvil + roadrunner
= flat coyote. This assiduous appreciation of the absurd may very
well be one of those defining characteristics that draws a line
in the mulch seperating us from the rest of the planetary fauna.
Additionally, there is the theory that music is some order of
collective, primal human language, existing before and ultimately
reaching beyond the limited scope of mere spoken communication
and touching something of the soul within. The Jossverse appears
to entertain this concept, or else why create a character who
reads 'auras' and divines the intent of the subconscious after
hearing someone sing? Do we give away our true intentions when
we choose what music moves us? Perhaps so.
Finally, for the purposes of this humble column, anyway, we get
to the musical as a form of political or social commentary. As
mentioned previously, this use has a long historical track record,
since just as with the 20th Century creation of cartoons or comic
strips, wrapping a dissociative technique around the often unpleasant
truth to be conveyed helps in getting the intended message across
without getting the audience too riled at being made the object
of the lesson.
This latter interpretation is most assuredly the primary one intended
by the director of this week's Classic Movie, a man whose best
known cinematic raison d'etre is to start out by going over the
top, and then go a bit further just for good measure. The film
itself is not one that you should try to overly analyse, because
frankly there is little point in analyzing the obvious-- this
is the whack-'em-over-the-head-with-it but make-it-incredibly-stylish-while-you're-doing-so
variety of filmmaking. You need to simply sit back in your chair,
and let everything just wash over you. This film revels and rejoices
in its indulgences, and makes not the slightest of apologies for
them. It brings to the screen a number of talented and seasoned
members of the acting community, and juxtaposes their finely-honed
craft with the work of a number of rank amateurs, and invites
you to go ahead and point accusing fingers at the audacity. Considering
that it was made in a day and age well before the advent of CGI
and other advanced means of creating visually astonishing images,
what the costume personell and art directors manage to envision
and then realize is astounding. This film is pretentious, oh yes
indeed, but it rocks!
So, without further ado (and we do ado, but it's all for you that
we ado what we do), your humble movie-man presents for your greater
tripping pleasure, Ken Russell's take on Pete Townshend and The
Who's freaky but undeniably brilliant 'rock opera', Tommy.
Released in 1975, Russell brought his long time fascination with
musicians both classical and contemporary to the big screen in
honor of what he referred to as 'the greatest work of art of the
twentieth century'. Yes, he was referring to Townshend's Tommy,
and no, I have no idea if he was kidding. I might not give the
work quite that many points, but it did start a number of interesting
musical trends after effectively shattering the myth that the
rock music genre could never sustain a longer form and retain
coherency or greater meaning while doing so. I still clearly remember
it debuting in the golden days of the 60's just before AM radio
was starting to lose ground to FM in the pursuit of a greater
audience, and unbelievably enough, you could find your local AM
deejays actually wielding enough power to get the station to play
an hour-and-a-half long piece of contempory music interrupted
only with the mandatory FCC station ID's on the half hour. It
was a wild and at least momentarily free-thinking time in modern
American history, and in the passage of time since that period,
it still holds up pretty decently.
A couple of notable items: Of the experienced actors on display,
take special note of Ann-Margret (Tommy's mother), who gives a
truly dazzling performance in a role that calls for her to have
moments both great and absurd, including the one where she gets
to roll around on the floor of a lavishly appointed room in an
ostentatious mansion, wallowing in a flood of soapsuds, baked
beans, and mud, a comment on conspicuous consumption as only Ken
Russell could envision it. Ann-Margret is in fact the primary
glue that holds the whole extravaganza together, serving as the
emotional anchor for her son as he travels the 'amazing journey'
of the deaf, dumb and blind pinball wizard who awakes from his
sensory 'deprivation' and becomes a messiah.
Credit is also due to Roger Daltrey, who as I recall had no acting
experience to speak of before playing the title role, but nonetheless
does a fairly credible job under challenging circumstances. Besides
the other band members of The Who, some folks who pop into view
include Eric Clapton (as 'The Preacher', no doubt a lampoon/homage
to the 'Clapton is God' following), Elton John, who plays Tommy's
pinball wizard rival in yet another visually absurd yet compelling
scene, and a still very young Tina Turner as 'The Acid Queen'
who gets very freaky on us.
I don't know how many of ya'all are of a ripe enough age to have
actually been young when Tommy (the album) first came to be in
the 60's, and of those who were, some of you may feel that Russell's
later filmic treatment of the work didn't do it justice, or took
a wrong turn at the beginning and never got back on the road.
There is no question that it doesn't follow the main highway,
but that was part of what the decade was about, taking the chance
on the road less traveled. I recall just about two weeks ago when
someone on the Cross & Stake board posited that 'Once More, With
Feeling' would either suck big time, or be stunningly brilliant.
So be it.
E. Pluribus Cinema, Unum,
OnM
*******
Technically Loud, Vociferous and Farsighted:
Tommy is available on DVD, according to the Internet Movie Database.
The review copy was (again!) on an old Beta videotape from my
collection, very likely off some pay cable source, the specifics
lost in the mists of time, like my brain. The film was released
in 1975, running time is 1 hour and 48 minutes. Writing credits
go to Pete Townshend (music) and Ken Russell (screenplay).
This movie was the first, and also possibly the last to be released
in 'Quintophonic Sound', an early discrete multi-channel movie
sound system. The 'quadrophonic', or 4-channel stereo era of the
70's was a flop in the consumer electronics marketplace, for a
variety of reasons such as competing and incompatible hardware/software
systems, but the public's loss was the movie industry's gain as
multichannel took root in Hollywood, and grew steadily until the
'home theater' boom of the early to middle 90's. What goes around...
Cast overview:
Ann-Margret .... Nora Walker Hobbs Oliver Reed .... Frank Hobbs
Roger Daltrey .... Tommy Walker Elton John .... Pinball Wizard
Eric Clapton .... Preacher John Entwistle .... Himself Keith Moon
.... Uncle Ernie Paul Nicholas .... Cousin Kevin Jack Nicholson
.... A. Quackson, Mental Health Specialist Robert Powell ....
Group-Captain Walker Pete Townshend .... Himself Tina Turner ....
Acid Queen Arthur Brown .... The Priest Victoria Russell ....
Sally Simpson Ben Aris .... Reverend A. Simpson. V.C.
*******
Miscellaneous und das 'Question of the Week':
Still didn't get my copy of Shrek yet, but I have gotten a chance
to see at least some of Final Fantasy, which I had obtained the
DVD of last week. Lotsa extra material with this disc, haven't
gotten to it all yet, but seems pretty interesting. The commentary
track on the main disc (there are two in the set) is in Japanese,
with subtitles, which I think is a first, at least for me. They
seem to spend a lot of time saying 'that scene was really hard'
and 'don't really like the lighting on that one' and 'that one
took four months to do' and so on, interspersed with quite a bit
of laughing. Not sure if they were stoned when they did the commentary,
or when they made the movie. Oh, well... not a brilliant flick
dialog-and-plot-wise, but very serious eye candy for CGI fans--
certainly worth several viewings, there is just so much detail
that you can't possibly appreciate in just one run-through. I'm
wondering just how realistic the next iteration of the estimable
Dr. Aki will be? Definitely a big time hummmm... there.
The Question:
When you watch a musical, do you tend to forgive weak acting if
the music is really good? Suppose the reverse was true?
*******
If I told you what it takes To reach the highest high You'd laugh
and say Nothing's that simple But you've been told many times
before Messiahs pointed to the door No one had the guts to leave
the temple
*******
Take care, folks. See you next week!
*******
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the
Week - November 9th 2001 -- Humanitas, 07:20:46 11/10/01 Sat
I discovered Tommy when I was in high school, and probably could
still sing along with it as it plays. Great music. I never saw
the film, though. Perhaps now I'll check it out. Thanks as always,
OnM!
As for the QotW, it depends on what you mean by 'forgive.' If
the acting is weak, but the music is terrific, I might buy the
album, but I'll never watch the show again. On the other hand,
if the music is a little weak, but the acting is terrific, I'll
probably love the show anyway. That's what I'm doing with SMG
in OMWF, by the way. My opinion is that her singing is a little
weak, but boy, can she sell a song! The same principle applies
to most "specialty skills," dialect, fighting, singing,
etc. If Costner could act, nobody would have noticed the fact
that he had no accent in Robin Hood. If the intention is clear
and believable, everything else is gravy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- mundusmundi,
08:31:24 11/10/01 Sat
Hmmm, weak acting and good music? Sounds like Remember the Titans,
the "inspirational" Denzel Washington football movie
I saw last night, with its connect-the-dots screenplay and every
cliche in the book. Wretched flick, but the wall-to-wall 70's
soundtrack kept me from ejecting the tape and watching Murder
at 1600.
Regarding actual musicals, I think bad acting can sink a good
number, since ideally in a musical there is supposed to be a story
coming across. On the other hand, good acting -- or what may be
deemed gusto -- can make up for not the best singing. Nick Brendon
case in point. SingedCat above nailed my own assessment of his
performance by mentioning how nobody in the cast did more with
less than Brendon. Of course it helps to have a director who knows
your strengths and limitations. Had Joss produced a big emotional
Xander/Willow power ballad, it's safe to say we'd have all been
hiding under our pillows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- Aquitaine,
08:34:46 11/10/01 Sat
Good review, as usual.
When you watch a musical, do you tend to forgive weak acting if
the music is really good? Suppose the reverse was true?
Well... I expect the actors to act their songs so I don't think
the acting and singing are separable. Hmmm. I also definitely
don't think an actor needs a good voice to sing in a musical and
I don't think a good singer can act well to bad music. Er, not
sure that answers the question but it's the best I can do on a
rainy Saturday am:)
I got a chance to see "Final Fantasy" this week. It
was entrancing to watch (almost hypnotic) despite, or perhaps
because of, its forgettable storyline.
-Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- Shiver,
17:27:05 11/10/01 Sat
Never saw the movie, but did see Tommy on Broadway ... a very
good show.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- Neaux,
19:08:47 11/10/01 Sat
The hatred of Musical Animation... Disney flicks suck.
Probably why I love anime. Animated movies without the lowsy bursting
into song. Probably why I like Final Fantasy too.
So why did I like OMWF? Cuz the singing had a purpose and I'm
a Buffy fan dammit!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- Isabel,
17:37:01 11/11/01 Sun
A friend once told me that her parents sent her to see it (alone)
to get her out of the house one rainy day, "Because it was
a movie about a handicapped boy." She says that 'Tommy' can
be quite traumatic to a 10 year old.
"When you watch a musical, do you tend to forgive weak acting
if the music is really good? Suppose the reverse was true?"
Tricky. I'd have to say yes and no.
I can name musicals with catchy songs that I've loved and the
acting was, hmm... melodramatic and over the top. (Or just not
real.) (Hello Dolly, Oklahoma!, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers,
Anything with the Muppets)
I was hung up on the good acting, poor singing (music) until I
remembered 'Camelot' and 'Guys and Dolls.' I was in Camelot in
high school, my sister was in Guys and Dolls. I love the musicals
but I CAN'T watch the movies. It's Vanessa Redgrave and Marlon
Brando. They can't sing. And in Camelot, they turned "The
Month of May," a perky little ditty about spring fever and
youth, into an atonal, sex-kitten dirge. Redgrave and Brando are
good actors, but the casting directors who hired them for their
names should have been shot. It's not like there isn't a plethora
of actors who can sing in Hollywood. (Or hire real singers and
dub 'em.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - November 9th 2001 -- Javoher,
19:27:13 11/11/01 Sun
"When you watch a musical, do you tend to forgive weak acting
if the music is really good? Suppose the reverse was true?"
Sure I do. I could watch a poorly acted West Side Story any day
of the week. Most musicals (apologies to Leonard Bernstein) are
fairly rigid in form. Because the song is the primary vehicle
for explaining what's actually going on it makes up for any action
and dialogue problems which are secondary vehicles, if the singers
can sell the songs well.
The opposite? Nope. See humble opinion above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Review of the musical numbers
(con't from below--no spoilers) -- SingedCat, 05:46:27 11/10/01
Sat
First, an apology (in the old "clarify" sense of the
word):
I've been singing most of my life (a *lot* longer than I've been
professional) I've always been harder to impress on that count,
so when I tuned in to Buffy this week I kept my expectations of
the musical pretty low. First, I really agree that although they
weren't professional singers, that the episode was wonderful,
because I love musicals, and because it somehow brought a world
that has become real to us to another level--I've always fantasized
about living in a musical, just for awhile. :D I finished this
episode with a feeling of deep gratitude to Joss and the entire
cast.
Now let me let the dispassionate professional out of the box.
In terms of singing ability, I'd rank them
Hinton Battle ASH Amber Benson
-------------
Sarah Michelle Emma Caulfield James Marsters Michelle Trachtenberg
Nick & Aly
I put ASH, Benson and Battle in a different category becuase they've
all had vocal training. Hinton had an easier job-- performing
alone, he could be as excellent as he wanted, and with his small
part still almost stole the show. ASH, a West End veteran, did
a beautiful job of not upstaging the rest of the cast, aided perhaps
by his isolating role of pater familiis. His voice is well-suited
to his powerful ballad, a rock opera number that shows off his
vocal ability while turning SMG's training visuals into a poetic
slow-mo backdrop. Of the cast, Benson had the best female voice,
but was still a little variable in fullness of tone-- I could
hear that she was capable of good volume, with fullness and good
vibrato control in the long high notes-- very important-- but
the verses were still kind of thin-sounding. I think she just
needs a little more confidence to relax and open up her throat--nothing
some practice and a beer just before performing wouldn't fix.
(In my case, anyway...:D) Sarah Michelle is obviously the one
who worked hardest, no mystery to those on the set who are constantly
astounded by her amazing work ethic. Not a trained singer, and
faced with a huge vocal job, she kept it simple in terms of quality
and stress, opting for a pure stage voice, an almost choirboy
sound that allowed her to hit and hold all the notes without putting
too much strain on her voice. At its best she has a broadway sound,
as in the opening number(clearly her best), at the least it is
unimpassioned and unspectacular, but efficient; one gets the sense
that is the least she would expect from herself. James Marsters
of course underdelivered for my expectations (I knew he sang in
a band), but I watched again, and have an idea it may have been
direction. I think he was vocally going for a very alternative,
Stone Temple Pilots kind of sound that just plain clashed stylewise
with the rest of the musical. (NOT that I think it should have
been different-- I like the choice) I think that clash showed
up the harshness of his voice more than expected. I also think
he was directed to underplay his number, to blend with Buffy's
burdened attitude. In general I thought it could have worked better,
but still brought the message home--Joss's lyrics as usual struck
to the heart of Spike's unfortunely insightful character.
About Michelle and Aly I can't say much-- MT was far les comfortable
singing than she was dancing, and Hannigan, the most striking
absentee, did what's called speak-singing, in which you use your
talking voice to hit the notes. As such, it would have failed
to blend at all with Benson's lovely vocals, and rather than try,
I applaud their decision to go for the simpler solution and better
sound. A seperate comment on Amber's song-- I felt it had a very
Kate Bush "The Kick Inside" sound, fairlylike, and well-suited
to Amber's voice.
The award for doing the most with the least certainly goes to
Nick Brendan. Emma Caulfield, a good untrained singer, didn't
seem to mind underplaying her abilities to blend seamlessly with
her partner. Whedon wisely assigned them bouncy parts with easy-to-sing
short notes and an upbeat tempo. They became the classic big number
of the show, contrasting their staccato, whipsawing gripes and
affectionate dancing (What they say vs. what they feel) into the
embodiment of the 40's cheerfully bickering comedic couple.
Hinton Battle -- I will try very hard not to gush here. To direct
his nefarious musical, Whedon ordered someone straight off the
New York stage whose whole business is what you saw, and well-suited
to his part-- perceptive, polished, predatory--oozing with Bob
Fosse's charm, cruelty, and confident, understated moves. As a
broadway performer he *is* the musical, defining the entire episode
with our moral love-hate relationship with falsehood-- its necessity,
its treachery, and its awful beauty.
I'll end here with a personal refernce, and a PSA. I loved Broadway
growing up, and am further grateful to Joss for bringing such
a good representation of it to his audience. It makes me want
to see a show! Speaking of which, why don't we all do our part
for NYC these days, and make the effort...? Support the arts in
New York, if you live close by! www.newyorker.com, check the show
listings and go!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Wonderful post. Thanks! -- mundusmundi, 07:53:34 11/10/01
Sat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from below--no
spoilers) -- Humanitas, 07:55:06 11/10/01 Sat
Thinking about JM's number...
When I first saw the episode on Tuesday night, I was seriously
underwhelmed with "Rest In Peace." It didn't have the
rock-n'-roll punch that the ads had let me to expect. I felt (and
I said this in chat, I think) that it had been mixed wrongly for
the style. It seemed to me at the time like there should have
been more guitar to capture Spike's character. Instead, it seemed
like they went for emphasizing the vocals, instead. Usually, I
appreciate that, since I'm essentailly a word-guy, rather than
a music-guy, but it seemed wrong in this case.
Since then, I've been listening to the music alone, downloaded
from Psyche, and the song has been sounding better and better.
I'm not sure if it was a case of expectations not being fulfilled,
or what, but I like the song much better now than I did on Tuesday
night. >sigh< I guess I'll just have to go back and watch
it again to see. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from below--no
spoilers) -- mundusmundi, 08:19:04 11/10/01 Sat
It's growing on me too. Spike's song is also important because
it marks a transition from the sweet and/or funny songs in the
first half of the episode to the darker, more serious tone that
follows. I have a friend, who has been seriously bugged by Spike's
changes the last couple years, who flat-out loves the song. "Now
I get it!" he said. It's his favorite.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from
below--no spoilers) -- Lurker Becoming Restless, 08:31:58 11/10/01
Sat
The lyrics for Spike's song are fantastic and (like you said,
mm) so is its placement in the episode.
For me it was a bit disappointing the first time round because
JM has to put on Spike's accent - I think this might be what makes
his voice sound harsh in places - but it has grown on me too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't
from below--no spoilers) -- CaptainPugwash, 05:39:19 11/11/01
Sun
As a song about unrequited feeling (and torment), it takes some
beating.
I'm glad it wasn't heavy-handed rock, Spike had so much to say
(it was half protest/half serenade) to Buffy, and it tied in with
his touching response to Buffy's rage (written all over her face,
great stuff) at the end.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from below--no
spoilers) -- grifter, 09:18:35 11/10/01 Sat
exactly what I thought...where´s the badass rock-sound from
the trailer??
but the more I listen to it, the more it grows on more...really
good song...
I´m watching the epsiode and listening to the mp3´s
waaaay to much right now, and the more I listen to them, the better
they seem to get ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The problem with the mix -- Rattletrap, 05:26:49 11/11/01
Sun
You're partly right, Hum, about the mix lacking the necessary
rock punch, with the vocals too far out in front. Part of the
problem is television: Rock music relies very heavily on bass
and drums. On a CD player, even more at a live performance, you
feel them as much as you hear them. On TV, however, you can't
mix really bass heavy sounds because a fairly large number of
people in your audience are still listening through a small, mono
TV speaker that doesn't capture the bass very effectively. In
that situation the bass part and the kick drum usually come across
as annoying clicking sounds in the same frequency range as dialogue.
As a result, you can't pull them out too much in the mix. Notice
that all of the promos of JM's song lacked vocals, so the music
had a little more punch than it did in the actual performance.
The other thing that would help with that song, is not watching
the screen, because there is a disconnect between JM's motions
and the voice/song that just doesn't work. As someone pointed
out earlier, the same is partly true of Giles's song to Buffy
which always looks more like a music video than a musical to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The problem with the mix -- Cactus Watcher,
07:15:55 11/11/01 Sun
Music video. That's exactly what I thought when I first saw Spike's
number Rest in Peace, which is why the fight at the funeral scene
doesn't bother me. It's not real. Funerals aren't held at night,
and Spike can't go out in the day. It's that music video dream-state.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Review of the musical numbers (Spoilers) -- Javoher,
11:29:53 11/10/01 Sat
Hinton was fascinating! I was mesmerized by his dance and the
terrific stage quality of his voice. I am now deeply in love yet
again and will keep an eye out for him even though I'm a 5 hour
plane ride away from New York. And it's really difficult to have
someone who's in a different caliber not show up the regulars.
Good move on Joss' part to keep Hinton limited to just the one
song and dance with MT, one that was designed in part to show
the age differences between them.
"James Marsters of course underdelivered for my expectations
(I knew he sang in a band), but I watched again, and have an idea
it may have been direction."
I was thinking that. Part of my fun with this show is to watch
professional creative people work their magic, and JM's approach
to this episode didn't quite fit for me either. At first I was
disappointed his voice mostly didn't live up to the power of the
lyrics, but I've listened a few times now and when I don't watch
the screen but just listen to him the songs work better. It could
be the editing. There's a disconnect between his on-screen motions
and his over-dubbed vocals (also with ASH's in the scene with
Buffy). He also could have been going for a very natural, everyday
kind of voice. The kind we non-singers all have when we sing along
in the car. That fits well with the idea of ordinary voices under
a spell beginning to sing their thoughts and emotions.
I also liked SMG very much in this episode, more each time I watch
her. I can hear in her voice the short amount of time she has
spent developing it from some of her vowels and soft consonants,
but she did wonderfully putting the right emotion into it. And
while I didn't like her choreography it got the unconnection and
suicide ideas across.
NB and EC were really funny. I don't care if they aren't trained
singers or dancers, they were great together. I could watch that
duet over and over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (Spoilers) -- Nina,
15:28:20 11/10/01 Sat
I read a lot of comments about people comparing or complaining
about the quality of the voices in the musical (not only on this
thread, but I'll comment on it here as it fits! ;) . It really
puzzles me how so many people were expecting either so much or
nothing out of it.
The problem with musicals is that we all heard tons of them. We
all heard the leading lady, the leading man burst into song and
have wonderful voices (ie: Natalie Wood singing "Tonight,
tonight" comes to mind). In musicals everybody sings well.
No constrats, they are all good. Some a little better than others,
but they are all up there in the "good quality voice"
standarts we all expect.
Now when JW starts to write a musical we think that the cast has
to become what they are not to please our trained ears. They have
to have that singing and pleasing voice we want to hear! That's
where Joss doesn't go. From the start we are not in a real musical.
In real musicals characters don't know they are singing. They
do it unaware of what they are doing. In OMWT all the characters
know that singing is not normal. They are forced into songs with
their own voices! Not a broadway-like voice, but Xander's voice
and Anya's voice and Spike's etc...
If we were all brought into songs here on the board we would have
all different voices and it's what happened with Buffy's cast.
Xander sang like Xander.... I for once would have been disappointed
to hear Xander have a wonderful voice. I don't imagine him having
one and the voice I heard was perfect for Xander. Same thing with
Spike. It was not JM performing at 14 bellow but Spike singing
like Spike (and from what we've heard in season 3 it wasn't THE
voice then... so it couldn't be THE voice now either) It's obvious
that Spike was underplayed vocaly and on purpose. JW said in the
Bronze that "it was too high for James"... so if he
knew it was too high and he kept the song as high as it was it
was because he was looking for effect. When you sing in the highest
part of your register you are under tension and that's how Spike
felt in his song. He was under a lot of tension. Be it sexual
tension, emotional tension or whatever... ASH also has a part
when he sing "is my slayer too far gone to care" where
he is in the lower part of his register and makes the whole line
even more touching and poignant!
Personaly I am amazed that JW didn't go for a real musical where
everyone would have performed perfectly (anyway he could never
have done it with the buget he had!). He managed to respect each
character's personality. We already knew that Giles could sing
(not ASH, but Giles) and when forced to make Willow not sing (as
AH couldn't) he managed to make it work into the script. Chapeau!
Big Bravo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (Spoilers)
-- JBone, 20:39:05 11/10/01 Sat
I read a lot of comments about people comparing or complaining
about the quality of the voices in the musical (not only on this
thread, but I'll comment on it here as it fits! ;) . It really
puzzles me how so many people were expecting either so much or
nothing out of it.
First of all, I don't really see anything wrong with comparing
voices. We compare damn near every other imaginable aspect on
the show on this board, why not singing voices. Secondly, I haven't
read every thread, but I really don't remember very much complaining.
On the contrary, even when someone points out what they conceive
to be flaws, they almost always say it was a good job anyway.
Or that the performance has grown on them throughout their multiple
viewings.
I also believe that the fact that the cast used their own voices
has brought about much praise. At least they did their own work
kind of stuff. Let's see other shows do that anywhere near as
well. Our favorite show did something that almost no other show
on tv can pull off, and it was with their own voices.
Like I said earlier I haven't read every thread. And since OMwF
is the second coming of Restless with 30 times the posters, there
are bound to be many a varied opinion. But I take some pride in
the board that I visit first and most often. These are, overall,
the most educated, reasoned out opinions you can find on any Buffy
board (my drunken ramblings excluded.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (Spoilers)
-- Aquitaine, 15:30:45 11/11/01 Sun
I agree with you, Nina. What I enjoyed about the episode was the
emotional punch that the songs packed. In fact, the songs I least
enjoyed were Sweet's because, despite Hinton Battle's considerable
talents, I didn't *feel* anything for his character. On the whole,
the episode felt like a 'reluctant musical'. LOL. I loved that
the characters' personalities were not overwhelmed by incongruously
melodious voices. The characters weren't performers; they were
everyday people under a spell. It was very refreshing.
As for the 'critiques' on this board and some of the 'criticism'
I have read on other boards, I too wonder if that isn't linked
to some viewers' level of expectation (or level of musical knowledge:).
So while OMwF didn't boast powerful, quasi-operatic as do the
big Broadway productions, it was able to convey emotion on a different
register that seemed commesurate to the scope of television.
-Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Review of the musical numbers (Spoilers)
-- Kimberly, 09:36:40 11/12/01 Mon
And on a slightly different level: my husband and I have watched
this episode at least half a dozen times; he made an audio tape
of it so we could listen to it yesterday while making a new baby
visit. My six-year-old son has sat down and watched it all the
way through once (remarkable considering that much of it must
have gone right over his head).
Now, having watched it as often as we have, and having a tendency
to sing along with musicals anyway, my husband and I have started
singing along with most of the numbers. However, we're not allowed
to sing Sweet's song if our son is around because "He's the
bad guy." (And it's a shame: it's not the best song, but
you can put some great over-emoting behind it and have fun.)
For what it's worth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Especially agree with your Hinton Battle comments... --
A8, 22:26:46 11/10/01 Sat
...the first thing that came to mind regarding his performance
after viewing the ep was Bob Fosse in "The Little Prince."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from below--no
spoilers) -- bible belt, 15:37:38 11/11/01 Sun
The pressure must have been tremendous for SMG since she is the
star of the show and all the numbers she did, kudos there. Also
to have to dance in front of Hinton Battle must have been intimidating
as hell.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Review of the musical numbers (con't from below--no
spoilers) -- anom, 20:31:05 11/11/01 Sun
Just on the 1st 3--Battle, Head, & Benson--I'd agree w/you on
the way you put it, "singing ability." But in terms
of vocal quality, I was surprised to find myself liking Benson's
more than Head's. That might have been partly because her voice
was such a revelation. But to me, ASH (it just sounds weird calling
him "Head" after a few times) didn't sound as good as
in the couple of previous eps where we heard him sing. On the
other hand, he could do more w/his voice, which (I figure) is
why he got more ornamentation in his lines.
And, of course, Battle--yeah. Wow.
For the record, I'm a semiprofessional (or maybe semidemi-) singer
w/lots of practice but minimal formal training who somehow learned
to trill without really meaning to just this past April at age
47.
So 'Cat--where can we go to hear you? @>)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMWF - Dance Number break downs
-- fresne, 10:29:06 11/10/01 Sat
Okay so there have been some pretty incredible exposition on the
general meaning of the musical, analysis of the singing talents,
etc.
And oh, my God did Joss deliver ona wonderful musical.
However, what I have been craving since I watched it was some
disection of each indivudal number, as a dance number, part of
the whole etc.
Unfortunately, I have nomusical, theatre, dance, or film background.
But whatever,
So here's the Song List
And down a bit a few of my attempts. Going Through The Motions
Buffy's Opening Number I Have a Theory Bunnies Part of the "Theory"
song Why Should We Care Under Your Spell Tara's love song to Willow
I'll Never Tell Xander and Anya Duet Rest In Peace Spike's Song
to Buffy Does Anybody Even Notice Tiny 2 line phrase Sweet's Song
This is the only song I haven't heard yet! Standing In Your Way
Giles' song Under Your Spell (Reprise) After Tara finds out about
Willow's spell Wish I Could Stay Tara and Giles "duet"
Walk Through The Fire Play A Part Buffy faces Sweet Sweet's Song
(Reprise) Where Do We Go From Here? Walk Through The Fire (Reprise)
Buffy and Spike.....together
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Spoilers - They bicker in tune, Xander & Anya -- fresne,
10:30:52 11/10/01 Sat
Retro-Pastiche, Book Number. Yeah probably. But a cute one.
What struck me about the complaining bit, was how in sinc Xander
and Anya were. Same key, on beat
Anya starts dancing silly crazy, Xander pauses a moment, annoyed
that his verse has been interrupted and then joins in.
They segue into a nice back and forward two step, with it's implication
that sometimes Anya leads, sometimes Xander. They shift into shoulder
clasp dancing position. They cavort. They pep. They bubble. Anya
runs. Xander chases. He spins her.
Following a quick line about Anya's supple tight embrace, they
shift into a slow old-fashioned style spinning waltz. It's not
all sex. It is sweet emotion. Xander spins Anya a slow spin and
they part to reveal a few more fears.
And yet, even as they're sitting on their table, facing away from
each other, they are supporting each other back to back. Anya's
head resting on Xander's shoulder.
They may be worried that they'll, "Really raise the beam
/ In makin' marriage a hell," but that's quite a nice supple
dip.
I can't say I'm too worried about their marriage plans if this
is all that stands in their way. Course, dark clouds forming,
this is the Jossverse, so who knows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Spoilers - Rest in Peace/Release Spike's Song -- fresne,
10:32:26 11/10/01 Sat
Spike's Crypt - Dialog Spike makes a return to the red over-shirt
(which is loose and flowing), black t-shirt combination, but he
is not wearing his leather trenchcoat. Instead, in a role reversal,
it is Buffy who wears a black coat.
She enters the crypt, once again, without knocking, as Spike is
climbing from the hole in the ground that is his sub-crypt. This
placement increases the sense of role-reversal between them. It
is not Buffy climbing or descending stairs, it is Spike climbing
a ladder to meet Buffy.
His opening line, "The sun sets and she appears," further
reinforces their reversed roles.
In the ensuing conversation, we are told that have not seen one
another since all of the singing and dancing began and that Spike
believes himself immune, because he has had no reason to experience
a powerful emotion. No Buffy.
He offers her a drink, which was what he offered her the last
time they were together socially. However, she rejects it with
a world of no, no wonder under the circumstances and instead she
cuts right to a request for information.
And you can see the song starting even here. Spike doesn't want
to play that game, even more so after Buffy's Freudian slip.
Rest In Peace Spike's Song to Buffy The moments before Spike begins
to sing, you can see him struggle to suppress his song with terse
words and a request for Buffy to leave, but she responds to his
request by asking, "What's up? You're all bad and moody?"
He asks her again to leave, but interestingly she asks him again,
"What?"
And the song cannot be denied. Both his horrified expression and
Buffy's eye roll would be funny if the number weren't such a scorcher.
For the first time, Spike characterizes himself neither as a monster,
nor a man, but as dead, "I died/So many years ago/You can
make me feel/Like it isn't so."
When Spike begins his song, Buffy looks amused (after all she
sang), but as soon as Spike tells Buffy that she's scared, she
becomes uncomfortable, breaks eye contact and keeps glancing to
and away from Spike.
However, while Spike may feel alive when he is with Buffy, he
has come to the conclusion that "he is only dead to"
her because she can whisper her secrets in his ear. Even further
than that, he isn't even one of the ones that she loves, because
"you can't tell the ones you love/You know they couldn't
deal"
As he sings, "And since I'm only dead to you," he lies
down on the sarcophagus in the pose of the Crucifixion, the ultimate
irony for a vampire. Then in a shift to an overhead camera angle,
he crosses his arms in the classic position of the dead and sings
the chorus, "Let me rest in peace," for the first time.
However, Spike is not restful. He jumps up on a repeat of the
"Let me rest in peace" line in an agitated movement.
Even his shirt is in violent fluttering motion.
As he sings, the fairly destructive, "Let me take my love
and bury it/In a hole 6-foot deep" line, he picks up the
bottle, which he had just offered to Buffy, and throws it against
the wall where it shatters.
Buffy stops glancing away. Visibly startled, she stands and makes
eye contact with Spike.
As, Spike predatorily walks towards Buffy, she retreats from him
in step, and in so doing, even though she is moving away, she
is engaged in his dance. However, because she is always retreating,
"I can lay my body down/But I can't find my sweet release."
Release in death, emotional fulfillment, and of course as always
with Spike, all threads lead to sex.
Now it's Spike who breaks eye contact, turning from Buffy with
a quick arm motion on the refrain, "So, let me rest in peace."
Again, the speed of the motion, reinforces that Spike is not at
peace.
Buffy takes him at his word and turns to go, but since this is
a song which asks "Why won't you sleep with me/love me."
almost as much as, "Why won't you leave me alone," Spike
stops her.
Before she can open the door, he circles around, once more makes
eye contact and then kneels, "You know/You got a willing
slave." He is in a physical position of supplicance, but
takes the opportunity to suggestively pass his gaze over Buffy,
"You just love to play the thought/That you might misbehave."
Buffy again breaks eye contact.
Spike tells her to leave, "I'm telling you/Stop visiting
my grave/Let me rest in peace," opens the door, but blocks
it at the same time with his arm. More than blocking her, the
action both brings him closer distance wise towards Buffy and
curves his arm around and behind her. It's actually a perfect
position to start dancing. Buffy is fully engaged in the song
with close eye contact.
However, rather than dance dropping his hand down to pull her
into a dance, the scene shifts to the graveyard as the music slows
to a funeral dirge. Mourners carry a coffin across our view. Reminding
the viewer that both Buffy and Spike have been dead. Have been
carried in a coffin and put in the ground.
The camera cranes up and we see Spike and Buffy walking side by
side towards the funeral.
Spike's lines stumble out. "I know I should go/But I follow
you like a man possessed/There's a traitor here beneath my breast
/And it hurts me more than you've ever guessed /If my heart could
beat/it would break my chest/ but I can see you're unimpressed."
There is almost an impression that Spike can't quite break out
of this section of the song with its heavy repetition of strong
rhyming words, "possessed, breast, guessed, chest, unimpressed,"
which force him to take a breath after each line.
For the beginning of this section, Spike is staring straight ahead
and sees neither Buffy's glances nor her defensive arm cross,
as he discusses his traitorous heart. Traitorous because he shouldn't
love her. Shouldn't go on following her.
Spike's takes her expression and crossed arms as a lack of impression
and turns away from Buffy, once more asking Buffy to "Let
me rest in peace," with that oh so impressive leap to the
coffin top. Again extreme motion is pared with peace. We see the
leap, the coffin's shudder under his abrupt weight, the extreme
color contrast of his red shirt and the dark sky, the motion as
he pushes his arms back, pushing his chest and his vulnerable
heart (vulnerable to Buffy as a vampire and as a lover) forward.
In this case there is even less peace, because the front mourners
lower the coffin, and like Buffy's return from the grave, it disturbs
his balance.
As he falls, he somersaults and transforms for the first time
this season into his vampire face. He attempts to find his rest
and sweet release this time, through violence and vampiric action,
by disrupting the funeral and grabbing the priest. There is a
moment, where you wonder if he will bite the priest, but once
again Buffy interferes, pulling him back.
And in a wonderfully quick turn, they shift position in the struggle,
so that as he falls backwards, Spike pulls Buffy down into the
grave with him. Something, which if you think about it, would
be pretty unsettling all in its own for Buffy.
As they lie there in the grave, physically the closest they've
been in the song, he sings the song's refrain for a final time
as a question. "Why won't you /Let me rest in peace?"
and for once Spike is not moving around. Not leaping, jumping,
smashing. He lies under Buffy and asks his question.
And as she runs away, you see the moment the song leave him and
the realization that he has just driven her away.
Because, the song may ask for peace, but it's all about motion.
Asking Buffy to leave, blocking her exit, asking for release.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Spoilers - Child Ballet to Swing - Dawn and Sweet -- fresne,
10:34:17 11/10/01 Sat
Dawn's Ballet with the Wooden Minions Ballet I've seen some comparisons
to Audry Hepburn in Funny Face (I'm assuming the empathicalism
number), but I'm afraid I don't see it. This isn't a adult's dance
of jerky showy motions. It is a young girl's exploratory glide.
This entire sequence makes me think of the Nutcracker. A young
girl's dream of dangerous ballet dancing mice and sugar plum faeries.
Although, musically, there were a number of moments that reminded
me of The Nightmare Before Christmas, the overture. Then again,
I'm addicted to that movie, so that's not unusual.
Dawn awakens from her sleep lying on a pool table in the Bronze.
The Bronze that place of transition. Children don't there. Adults
rarely either. A place of ladders that lead to ramps that go nowhere.
Dim lights and whole lot of hormones.
On point, she attempts to flee, and comes face to face with one
of the wooden minions.
There is so much to be made of wooden minions. Not real boys,
who won't grow up. Minions who are only differentiated from each
other by the color of their painted hair.
She backs away as he follows and then in a classic move, he takes
her arm, which she is using to block his approach, spins her,
and then propels her into a beautifully supple half and then full
dip. In a wooing dance, this is where the fun begins. But her
lets her go and she again attempt to flee in gliding dance step.
Her escape is pointless though, she merely comes full circle and
meets the blond minion again. He takes her arm, snaps her to full
extension, then brings her in for an arm curl, before picking
her up and spinning with her. Again, in a wooing dance, this is
where the man starts to woo through dance, but he lets her go
and propels her towards the brunette minion.
They dance escape. The red haired minion swings Dawn into an over
the hip spin and dips her beneath him. There's almost a swing
quality to the steps. But not to this speed or beat, we're not
there yet.
They toss her about, surround her, circle round her, and then
the brunette minion sends her into a quick slid across the floor
to the jazz hot dancing feet of Sweet.
Sweet's Song Sweet woos with words and song and dance.
He immediately establishes himself as something different with
his two-toned tapping feet as he gradually comes into camera.
Brief rant: About the only quibble I have with the number (or
for that matter the musical) is that later in the scene it is
not filmed to display full bodies. The only reason to do close-ups
in a dance routine is to make a plot point or to hide the fact
someone can't dance. Battle can clearly dance and I wanted to
see what he was doing from his two colored taping shoes to the
top of his head at all times.
Anyway,...
The change in style and tempo serves as an abrupt transition from
a childish world of ballet dreams to the more adult sexualized
world of swing and jazz.
Sweet tempts. "Why'd you run away? /Don't you like my style?"
Sweet plays in his power with a quick time clothing change from
red to blue. With curling fingers, he asks the kneeling Dawn,
"Why don't you come and play?" and he's clearly not
talking about hopscotch.
He promises a smile. He brings the fun in and since she invited
him, they should dance awhile and once again he holds out his
hand, but Dawn isn't ready yet.
Sweet sings and dances of himself as a source of movement, imagination,
and emotion, "I'm the how to swing / I'm the twist and shout"
all energetic youthful dances, "When you gotta sing / When
you gotta let it out." All of which is beautifully pared
with Sweet's dance steps which are very restrained. Soft tap clicks,
restrained, sinuous, arm motions. Sweet's too cool to have to
show off. He has minions to leap for him.
And Okay, I love a man in a zoot suit. His coat does a beautiful
swirl as he turns to Dawn, "You call me/ And I come a running"
and the wooing begins with Sweet's out held hand, it's time for
Dawn to swing, because "Now we're parting/That's what it's
all about."
This is the only true wooing number in the musical (a song in
which a man attempts to sway a woman romantically through dance).
It disturbs because it is between Dawn's child-woman and an omnipotent
figure who knows your emotions and can bring them to the surface.
With a magician's wave, he pulls a small hip thrust and rotation
from Dawn. They fall into dance step. With a gesture, her hip
movements become more pronounced and he pulls her arms up and
he pulls her into a face forward dance position and they swaying
move to the music. Dawn's expression is one of confusion and longing.
She does want the dance.
In most wooing songs, the point where the man pulls the woman
into an arm curl is very romantic. The couple has achieved synchronous
rhythm and the move serves as a demonstration of how perfect the
couple is together. See how we move together to the beat. See
how our internal rhythms are the same.
Here, however, Dawn dances in rhythm because she cannot resist
Sweet's power. Dawn's expression shows her struggle between her
desire to enter this adult world and her fear at doing so.
Also, Sweet's arms aren't around Dawn. Her shoulder, her hand,
pulling her arms into a hug, but although they dance in sinc,
he isn't holding her.
She tries to explain it away. Perhaps, Sweet is just a fun demon.
Nothing wrong with dancing. Until you burst into flames that is.
Once again, Sweet pulls Dawn to her feet with a gesture, circles
around her and into her space and changes her clothes to a floor
length romantic dress with a gesture. The A-line style of the
dress and Dawn's loose hair, evokes images of brides with their
loose hair indicating their maiden's status.
And here the wooing ends. Dawn starts to protest that this isn't
very legal, and Sweet just starts dancing around doing his own
thing, because his dance isn't about finding a synchronous rhythm
with Dawn (the reason you know a couple is meant to be together
in a musical) but on showing off his power, soft shoe technique,
and high kicks.
And Dawn retreats from the dance, back into being Slayer's little
sister.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spoilers - Child Ballet to Swing - Dawn and Sweet
-- Javoher, 11:43:20 11/10/01 Sat
Dawn is really growing up quickly. Her scenes began with a child's
singing voice (MT has potential IMO, but she's 17 and hasn't developed
yet) and a child's longing for recognition under an older sibling's
shadow. Then her dance scene as she awakens strongly reminded
me of Clara's fight with the Rat Army in The Nutcracker - Dawn
is a frightened child with foes much stronger than she is. When
she begins her pas de deux with Sweet, the tone changes dramatically
into a girl's awakening sexuality; her moves reminded me a little
of Latin dancing the way she wrapped and unwrapped into his arms,
and the way her hips swiveled. Sweet is very much the leader and
Dawn is in thrall.
This could be interpreted as a caution or as foreshadowing of
what can happen when a girl falls under the sexual spell of an
adult male predator.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spoilers - Child Ballet to Swing - Dawn and Sweet
-- mundusmundi, 12:57:52 11/10/01 Sat
My favorite moment in Sweet's number occurs after Dawn asks hopefully
whether he's a good demon -- bringing the fun in. Battle does
a funky little twirl and lands on a chair that wheels its way
backwards. After a cut to the minions, Sweet hops up and saunters
to a door that crashes on stage, revealing the price that comes
when life becomes a song. (Incidentally, the folks I watched the
episode with came fully alive to it once Battle arrived on screen.)
These are really great, fresne. Keep 'em coming.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spoilers - Child Ballet to Swing - Dawn and Sweet
-- Maxwell, 19:21:05 11/11/01 Sun
Just a small point. The line that you have as "I'm the how
to swing / I'm the twist and shout" I believe is actually
"I'm the hottest fiend / I'm the twisted child".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> sweet's lines -- anom, 11:03:46 11/12/01 Mon
"The line that you have as 'I'm the how to swing / I'm the
twist and shout' I believe is actually 'I'm the hottest fiend
/ I'm the twisted child'."
I heard the 1st part as "I'm the hottest swing" when
I played it back. It could also be "the how to swing,"
but that just doesn't sound right to me, especially the "the."
(I thought I'd remembered "I'm the hottest thing," but
"swing" was very clear on the playback.) As for Maxwell's
reading, sorry, but those lines don't rhyme w/the next ones: "When
you gotta sing / When you gotta let it out." And ya know
it's gotta rhyme--this is a musical, after all!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: sweet's lines -- mm, 14:50:31 11/12/01
Mon
"How to swing/Twist and shout" makes more sense given
the character. There is, I believe, an error in the transcript
for Buffy's opening number. When the vamps start their chorus,
the line on the transcript reads: "She does pretty well/with
things from hell." I've listened to it carefully several
times, and I'm fairly certain they sing: "She does pretty
well/with fiends from hell," which also sounds better and
makes more sense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Oh. Those were fun to read. Made me relive some great
moments! -- Aquitaine, 16:18:40 11/11/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symbols in OMWF *Spoilers* --
Edward, 12:44:02 11/10/01 Sat
There are a couple of symbolic points that I have not seen discussed.
First, when Sweet leaves his energy signature first becomes a
hammer which I believe symbolizes the job he just did in smashing
the Scoobies apart.
Second, Spike takes part in "Where do we go from here"
just as all the others do. In fact he is the first to take up
the song after Dawn starts it. He is fully involved until he backs
into one of the structural columns of the Bronze and is jarred
back into reality. Considering the choreography of the episode,
this could not have been coincidental. I'm not quite sure what
that symbolizes, but it is definitely what wakes him up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Symbols in OMWF *Spoilers* -- grifter, 14:41:28 11/10/01
Sat
Ok, here are some (hopefully) interesting little things I noticed
about OMWF:
1. Right in the beginning of the episode, Buffy stays in bed while
everybody else gets up (cheerfully). She´s not interested
in getting up and living her life.
2. Later, while singing at the graveyard, she rescues some handsome
guy, but isn´t interested in him at all. Love or sex aren´t
of interest to her. Again we see that life doesn´t hold
anything for her currently. We will see how the Spike-thing works
out..
3. During the "I´ve got a theory" - song, Giles
has exactly the right idea what´s behind all the funny singing:
"...a dancing demon!". But he thinks he´s wrong.
Lack of confidence showing here?
4. Tara sings: "But your power shone/Brighter than any I've
known". For someone complaining about Willow using to much
magic, she seems pretty fond of it...strange.
5. Xander sings: "She´s also really greedy/She never..."
Anya interrupts: "His eyes are beady" Xander: "This
is my verse, hello?" She´s taking over a part of his
life, which is, of course, normal for most relationships, but
he´s not completely cool with it.
6. Who´s "David Brinkley", whome Anya fears to
look like when she´s gotten old? Can someone enlighten me
please?
7. When Buffy visits Spike in his crypt, he´s coming up
the stairs, maybe symbolyzing his feeling of "being beneath
her", later again shown when he kneels before her and sings:
"...you know, you got a willing slave...".
8. Buffy sings: "Now, through the smoke, she calls to me/to
make my way across the flames". Fire seems to both represent
life and death in this episode. Dawn (representing all innocents
who need Buffy´s protection) wants her to live and help
again, but Buffy could also die (again) in the process. To her,
"...it´s all the same".
9. Spike: "I hope she fries/I´m free if that bitch
dies/I´d better help her out". One of the best lines
in the episode, it shows Spike´s inner conflict perfectly.
10. In the end Buffy and Spike sing a duet. She sings the sweet,
"Disney-esque" "Going through the Motions";
he sings the emotional bad-boy-song, "Let me Rest in Piece".
The themes mix and the singers finally kiss. That´s what
BtVS is all about: A mixture of different ingredients leading
to the best TV series out there. Comedy, Drama, Action, Fantasy;
cute highschool stories, heavy apocalyptic stuff, deeply emotional
characters.
There´s so much going on in this episode! Probably hundreds
of details that could be interpreted as having some meaning, here
are just a few that came to my mind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Symbols in OMWF *Spoilers* -- Edward, 15:06:15
11/10/01 Sat
David Brinkley is a retired newscaster. He is old and wrinkley
these days.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Symbols in OMWF *Spoilers* -- RichardX1, 07:25:33
11/11/01 Sun
::10. In the end Buffy and Spike sing a duet. She sings the sweet,
"Disney-esque" "Going through the Motions";::
Technically, she's singing her first verse from "Walk through
the Fire" with a couple of lyrical adjustments toward the
end of it so that they can both end on "feel" before
kissing. But maybe I nitpick too much.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Symbols in OMWF *Spoilers* -- grifter, 10:22:04
11/11/01 Sun
No no no, you´re absolutly right...it sounds like a mixture
of "walk through the fire" and "going through the
motions". Thanks for pointing it out!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace"
-- gds, 23:31:20 11/10/01 Sat
Normally if I wait a while other people will say what I would
have said. So I am surprised that in the flurry of posts over
OMWF(and this episode certainly deserves a heavy response) no
one mentioned (unless I missed it) the irony that although Spike
sang "Let Me Rest in Peace" to Buffy, this title clearly
reflects Buffy's feelings toward the SG.
By the way, did anyone else get a mental image of Jar-Jar when
Dawn said "Uhhhh-yuh-uh" to Sweet?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace" -- grifter,
02:16:13 11/11/01 Sun
"By the way, did anyone else get a mental image of Jar-Jar
when Dawn said "Uhhhh-yuh-uh" to Sweet?"
No. Jar-Jar evil. Jar-Jar must die!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> LOL! -- CW, 07:29:46 11/11/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace" -- Dedalus,
08:34:41 11/11/01 Sun
Poor Jar Jar.
Ahmed Best said all this "Jar Jar must die" stuff points
to an even bigger problem in the American psyche. I have to agree.
To think people actually have enough time on their hands to create
websites dedicated to the eradication of a fictional character.
BTW, just downloaded the special Episode Two trailer via my TPM
DVD at starwars.com, and Jar Jar is there in all his clumsy glory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Interesting since grifter is Austrian! -- CW,
08:44:20 11/11/01 Sun
Perhaps there are is also a problem with worrying about nothing.
;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Interesting since grifter is Austrian!
-- Dedalus, 08:57:19 11/11/01 Sun
There was a Jungian analysist who had a very interesting take
on the anti-Jar Jar sentiment bouncing around the country a few
summers ago.
I'll have to post it one of these days.
Oh well. Sorry about the nationality screw-up. I just hate to
see innocent beings condemned to death for being inefficient and
clumsy. It's a little too Imperial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Yeah, Xander would have long since
been a goner! :o) -- CW, 09:03:20 11/11/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Jar-Jar -- grifter, 10:08:10
11/11/01 Sun
I just don´t like the character. I admit it, I´m a
poser, I´m not really a Jar-Jar-death fanatic, I just think
he sucks...he´s a stupid gimmick introduced for not having
to think about how to make people laugh and to sell overpriced
puppets to little kids.
Xander, as a puppet? Not really THE seller, I´d guess...;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Amen! -- RabidHarpy,
09:14:22 11/12/01 Mon
I absolutely agree, (could it be the Germanic blood in my veins?)
- Jar-Jar was a TOTAL gimmick to sell merchandise! I'd rather
have seen an army of C-3POs in his place!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Jar Jar, Adric, Wesley, Neelix.,
Mel... -- Arachne, 10:25:54 11/11/01 Sun
Seems nearly every SF film/series has at least one character who
appears to be a irritating waste of space (except Buffy - Xander
may have sometimes seemed useless, but never irritating). Some
of them come through in the end, such as Neelix (from bumbling
nuisance to voice of common sense and homely wisdom) and Adric
(the bratty prodigy who, in the end, proved to be the most noble
and self-sacrificing of the companions, and the one who made the
greatest impact on the Doctor). Some of them (such as Mel *shudder*
Bush) don't. Only time will tell which category Jar Jar falls
into...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Thanks Ded, tempt me then leave
me wanting more..... -- Rufus, 15:20:02 11/11/01 Sun
I found Jar Jar irritating at most and was puzzled at the backlash
against his character.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace" (spoilery) --
Traveler, 07:04:01 11/11/01 Sun
"this title clearly reflects Buffy's feelings toward the
SG."
True, but the song itself was very different from Buffy's "Walk
through the fire" song. Spike was saying that his love was
hurting him because he felt so strongly. The fire (love) couldn't
hurt Buffy because she couldn't feel any emotion strongly, except
for dispair/ennui.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace" (spoilery)
-- Dedalus, 08:37:15 11/11/01 Sun
To me, the best part about the Rest in Peace song was that Spike
was trying to get Buffy out of his crypt before he burst into
inevitable song.
When he did start singing, he gave this great little roll of the
eyes, and just finally resolved himself to get it out of his system.
It was most funny.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace"
(spoilery) -- grifter, 10:10:14 11/11/01 Sun
Yeah, that was one of the funniest moments in the ep for me. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: OMWF - "Let Me Rest in Peace"--Significance?
-- Wisewoman, 10:39:56 11/11/01 Sun
On repeated viewing of OMWF I'm struck by some of the other things
Spike is saying in his number, i.e. speaking of himself as having
died, and as a dead man. This represents, I think, a new aspect
of Spike. FFL led us to believe being vamped was the best thing
that could have happened to him, changing him from a wimp into
a being of immense personal power.
In "Let Me Rest in Peace" he seems to be saying, perhaps
for the first time, that he has regrets, that he recognizes the
gulf between him and Buffy is not just Vampire/Slayer, but also
dead/alive, which may be much harder to reconcile.
I think it's significant that the line he reprises in counterpoint
to Buffy's "I touch the fire and it freezes me," is
"I died, so many years ago..."
Just realized I haven't read rowan's post on the couples aspect
of OMWF yet, and this is probably covered there...okay, so I'll
go read now...
;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow's "Get out of jail
free" card (SPOILER OMWF) -- Xen, 21:59:09 11/10/01 Sat
Anyone else remember in "Family" how Tara cast a spell
to make the SG blind to demons? She believed (due to what her
family was telling her) that she had a demon inside her and wanted
to conceal that from everyone else. So as far as Willow's casting
a forget spell on her this season, if Tara does have any moral
high ground to take a stand on it can't be much more than a step
stool. Naturally the situations were considerably different in
scope, Willow trying to cover up a relatively minor disagreement
versus Tara hiding what she felt was a major and potentially damaging
personal revelation, but the underlying principle is the same.
Both ladies have used magic to manipulate the perceptions of those
around them to their own benefit.
Giles has also expressed reservations concerning Willow's use
of magic, but his days as the Ripper (anyone remember Eyghyon
in "The Dark Age") immediately come to mind.
I'm not saying Willow is right, but it could be argued the ones
that seem most vocal about her being wrong certainly have a nice
view of what she's been doing from inside their glass houses.
I think that's going to make their trying to get through to her
that much more difficult.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's "Get out of jail free" card (SPOILER
OMWF) -- Rufus, 22:19:46 11/10/01 Sat
I'll start with Tara, her spell did threaten the lives of the
SG....but that type of carless magic was based upon her assumption
she was a demon. Tara understood what she did was wrong and corrected
it as soon as possible. I haven't seen her do anything carless
since.
Now, to Giles....sure he was a jack ass when he was younger but
what would you have him do? He could just keep his mouth shut
and let Willow do something that could destroy many lives.....or
he can do what he did and warn her that she is messing with power
that she can never totally control. His experiences tell him that
arrogance can blind one to what should be obvious...there is no
such thing as a free lunch when you work with dark magic.
As for glass houses, at some point everyone has at least sub-letted
a glass house. In the case of Tara and Giles they are trying to
prevent someone they love from making a big mistake.....they would
be wrong not to. It is up to Willow to listen or not listen to
what they have to say. If she were smart she would consider what
she could possibly lose instead of constantly casting spells attempting
to hang onto what she has.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Right, just because you've done something stupid...
-- Cactus Watcher, 07:23:46 11/11/01 Sun
in the past, doesn't mean you shouldn't try to help someone who's
about to make the same mistakes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Right, just because you've done something
stupid... -- Solitude1056, 15:42:56 11/11/01 Sun
As an older friend told me many years ago, "People say that
you learn from your mistakes. Well, you don't have enough time
in your life to make every possible mistake so you can learn not
to do that. Save time, and learn from mine."
;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's "Get out of jail free" card (SPOILER
OMWF) -- SingedCat, 05:19:09 11/11/01 Sun
"...it could be argued the ones that seem most vocal about
her being wrong certainly have a nice view of what she's been
doing from inside their glass houses.."
I'm not so sure about that, Xen. If G & T defended their actions
while condeming Willow's, they would surely be elected for membership
in the Zrconium Wall Society. But Giles' and Tara's actions were
well-established as bad mistakes, and engendered their strong
beliefs that using magic is like drawing a gun-- used right, it's
a powerful weapon in times of need; use it more than necessary,
and you just increase the chance that something will go wrong.
It makes perfect sense to me that the ones with the most experience
with magic are the ones trying to warn her. Have you ever tried
to watch someone make one of your worst mistakes without saying
anything? :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Willow is a drug addict -- change, 05:23:53 11/11/01 Sun
My take on Willow is that her use of magic is being used as a
metaphor for addiction. It's not so much that she is becoming
evil, or that she works evil or harmful magic, but rather she
uses magic too much. She is becoming so addicted to it that she
no longer thinks about the harm she is doing to others or to herself.
When she cast a spell on Tara to make her forget, compare her
to an alchoholic getting drunk to avoid dealing with their problems,
and then hurting their friends and loved ones instead.
When she works spells that hurt her physically (like the resurrection
spell did), think of a drug addict wrecking their bodies physically
by overdosing.
This season is suppose to be about growing up. Willow's use of
magic is a metaphor for experimenting with drugs.
There are no get out of jail free cards for drug addicts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow is a drug addict -- DEN, 08:21:04 11/11/01
Sun
I like the direct link between magic, addiction, and growing up
that this thread is establishing. It fits Willow's behavior into
the stated theme of the season much more convincingly than attempts
to make her the Big Bad
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow is a drug addict -- Xen, 09:07:23 11/11/01
Sun
I've read the replies so far and no one is saying anything I don't
agree with. Her friends certainly should speak up about her abuses
of magic, but I just think she isn't going to heed them. If you
look at it as an addiction as you point out, then the misuses
of magic perpetrated by her friends in the past may be all the
reason Willow needs (in her own mind at least) to ignore their
warnings and keep doing what she's doing. At least until she screws
things up so horribly with a misguided spell she gets a "moment
of clarity".
A better question the addiction analogy leads to is whether her
career as a witch is heading for an permanent end. My (limited)
understanding of the whole addiction recovery issue is that once
you've crossed the point of no return your forever after a "recovering"
addict. There's no getting back to the way things were before
the addiction. A recovering acoholic doesn't get the luxury of
the occasional nightcap no matter how much time has passed. So
if Willow does cross that point of no return in her magic use,
will that mean no more spells... period... even in dire need...
ever?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow is a drug addict -- change, 03:31:54
11/12/01 Mon
> A better question the addiction analogy leads to is whether
her career as a witch is heading for an permanent end. My >
(limited) understanding of the whole addiction recovery issue
is that once you've crossed the point of no return your > forever
after a "recovering" addict. There's no getting back
to the way things were before the addiction. A recovering >
acoholic doesn't get the luxury of the occasional nightcap no
matter how much time has passed. So if Willow does cross that
> point of no return in her magic use, will that mean no more
spells... period... even in dire need... ever?
I hadn't thought of that, but it's an interesting point. I think
the writers may want to go that route for purely practical reasons.
Willow is getting to be so powerful that it is getting hard to
construct a believable threat to the scoobies. After all, she
has fought a god and resurrected the dead. Is there anything that
she cannot do? The Sweet demon ran as soon as he realized how
powerful she was. Maybe the writers are planning to strip her
of her powers so that the scoobies can be threatenned again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Maybe Willow Needs Spike's Chip -- Moose, 17:38:17
11/11/01 Sun
If Willow got nasty blue shocks from using magic maybe she would
think a little first. ;-)
Where's the Initiative when you need 'em...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's "Get out of jail free" card (SPOILER
OMWF) -- pagangodess, 18:42:04 11/11/01 Sun
Just a note to possibly justify Willow's action. ***Spoiler for
The Gatekeeper Trilogies**** I realize that very few people ever
talk about the novel written about the show, however in 'The Gatekeeper
Trilogy'(can't remember exactly which book) in mentioned the ghost
roads, where the souls walk to their final destination, but very
few ever find it and they stay lost there forever. Buffy saw two
or three slayers' spirits stuck in this dimention and Willow knew
about it. It may then be, that Willow had good reason to believe
that Buffy's soul was wondering and lost. This, and the fact that
Buffy did not die a natural death, may have been enough to convince
Willow to try.
Also, remember how Willow helped Dawn find the book, which would
lead to information of how to bring Joyce back.
Another point, when everyone talks about getting Buffy out of
hell, Giles is the only one who never makes a comment to that
affect. Did he already know, that Buffy was never in hell to begin
with.
Sorry for rambling pagangodess
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's "Get out of jail free" card (SPOILER
OMWF) -- darrenK, 19:29:46 11/11/01 Sun
I think this is a really good point and taken in direct light
it's hypocritical on the part of both Giles and Tara.
BUT--the inevitable BUT--it could also be argued that both of
them have abused magic and know how close they've come to causing
real damage to the people around them and want to keep Willow
from doing the same.
I'd like to see it that way. If the people with experience didn't
share it with the rest of us, none of us would know nothing. I
mean anything.
dK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> But Tara and Giles LEARNED something ... (SPOILERY) -- Earl
Allison, 03:00:05 11/12/01 Mon
If everything fell to "let he who is without sin"-type
rationale, who could judge or advise anyone? Just because someone
is evil, or was evil, that doesn't mean they can't advise. Look
at how well pre-chip Spike read people -- remember his speech
from "Lovers Walk"? Evil or not, he KNOWS what love
is, and what it means. Ditto for the Mayor's speech to Buffy and
Angel -- his being evil didn't diminish the truth of what he spoke.
No reason Tara or Giles shouldn't be angry, nor should they hold
back their advice because of past mistakes. Now, if they were
STILL acting the same way, you might have a point.
Problem is, Willow's learning NOTHING here. Until or unless she
realizes what she's doing, EVERYONE is in trouble. Besides, as
you mentioned, Willow is tampering on a grand scale the others
never approached.
Tara stopped HERSELF, cancelling the spell at risk to herself
(she still thought at that point that she was a demon), and Gies
has been torturing himself for years over the Sleepwalker incident
... the point just sails over Willow's head.
What's the info from tonight's ep? Willow casts ANOTHER spell,
trying to make Buffy forget Heaven (IIRC)? Great, after the revelation
that she screwed up (however well-intentioned), what is her first
reaction? To use MORE magic to correct her mistake.
Dunno, and don't get me wrong, I ADORE Willow/AH, but her learning
curve here seems to be a flatline.
Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absence of Hope (spoilery for
S6) -- John Burwood, 01:02:33 11/11/01 Sun
"What is hell but the total absence of hope? The substance,
the tactile proof of despair." So said the demon in Anne.
I have often wondered, with zero qualifications to know, whether
Buffy was actually clinically depressed between B2 & Anne. Certainly
she must have felt in hell - and judging from the wildfeeds & posts
she seems to be there again. Clearly she seems to have lost all
hope - I know that feeling, and got past it by learning not to
hope for things I couldn't have. But Buffy is way younger than
me and way too young to give up hope in her life. IMHO the challenge
of S6 has to be Buffy finding something to hope for in her life
- something totally not Slaying. Anyone got any suggestions what?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- grifter, 02:23:35
11/11/01 Sun
She mentions the things she should "sing about" (=live
for) herself in her "battle" with Sweet: "...family
and friends...".
But right now she is unable to "feel" ("...I touch
the fire and it freezes me")because she wants to go back
to heaven. She will have to accept that she´s alive again,
and then the rest will come automatically IMHO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- John Burwood,
05:37:20 11/11/01 Sun
But 'family and friends' are others, not herself. In living for
others, you are greying into the areas of duty & responsibility.
What does Buffy have to hope for as herself? Maybe Buffy is saintly
enough to find happiness in only living for others (I sure as
hell am not), but we are stretching back to the burden of responsibility
of a Slayer. What does Buffy have to live for personally and in
practice?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- grifter,
07:13:59 11/11/01 Sun
I guess you could ask the same question about any of us...what
does any of us have to live for?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6)
-- Elvengrrrl, 22:29:14 11/12/01 Mon
Errr...the hope that someday we too may get to kiss James Marsters?
:p
Yeah, yeah. Very deep and philosophical I'm not at the moment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- Aquitaine, 15:46:42
11/11/01 Sun
Well, at the risk of sounding trite, I'll venture to say that
Buffy's latest depression dates back to the episode where she
quit school (Tough Love, I think). She gave up on living for herself.
She said something to the effect that she was now living for Dawn.
As you suggest, Buffy needs to find something outside of slaying
that makes life worth living as far as she is concerned (not the
'free' world at large or her friend or even a lover). There may
be a clue, therefore, in that lengthy little discussion she had
with her professor about liking poetry but not having the time
for it. Don't you think this OMwF (rhymes, people, rhymes:) could
be the first step in a new direction? Of course, I love this idea
because William/Spike was a poet *sheepish grin* but I do think
it works in a broader sense too. As Giles was suggesting, Buffy
needs to ignite the spark within herself. Poetry seems like as
good an accelerant as any.
grifter, you ask what reason any one of us has to live and I suspect
that many ATPoBtVS posters would say that talking philosophically
about fiction (literature, tv or movies) is one of the things
that they find worthwhile. Such a deceptively simple endeavour
may not lead any of us to find the answer to that question but,
at the very least, we are living by the mere act of conversing
and being interested in asking questions without answers.
OK. I think I'm done now. Cough.
- Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- RabidHarpy, 09:50:44
11/12/01 Mon
A very good question...
"She will have to accept that she´s alive again, and
then the rest will come automatically IMHO." ~grifter
This reminded me of the fact that once Buffy discovered she was
the Slayer, she inevitably found out that her life was limited.
If we all knew that we wouldn't live past the age of 21, (or whatever
the maximum age of the Slayer was said to be), wouldn't we live
the years that we had in passion and vigor? Buffy would have been
slaying her little heart out because she knew that this was her
task/purpose for the few short years she had to live. She could
afford to live with abandon, (ie. loving Angel, a vampire), although
most often she was cautious. Now that she has no definite "ending"
point to rely on, she seems rather lost. It is one thing to live
(like the rest of us) not knowing when you are going to die -
life trundles along in a rather hit-and-miss fashion as we wait
for our bodies to wear out, but for someone like Buffy, who is
used to having her life outlined for her, and used to knowing
that there is a definite ending point to her duties, being thrown
into the "everyday" world (with the rest of us) can
seem nothing short of overwhelming - or at least frighteningly
mundane. Her life has been one fast-paced, dangerous adrenaline
rush; her motto has paralleled the idea that, "It's better
to burn out than to fade away", and now she is forced to
"fade" like everyone else. This is especially difficult
for her to reconcile because she had followed all the rules and
completed her task, thereby earning her release from this world.
It is only because of her friends that she has been forced to
return - (not to mention the difficulty of knowing what awaits
her in "heaven"). Buffy not only needs a new sense of
hope and purpose, but a reason for living - a task that is uniquely
hers to accomplish, and which does not hinge upon her family/friend's
emotional reliance on her.
A few tasks that come to mind are:
- fighting and defeating the "source" of all evil, (someone
more powerful than the Master - perhaps an alternate world Buffy
with the same strengths, weaknesses and knowledge - hmmm... this
could be a metaphorical "fight" with her inner self
too...) - discovering a "cure" for vampirism so that
she can "save" souls instead of destroying their dead
"shells" - training up the next Slayer, (redeeming Faith?
or possibly training Dawn - who shares her blood and is coming
of age...) - protecting Dawn from an immediate threat, (or becoming
a "watcher-type" mentor for Dawn whose "powers"
- should she possess any - require Buffy's experience, knowledge
and guidance) - helping Spike to regain his lost soul, (if this
is possible), or somehow supernaturally restoring his humanity(?)
- saving Willow's soul from the "dark side"
Just some ideas to throw around...
There may be a clue, therefore, in that lengthy little discussion
she had with her professor about liking poetry but not having
the time for it. " ~Aquitaine
So, Buffy has some creativity - she likes poetry, has an intelligent
wit, and in the last episode we saw her sketching (?) Perhaps
she has picked up some of her mother's artistic talents after
all?! All she needs to do is pursue them and see if she can perhaps
earn some money that way... If she could transfer her thoughts
and feelings, or her visions of "heaven" onto canvas,
she might be able to sell some paintings - she certainly has the
"tortured" part down - she just needs to work on the
"artistry" part!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- mundusmundi,
15:25:49 11/12/01 Mon
Excellent post. For more than five years, Buffy has been a "destroyer"
figure, a hero fighting for good by annihiliating the forces of
darkness. Yet she is growing restless, particularly with her pangs
to be a "creator" of some stripe. To do something. We've
seen this manifest itself in subtle ways, namely her imaginative
gift with language. (As I think d'Herblay once wrote, "Language
is alive to her.") This is a poet's gift, of course; but
while poetry is certainly something Buffy could dig into and find
some personal satisfaction with, it's not going to pay the bills.
She needs a job, a real job, yet one that'll give her a degree
of independence and keep her out of a cubicle.
You also mentioned the necessity of accomplishing more personal,
Slayer-related tasks. For example:
- training up the next Slayer, (redeeming Faith? or possibly training
Dawn - who shares her blood and is coming of age...) - protecting
Dawn from an immediate threat, (or becoming a "watcher-type"
mentor for Dawn whose "powers" - should she possess
any - require Buffy's experience, knowledge and guidance) - helping
Spike to regain his lost soul, (if this is possible), or somehow
supernaturally restoring his humanity
I'm keying in on these three because I believe they could be potentially
interrelated. Fact is, Giles's imminent departure is going to
create a vacuum among the Scoobies, one that would have been filled
by Willow, the natural choice, were it not for the likelihood
that she appears about to take a very wrong turn. (That's not
a spoiler, just fairly obvious speculation.) Who now becomes the
mentor figure, the brains behind the group? Not Xander. Nor Anya.
Tara has potential, but The Willow Situation makes her a big question
mark also.
Barring the arrival of a brand new character, it seems that there
are only two possibilities -- Spike and Buffy herself. Life in
Mr. Bloody's Neighborhood certainly is strange nowadays, his character's
arc this season the hardest for me to get a bead on. He can't
remain Buffy's whipped--er, whipping boy; yet if he returns completely
evil again, what choice will there be but to stake him? Spike
needs a calling, a sense of mission. (Giles himself suggested
in S4 that the chip may be a sign of a higher purpose; and some
have interpreted Xander's dream in "Restless" as a big
hint of Spike's destiny.) Being a de facto Watcher of some sort
is a possibility, though not without flaws. For one, Spike is
more a man of action, not one to sit and read and brood. (For
two, exactly who would call him?)
Which leads us back to Buffy. Granted, she has never been one
to sit back and delegate either. But we've also seen that Buffy
is capable of change. And while I think that redeeming Faith is
out of the question (that's more Angel's dept., and the California
penal system's, IMO), and that she seems determined to keep Dawn
out of loop, slayer-wise, if at all possible, I do believe that
Buffy should seize the opportunities life continues giving her,
take action and found her own Watchers' Council. By combining
ideas from Anya and Spike, she could seek proper funding and run
her own business out of Sunnydale. With Xander, and if lucky a
reformed Willow, they could monitor and train younger Slayers
and perhaps pay their way through to the end of their years.
(I'd echo Earl Allison's sentiments here and say, "Take it
and run," but as it's probably too damn heavy, feel free
drop the post and rest a while. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Absence of Hope (spoilery for S6) -- RabidHarpy,
06:27:31 11/13/01 Tue
"I do believe that Buffy should seize the opportunities life
continues giving her, take action and found her own Watchers'
Council. By combining ideas from Anya and Spike, she could seek
proper funding and run her own business out of Sunnydale. With
Xander, and if lucky a reformed Willow, they could monitor and
train younger Slayers and perhaps pay their way through to the
end of their years."
An EXCELLENT suggestion! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Buffy feminist challenge --
Masquerade, 08:23:51 11/11/01 Sun
Hi all,
I got this email and I'd really love to respond to it, but don't
have any free time in the time allotted. Care to try on a question
or two?
Masq
Dear Masquerade, My name is Janelle Hing and I attend the Chapin
school. It is an all girls private school that teaches young females
to be independent and empowered. My friend , Lauren and I are
in a course called A.M.P ( Art, Media and Propaganda) at our school
which teaches us the skills necessary to analyze the media. Our
assignment is to do an oral report on anything media related.
My friend and I decided to do our oral report on Buffy since she
is an obsessed fan. We want to present Buffy as a positive role-model
and a new age feminist and depict moral messages portrayed on
the show. I would like to ask you a few questions about the show,
since you are sort of an expert on the philosophies behind the
show. Thank you ahead of time for you cooperation. The questions
are:
1) Do you view Buffy as a positive role-model, yes or no? Give
an explanation.
2) In your opinion, should Buffy be considered a new aged feminist
( yes or no). Please explain.
3) Do you think that there is a large minority representation
of the show?
4) Do you think that the show depicts morals and values relevant
to society today?
5) How would you compare the way females are portrayed on the
show versus their male counterparts?
6) Do you think that there are any negative stereotypes of men
and women on the show? If so, is it a typical occurrence?
7) Does the show contribute more unnecessary violence to t.v?
8) Is the show ethical?
P.S- My report is due WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 14th, 2001....So if you
could please respond before that, it would be great.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> #3, #7, #8 -- Solitude1056, 09:48:43 11/11/01 Sun
3) Do you think that there is a large minority representation
of the show?
Nope. That's one (minor) complaint with Joss' work so far, that
he's yet to incorporate minorities on a regular basis. Sunnydale,
though, is set up as a bit of a whitebread small town, so that
particular literary excuse has held up so far. There have been
various appearances of non-caucasian faces, but none were a major
character until AtS came along and we got Gunn. For the most part,
the part of the "minority" has been played by non-human
folks, like the Host. Much of AtS (which is more episodic than
BtVS) uses non-human to act as a metaphor for "minority."
7) Does the show contribute more unnecessary violence to t.v?
Compared to other shows? Not really. Joss is pretty good about
keeping the violence in the arena of violence with a purpose -
it's rarely *truly* gratuitous. Even when it appears that it's
just another "oh, Buffy's beating up vampires in the graveyard
again," the violence itself is demonstrating something. We've
got examples of Season 5, when Buffy stopped talking to the vamps
directly, and instead was using them to take out her frustrations...
and then there's a tapering off of Buffy/vampire fights as she
got more involved with Glory. So even what appears gratuitous
in most shows, has a definite character-development issue in Joss'
shows - and you can see similar elements in AtS, as well.
8) Is the show ethical?
Absolutely! Okay, Dedalus, d'Herblay, Age, OnM, Rufus, Mundusmundi...
wanna help me out here? ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> regarding question #3 -- Iago, 13:59:09 11/11/01 Sun
3) Do you think that there is a large minority representation
of the show?
Well, if you talk about minority in the sense of caucasian vs.
non-caucasian, I suppose there is a tendency there for there to
be mostly white characters. There have been at least a few characters
of African descent, though their presence is not pervasive: Mr.
Trick and the first slayer.
In speaking of other minorities however, Willow specifically represents
at least three, since she was Jewish, practices Wicca (though
not any realistic form of it) and is a homosexual. None of these
issues appears to be of importance in terms of discrimination
in the show, though they often are in real life. Even without
the world's history of anti-Semitism, Willow's active practice
of a "non-traditional" religion would likely single
her out for persecution, and gays are still fighting discrimination
every day. Willow's presence as Buffy's right-hand woman and best
friend over the years demonstrates a highly non-discriminatory
stance.
Also, you could look at the relationship between Buffy & the Scoobies
and Spike and Angel. They are defined by one trait (vampirism)
primarily, as are most people who are persecuted. Some characters
can deal with vampires without stereotyping, some can't. Xander
and Gunn are seemingly always skeptical of vampires, while Angel,
Cordy, Buffy, and others seem to withhold judgment until a character
justfies a reaction.
Granted, most vampires and demons are inherently evil, so the
parallel isn't perfect. There isn't one trait about other persecuted
minorities, other than whatever it is that defines them as a minority,
that makes them targets of violence. Nevertheless, it's interesting
to examine discrimination in the show through that lens. For example,
in the recent Angel episode "That Old Gang of Mine,"
I immediately thought that the way Gunn's old crew was acting
was intended to evoke that parallel. Gunn's crew was determined
to eradicate demons (etc.) simply because they were demons. It
didn't matter if they were good demons like Lorne (the host) or
the baby-killer demon who was at the bar. This reminded me very
much of lynch mobs in the old south: all that mattered was their
one trait, and to hell with the rest. It is also unique that the
perpetrators were African-Americans, since it was most often blacks
who were the targets of racist vigilantes. It's also possible
to see their actions in a Nazi-esque way, since it was their goal
to exterminate all demons, and their actions were being guided
by one charismatic individual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Did you overlook Kendra? IMHO she was not a minor
minority character... -- A8, 18:11:09 11/11/01 Sun
...and in many respects represented how virtuous The Slayer really
could be. Granted, the Caribean accent may have been a bit over
the top. Oh well. My only gripe was her lack of screen time. It
would have been nice to know a bit about her adventures slaying
outside of Sunnydale.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Also... -- grifter, 11:56:11 11/12/01 Mon
...there was Jenny Calender (sp?), who was a gypsy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Buffy feminist challenge -- Shiver, 10:50:09 11/11/01
Sun
#1 - The question "Do you view Buffy as a positive role model"
is too broad and general, and doesn't really fit the real scope
of the show. I wouldn't ask if any single character is a role
model or not, rather, I would say that the show itself is a realistic
metaphor for life and its trials.
The thing about Buffy as a character is she isn't perfect. Sure
she is strong, but not necessarily independent. She often allows
her heart to get in the way of decisions her head should make,
to the possible detriment of others around her. For example, her
inability to stake Angelus in season 2 when she had the chance
led directly to Jenny Calendar's death and those of others (Teresa
too). Her zeal to protect Dawn at the end of season 5 led to her
threatening her best friends and her watcher that she would kill
them to save Dawn and at the expense of the entire universe as
well. Her self absorption during most of season 5 drove Riley
to vampire hooker addiction and finally away. More than one season
ended with her running away from home and worrying those who loved
her rather than stay and face her problems. In other words, when
you dig into the meat of the show, Buffy herself is not a cookie-cutter
"role model" for people to base their own lives on.
However, she is a great character in the sense that she IS completely
fallible, and allows us to see our own selves in her. Who among
us hasn't made bad judgement calls that have affected the other
people in our lives (the difference between her and us is that
our mistakes don't generally put the world in danger of ending).
#3 There is next to no human minority representation on Buffy,
there is some on Angel, but the minority representation in the
Buffyverse is not human nationalism or race - it is demon vs human
or demon vs demon. There are classes among the demons themselves,
as witnessed by some of the Angel and Buffy episodes where other
breeds of demons express prejudice toward vampires as being "lesser"
demons due to their human bodies. In Angel, the central character
of Doyle was killed as a direct result of trying to stop a Nazi-like
race of demons that had made its purpose the eradication of "lesser"
demons and demon/human hybrids. The Angel episode That Old Gang
of Mine had human vs demon eradication for sport and out of prejudice,
failing to see that not all demons exist to the detriment of the
human race - some, like Whistler, are around to help.
#4 ABSOLUTELY. Season 1 and 2 are perhaps the easiest to break
down into moral and ethical quandry, because they are more episodic
seasons (season 1 especially). Every week is a new metaphor for
teen life. The guy who can't get a date to the prom decides to
unleash hell-hounds to attack promgoers. A student who is ignored
by everyone actually turns invisible and goes on a killing spree
for revenge. Who can forget Pete and his Jekyll/Hyde experiments
that led to the abuse of his girlfriend (one of my favorite Oz
moments, during a fight in the library. "Time's up. Rules
change." Wolf out. Woo!) And who can forget all the choices
that Faith makes during her illustrious Slayer career.
#5 I don't think there's any general negative stereotyping of
male/female on the Buffy show, although the Angel episodes Billy
and Offspring left me with some distaste as to how men were depicted
as victimizers and women victims. But not on Angel. Many of the
Buffy women are portrayed as strong characters and not stereotyped
into any negative female roles.
#7 The violence on the Buffy series has never been gratuitous
(violence for the sake of violence). It is always central to the
plot of the show and has never been so extreme that I had to turn
away from the screen. "Nature red in tooth and claw"
seems to apply to the demon world as well as the world we live
in, on Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A Buffy feminist challenge -- Shiver, 10:51:21
11/11/01 Sun
I forgot another great metaphoric episode - when Oz becomes a
werewolf. He acts strange around Willow, who blames herself and
finally goes to confront him. "It's not you", he says.
"I'm going through some - changes". Then he goes through
some changes!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Buffy feminist challenge -- CaptainPugwash, 11:21:43
11/11/01 Sun
Buffy represents the ultimate repressed woman who is unable to
choose her destiny. She is denied a normal life by TPTB who impose
their will upon her.
<<>>
'Thou shalt be The Slayer! Muahahahaaaaa!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Is the show Ethical........ -- Rufus, 15:17:54 11/11/01
Sun
The simple answer is yes. The writers make us work through a situation
to help us understand just how hard it can be to remain ethical.
If you consider basic ethics to be a series of rules to be followed
season one set up the basic rules. In season one the Slayer killed
demons, and demons were all evil. The line of division between
killing in an ethical way and murder was the existance of a soul.
As long as Buffy adheared to the basic rule of no soul=clean kill,
she was in safe territory. Then the problem of a vampire with
a soul questioned, if only slightly, the rule. It was still simple
as Angel, with a soul, was considered an exception to the rule.
So, we were still on the no soul=clean kill. It was in Dopplegangland
that we got the first idea that the vampire wasn't just a seperate
being housed in a corpse. When they were getting ready to send
Vamp Willow back to her reality, Willow was concerned about the
skanky nature and sexuality of her counterpart, Angel started
to make a comment but was interrupted by Buffy who gave out the
party line of "don't worry that isn't you". So, why
does it matter if a vampire has or hasn't got a soul in relation
to killing it? My thinking is that if you pick one characteristic
of a being and make that the basis of killing the entire race
or species then we do what people have always done to excuse genocide.
We turn that being into the other, not caring to explore further
just how true our assumptions are, and kill them all while thinking
we are right. Insert any minority or gender, religion, and you
can see just how easy it is for us to kill if we have the right
excuse. The writers of BVS are no longer making it that easy.
The best example is that of Spike. With that chip we get to look
past the demon and see just how close to us the vampires are.
Of course the vampire is one of the most common shadow figures
in books or dreams. Spike may be a "tight hot bod" to
some, but to me personally he represents just how easy it is to
demonize then exterminate what is different from us. I do believe
that to kill the vampire that is a threat is the right thing to
do, but it's clear even Buffy cuts them a break if they are not
an immediate problem. In the show ATS, demons are shown to be
an invisible part of society and mistakes are made when it's assumed
that the text book definition of a demon may conflict with reality.
The best example was in Judgement, when Angel killed the Prio
Motu demon only to find out that the demon had been able to transform
himself from a demon bred to maim and massacre, to a Buddhist
protector of a pregnant woman. Also in this season Gunn found
out just how far his gang could stray from their mission to protect,
to killers that murdered the helpless for sport. If both shows
had stuck to the no soul or demon = clean guilt free kill, then
I would have tuned out long ago, but they have been careful to
expose the ugly side of human nature. Note that in both shows
it's the human monsters that do the most damage. Both shows constantly
change and grow and test what is right, and what we think is right
based upon appearences.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: #4 -- mundusmundi, 16:36:28 11/11/01 Sun
4) Do you think that the show depicts morals and values relevant
to society today?
Yes.
Examples from the last episode:
1. Fight evil, don't placate it. Buffy is always fighting the
fight, helping others, saving the day. She may feel she's just
going through the motions, but she still does her job, expecting
nothing in return.
2. Stand by your friends. Buffy's friends remain by her side.
They may slip up now and then, but ultimately they give her backup.
They see it through, it's what they're there to do. (Or, as Xander
says in "The Body": "We'll help. It's what we do.
We help Buffy.")
3. Show love. Speak it. We see love expressed sexually (Willow
and Tara), through affection (Anya tenderly patting Giles on the
shoulder, Tara comforting Willow after the latter realizes that
she pulled Buffy out of heaven), and through simple words (Spike
and Dawn urging Buffy to live). Has there ever been a show where
the characters love each other as much?
4. Love by Leaving. By the same token, the show teaches that sometimes
you have learn to be alone, that it pays to be self-reliant. Giles'
realization is an example of this. Most comments have focused
on Buffy's dependency on Giles, but it also seems that he's dependent
on her. Giles is also going through the motions. He too needs
to leave in order to restart his life. And lastly....
5. Love by Living. Last year, Buffy showed love through sacrificing
her life. This year, she is learning to love again by learning
to live again. She has reached the stage of re-experiencing basic
emotions and sensations. Next will come reclaiming her "turf,"
reacquiring a sense of purpose, revising her mission statement.
As I've written elsewhere, Buffy is like Candide at the end of
a long journey. She needs to cultivate her garden -- to live and
learn and laugh and grow. I've no doubt this is the direction
Joss & Co. are taking us; it's where they've been headed all along.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> You really should look at some of the postings by Age below
[NT] -- Traveler, 16:50:45 11/11/01 Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Buffy feminist challenge -- Lauren, 17:08:10 11/11/01
Sun
#1: i do definately think Buffy is a role model. she depicts a
positve woman figure who can fight for not only herself, but for
the "world". #2)i think you could think of it as a new
aged feminist, but not a heavy one. #3)There aren't a lot of different
races... also homosexuals are looked down upon in a sense. However,
the stereotype of blonds being ditzes is terminated. #4)i think
it does depict values etc, like being an outsider and just in
the long run it's better to be yourself. #5)It's as if all the
females in the show are the ones with the power. Giles feels like
he has no more power over buffy, Xander is just kinda annoying
and rarely helps out, Spike can't even kill anymore. #7)Of course
there is voilence, but not any more than what you see on the news.
Also, before the show, it says the show is not for younger viewers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Could you elaborate on your comments regarding #2
and #3? -- A8, 18:23:57 11/11/01 Sun
What exactly is a "new age feminist?" How do you think
the show looks down on homosexuality?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Visible minorities on Buffy -- matching mole, 09:51:05 11/12/01
Mon
I'll only address question 3 as I feel others have given such
excellent responses to the others that I could add nothing more.
I do find the relative absence of 'people of color' on Buffy a
bit baffling and disturbing (not that I think it is intentional
on anyone's part). The show is set in a college town in southern
California! Even if the resident population is largely white the
campus would have very substantial numbers of Asian, Hispanic,
and African-American students.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Joss has stated that it is a 'straight up feminist show'
-- Rahael, 10:32:59 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angel's "hair shirt"
-- yabyumpan, 15:25:07 11/11/01 Sun
A few thought about Cordy being pissed at Angel for not telling
them he had slept with Darla: It's bugged me for a while that
no body's has bothered to talk to Angel about his Epipheny, you
would of thought that if a friend has gone through a dark time
you would want to talk with them about it and try to understand,
all he got was their anger. I understand that he hurt them but
surely that's all the more reason to try to find out why it happened.
It seems that they only get concerned about Angel when they think
it may effect them, which is pretty one sidded friendship. I think
one of the reasons that Darla was able to have so much power over
him is that he is taken for granted a lot of the time, at the
end of First Impressions, when he goes back to the hotel after
saving Gunn's life and she's there, the fact that no one said
"thank you" is one of the things she is able to play
on. We all have our Demons iside us but he has a real one which
he works hard to keep under control but he rarely get credit for
this, the only time I can think of is Wesley's comment at the
end of Eternity. He always seems to be eating humble pie, yes
he spent 150 years doing terible things but he spent 200 years
in a hell dimension,has accepted his duty to fight evil,regually
lays his life on the line for them and others and even when given
the chance to walk away from his duty and stay human,(the thing
he seems to crave the most),he chose to save Buffy from possble
future death and keep on the good fight (IWRY), I just wish he'd
ripe off his "hair shirt" and stop appologising for
being what he is, basiclly a good vam-man stuggling against evil,
inside and out. OK, end of rant, any comments!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Angel's "hair shirt" (SPOILERS) -- Javoher,
18:55:29 11/11/01 Sun
Something that interested me last week was the way Cordy handled
Angel's attempt at declaring he loved her. She took it very casually
and yelled out to everyone about Angel loving her, and they yelled
out right back while they continued what they were doing. This
heart-felt admission from a vampire who was on the point of giving
up his soul last year was mostly blown off. It's been well established
that Cordelia can be obtuse when it comes to sensitive emotions
and her disregard was well within character. Still, I had hoped
that with her increased sensitivity she would take him more seriously.
On the other hand, perhaps they still can't trust Angel's loyalty
to the group. Perhaps the trip to Pylea and Angel's sacrifices
for Cordy haven't completely convinced the group. And they would
have good reason not to trust him. They now know he had stopped
caring about the world to the point of releasing his soul and
unleashing Angelus upon the world again, which is one thing Cordelia
most fears in her life. He wanted to kill Darla regardless of
whatever she's pregnant with, then when he heard the heartbeat
and felt the soul he changed his mind, held her close and promised
they'd see it through together.
Angel is becoming more and more grey, and clearly has some morally
rocky decision-making skills.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Angel's "hair shirt" (SPOILERS) -- RabidHarpy,
11:19:44 11/12/01 Mon
"She took it very casually and yelled out to everyone about
Angel loving her, and they yelled out right back while they continued
what they were doing."
They just re-ran the "Buffy" Hallowe'en episode where
the Scoobies turn into their costumes, (ie. Willow=Ghost/Xander=G.I.
Joe/Buffy=18 Century Girl, etc.) In this episode Cordy tries to
get between Angel and Buffy until Xander says, "Deal with
it, you're never going to get between those two - trust me, I
know..." Perhaps Cordy is still operating on the same basis,
(especially since Buffy has returned from the dead, and she still
doesn't know what happened when Angel and Buffy met). Not only
that, but Fred's little rambling about "how could she (Buffy)
not love Angel", may have been a bucket of cool water for
whatever Cordy thought relationship with Angel is or could be.
Since her "fall from superficial grace", Cordy has been
a lot more insecure than in the past. She may be trying to gloss
over the whole "I love you" idea with Angel because
she doesn't want to get hurt if he doesn't mean it in a personal
way.
Just a thought...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spike and Sensativity ATTN: Age
(much spoilage) -- Traveler, 18:15:14 11/11/01 Sun
I read a post by Age further down on the message board which suggests
that vampires are a metaphore for the supression of the feminine,
including sensativity. This really reminded me of Spike's past
life as William, a man who loved beauty and art but was scorned
by his peers. Spike felt that Drusilla brought him out of a life
of mediocraty by making him a vampire. As a vampire, he changed
his name to Spike (very phallic, eh?) and made it his mission
to kill Slayers. Now, if Slayers symbolize the deconstruction
of male dominance and the affirmation of women's strength, this
means that Spike sought to gain power, strength, and respect by
subjegating women.
This trait continued until he fell in love with Buffy. The first
hint that he was changing occured after she had deeply hurt him
in FFL. In order to gain revenge for the way Buffy hurt him, Spike
intended to kill her with a gun (more phallic imagery, anyone?).
However, when he saw the pain she felt at her mother's illness,
Spike put aside his gun and tried to comfort her. Of course, he
didn't completely change overnight. Later, he tried some of his
old tactics with a new format. He kidnapped Bufy and tried to
force her to love him. However, even when under his power physically,
Buffy showed her strength and stood up to him. Afterwards, he
tried to apologize (be sensative), but it was too late. Next,
he tried to reastablish his dominance by creating a pliant sexbot
with Buffy's image. This strategy sated him for a time, but the
real test of Spike's character occured when he was captured by
Glory. If all he truly wanted was sexual dominance, he would have
done anything to prevent Glory from having dominance over him,
including telling her who the Key was. I would argue that this
is the real turning point for Spike, both with Buffy and his growth
as a character. Afterwards, he attempted to "just be there"
for Buffy when she needed him. We can argue about exactly what
his motives were, but his actions were undeniable.
The next important stage for Spike is shortly before Buffy died,
when he said "I know you'll never love me. But you treat
me like a man." These words show that the respect of a strong
woman now means more to Spike than any sexual conquest. This trend
becomes even stronger after Buffy dies. He makes it his mission
to protect Dawn. Thus, he attempts to become a nurturer, the exact
opposite of a vampire! Furthermore, he does this believing that
Buffy is gone forever, so there is not even the possibility of
a sexual reward to influence him.
When Buffy finally comes back, Spike is unrecognizable from the
vampire he had been a year ago. He shows hurt that he hasn't been
included in the plan to ressurect Buffy, and seems much more concerned
about Buffy's feelings than his chances with her. Ironically,
of all her friends, Spike places the LEAST emotional demands on
her (well, until recently).
So, the punch line is this: if vampires are woman destroyers,
does this mean that Spike is growing past his vampiric nature
to achieve some kind of feministic redemption? Could he somehow
fight to change himself until he is human again?
Closing thought: in "Once more with feeling," we see
Spike not as the Conqueror, but as the Suplicant, when he sinks
to his knees and says to Buffy "You know you got a willing
slave." As niether quite a vampire nor quite a man, he considers
himself dead. So, he looks to Buffy to give him life, with the
love and respect of a strong woman. If he has the blessing of
a Slayer, how could he be a vampire? With Buffy's love, maybe
he feels that he could be a man?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike and Sensitivity ATTN: Age (much spoilage) -- Rahael,
06:37:31 11/12/01 Mon
Traveler, I think you make some excellent points, which made me
look at Spike again. I had formerly thought him, in opposition
to Angelus, as carrying more of his former sensitivity toward
women through into his vampire self. Your post made me reconsider
his journey, especially as I now recall his callous treatment
of Harmony.
I had some further thoughts sparked off by Age's post as well-
sorry to tack it onto your post, but I thought we'd keep grouping
this discussion together, rather than starting a new thread. I
must say that the quality of the posts this last week has been
higher even than usual!
Some further comments regarding the discussion that Age started
below:
I started thinking about the deep ambiguity that vampires engender
in the world of Sunnydale.
We have often discussed before the increasing grayness of Sunnydale,
the lack of moral absolutes, of blacks and whites.
But I think that this was present from day one. Claude Levi Strauss
discussed in his seminal book 'The Raw and the Cooked' how human
cultures like to divide up the world into dialectical opposites
- the raw and the cooked, good and bad, man and woman, or more
pertinently in this discussion, living or dead. This occurs whether
the world can indeed be divided up into two opposing categories
or not.
In Sunnydale, it is not possible. For we have the existence of
these creatures who are neither living nor dead. This is not a
shallow point - it's a fundamentally destabilising concept. They
are deeply mysterious - dead, and yet able to have sex. Able to
bleed, though they have no beating heart. Able to love, though
souless and evil. And now, apparently, even able to father children.
Spike, and now even Buffy walk along an unstable space, the valley
between the living and the dead. Their shadow world poses that
eternal, destabilising question to our view of the world, and
our certainties of what constitutes reality. It splinters the
easy dialectical opposites through which we view the world.
I had thought, while watching Season 5, that its fundamental question
was , 'what is self?' 'What is self identity?'. When Buffy looked
at her robot double, and looked at her pseudo-sister Dawn (who
might even just be another copy of her), when Xander looked at
his double, did it not make them rethink the idea of what constituted
them, and their view of the world? The very unreality of their
reality (started off by that episode of Buffy vs Drac - where
even Buffyverse rules are flagrantly broken) that is so pronounced
in Season 5 seemed to strike me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spike and Sensitivity Spoilers for Season 5, 6
-- Age, 12:39:16 11/12/01 Mon
Thanks for the excellent points.
I'm going to quickly talk about the deconstruction of opposites,
by pointing out the following movement in the arc signifying perhaps
the deconstruction of opposites in season five:
the two Xanders become one;
Buffy's two suitors become one as Riley leaves;
Dawn's two mothers become one, as Joyce dies;
the Scooby Gang and the Watcher's Council become one as Buffy
gets them together;
the table in the Magic Shop signifies the two becoming one as
it is two circles in one;
Buffy and the Buffybot became one as the Buffybot gets decapitated;
Spike and Buffy become one in the sense that the barrier between
them as enemies is dismantled;
Ben and Glory become one, the animus and anima(from an essay I
read) to show that we all have the feminine and masculine in us,
and to show that the herd animal and the predator are one in motivation.
Buffy and Dawn, the representation of Buffy, become one in the
sense that Buffy dies.
And the central icon on display in the Magic Shop, along with
the death mask on the wall, is the Buddha figure on the counter.
The central idea of buddhism is deconstruction of the illusion
created by oppositional thinking. Note also that the fundamental
idea of this world in buddhism is that suffering is inherent in
this world because of change. If we try to hold on to the world
we are bound to be disappointed; but if we give up and hold onto
nothing(like being dead in heaven) then we are attached to emptiness.
If you can't hold on to it, but holding on to nothing is like
being dead, then what can you do?
So, yes, I see your point about being between worlds. It is this
very thing that Buffy doesn't seem able to bring together: the
world of peace, nirvana and the world of suffering, samsara. From
season four on, there was a movement from the childhood idea of
demons being all bad with our beginning to have pathos for some
of them. A movement away from oppositional thinking; however as
your posting points out, the vampire stradles both worlds in its
very conception. That's a good point.
As others have pointed out there's an emotional dimension to Buffy's
being between worlds, a sense of the discordance in the transition
from adolescence to adulthood; and the depression brought on by
being given adult responsibility before she's prepared for it.
In some sense then Buffy is between the worlds of adolescence
and adulthood. I can't help wondering if Joss Whedon is still
using Spike's vampire nature metaphorically when it comes to Buffy:
she wants what he is, to be dead; but by the same token, she wants
what he does, to feel. This would go with the ideas you present
in your posting about the deconstruction of opposites. We are
complex creatures and that complexity for Buffy gets expressed
metaphorically in her attraction to Spike.(It is the death aspect
that Spike himself highlights.)
Sorry to Traveler for not responding to the question posed in
the first posting of this thread, but I'm working on it.
Please note that I'm much weaker when it comes to character study
than metaphor and general theme. So, when I do post a response
I hope it's helpful.
As always great discussion, great series.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow's two sides (minor spoilers) -- Traveler,
15:55:51 11/12/01 Mon
Your description of various opposites in BtVS and how they were
deconstructed reminds me a lot of Willow and Dark Phoenix from
the X-men. When they first discovered their powers, Willow and
Phoenix were both forces for life and healing. Over time, both
became addicted to their own power.
Phoenix and Dark Phoenix were they same person. She felt flashes
of sorrow and remorse at her actions, but at the same time she
couldn't curb her selfish, destructive impulses. Ultimately, she
killed herself rather than continue to harm the people she loved.
However, this act awakened Jean Grey, the human woman Phoenix
sought to emulate. Thus, the forces of life and destruction were
deconstructed into one, a human being.
Is Willow following the same path? Is she becoming a force that
takes and destroys without regard to consequences? If the story
continues to parallel the Phoenix Saga, Willow will eventually
sacrifice her power in order to save her friends.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Willow's two sides Spoilers for S6
to OMWF -- Age, 08:14:47 11/13/01 Tue
Thanks for the analogy. I have no knowledge at all of 'The X-Men'
and a reference to another work always adds to ones understanding.
If we go back to 'Restless' then we see in Willow's dream that
she still fears that she's the insecure person of her highschool
years. A few months ago I read a posting which suggested a difference
between Tara's and Willow's approach to magic: Tara's is natural,
keeping more with the spirit of Wiccan practice; while Willow's
is an extension of her desire to acquire knowledge as a means
of overcoming her feeling of insecurity, from science to magic.
This would jibe with the snake imagery of 'Bargaining' which alludes
to the Garden of Eden myth. As the story goes, Adam and Eve eat
of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. tempted by the
devil to become as if gods. In this way, they are expelled from
the Garden, as Buffy was expelled, through the resurrection spell,
from heaven. The Eden myth is about the loss of innocence, and
certainly this year as the Scoobies start to face adult challenges,
expulsion from the Eden of childhood is intended as an interpretation.
However, for Willow herself, the allusion to the Eden myth does
reinforce the idea of splitting into two as Adam and Eve come
to see each other as different, and the world is arranged in terms
of life and death. There is this sense that Willow's leading a
double life, and like a god, exerting her will over the universe
itself by resurrecting Buffy, and then over Tara by making her
forget. In a recent review I read it was suggested that Willow's
preoccupation with magic is a form of addiction. She at least
seems to have entangled her use of power with her self worth.
And, I can't help wondering if the character, Willow, is being
used to highlight the difference between empowerment and wielding
power; this isn't so much Willow having power herself, but something
having power over her, and she becoming increasingly unable to
resist its influence. In this way, as women begin to wield power
in our society, they face the same question as to what it truly
means to have it.
As many have noted in the postings I've read, Willow doesn't sing
in last week's ep. There's still this sense that something is
hidden, that Willow's leading a double life, that her innermost
feelings have not been revealed. In this way, she didn't get to
see herself in the mirror of the song as a vampire doesn't see
her reflection; not only this but she isn't looking into the mirror,
so to speak, of the advice given by others. So, the idea of there
being two Willows in the sense you intended by your referencing
'The X-Men' makes sense.
Will Willow sacrifice her power for her friends. If the analogy
holds up, we will see Willow sacrificing her power or her life.
I'm really not sure how this will be resolved, but perhaps the
scene in the woods(symbol of confusion and identity crisis) in
'Bargaining' where Xander and Willow get lost and Tara leads them
out is a foreshadowing of a role Tara will play. What I'm getting
at(and this is purely speculation and not based on spoilers) is
that it is Tara who will be sacrificed,(the two become one) with
Willow taking up Tara's more Wiccan approach to magic, ie you
do not do away with power(ie women don't retreat back into the
shadows of subservience (shadow imagery comes from Tara's song),
you simply learn to empower yourself. This may work in strictly
symbolic ways, but it's not very satisfactory because it also
implies a failure of coming out of those shadows if Tara is sacrificed.
It'll be interesting to see how this is handled. What you really
need is another witch.
Thanks for the discussion.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Buffy's liminality -- Rahael, 09:27:09 11/13/01
Tue
Age, I think you have pointed to the crucial idea - Buffy's entire
journey is the one between childhood and adulthood, and she is
at that phase that anthropologists term 'liminal' - neither one
nor the other, straddling the world of adult and child.
Nowhere is this more beautifully illustrated than the double of
Buffy/Dawn. Truly a woman/girl compound.
Anthropologists have had an especial curiosity about this because
in some traditional 'face-to-face' societies, the liminal phase
is celebrated through ritual and ceremony, and accorded a special
power. Liminal beings, (what Western culture calls 'teenagers')
are accorded a disruptive power, both special and disturbing,
whose uncertainty must be contained through rituals. These are
the rites of passage that formally mark the end of liminality
- the final step into adulthood.
The anthropologist Van Gennep was noted for defining three crucial
stages in the rites of passage - separation (the removal of the
individual from his or her former state) The second - liminality
(period of transition ) and finally, the ritual of aggregation,
which is readmission into society with newly acquired status.
Those undergoing rituals to control or end their marginal or liminal
status are often subjected to various ordeals or tests of endurance.
They reinforce the accepted hierarchies of power, and allow the
liminal subject to express their courage and worthiness to handle
the responsibilities of adult life. A particular stress in these
ceremonies is the qualifications required for marriage and the
entering into of adult sexuality. Their liminality conquered,
the newly stable subjects are reintroduced into society as adults.
Another aspect of these rituals emphasise the new knowledge gained
by initiates, and the entering into the privileges of adulthood
by virtue of the pain of ordeals.
The Watcher's Council's 'Cruciamentum' test in the episode Helpless
seems to be one such ritual ; another could be Buffy and Giles'
journey into the desert to meet the first Slayer. But more pertinently,
every ordeal, every moral, physical and emotional dilemma that
Buffy phases appears to be yet another 'test', another 'ritual'.
What greater exemplification of this ritual of separation of society,
a painful ordeal, a new found adult responsibility and final reintegration
and entry into adult society than Buffy's death and ressurrection?
At this stage, she is still in the 'painful' part of her ordeal.
She, and the other Scoobys are demonstrating their worthiness
to enter adult life. This is why Giles has to go......they must
be separated from adult society before they prove their worthiness,
and are allowed re-entry.
Spent so long working on this post, I failed to notice that you
have posted again! I'll answer the new one shortly. Nevertheless,
we are still addressing the same themes, especially with the garden
of eden analogy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's liminality *Spoilers* for
'Tabula Rasa' -- Age, 20:34:45 11/13/01 Tue
The Eden myth does seem to be the template for this transition
period. In 'Tabula Rasa' during the Eden like state of not knowing,
the Scoobies start naming themselves as Adam named things in Eden.
And, of course, Giles the father figure leaves Buffy to get on
with living her life, just as the expelled Adam and Eve had to
do. But the Eden myth is not followed exactly: Giles is not the
jealous God punishing his children for disobedience, but the kind
father figure understanding that suffering is inherent in living
and something we have to face; and Dawn's sexual awakening may
be frightening, but it's not shameful. Did you notice that Giles'
remaining in Sunnydale was equated with a kind of emotional incest
where the daughter figure would not be able to break away from
him, but would rely on him? And of course having Anya portray
this was great irony as, with her memory intact, she's the one
who wants him to go.
The Eden myth can be interpreted in several ways, but it seems
that it describes the period of sexual awakening leading to the
recognition that life is painful and that death is inherent. It
also, to some extent, describes the moment of self determination
as the child starts his journey to adulthood in the act of disobedience(Willow's
assertion of her will over the natural world; hence the snake
imagery of 'Bargaining.') It is also the fall into oppositional
thinking with the eating of the fruit of the knowledge of good
and evil: man and woman; life and death. It seems to me that this
is what Buffy has fallen into: she sees her world as split into
a happy one and a hellish one and cannot bring the two together;
she is looking to live, and this relates to wanting to taste of
the other tree in the garden, the Tree of Life. Perhaps bringing
the two worlds together is the equivalent of this?
Your comment about Dawn is pertinent because we see through her
sexual awakening a re-enactment of the basis of the Eden myth.
As you pointed out, she, as representation of Buffy is meant to
describe this split, this being in two worlds, adolescence and
adulthood during this transition period.
Last year the arc finished with oneness(as Buffy was killed leaving
only the child representation of her in Dawn; child, it seems
in two senses: the human, the innocent, the child of God or the
original nature of buddhism that will not kill; and the child
that this year is in transition to becoming an adult);and it finished
with completeness as Buffy embraced her human role as female,
which includes motherhood and death. This was a necessary stage
as without this acceptance the next generation will not be born
and the human race dies, as the allusions to 'The Wizard of Oz'
were meant to reinforce. But part of that feeling of completeness
was the mistaken idea that she'd done all she needed to do or
be: Buffy the heroine who gives up her life for the world; there's
a smack of adolescence about that as the heroic world of the Troika
is meant to reinforce. But, there's more to life than that: as
the poem says: miles to go before she sleeps...there's all the
adult living sacrifice part before we get to do the other sacrifice
that we are all set up to do anyway. Dying we all will do whether
we like it or not; becoming an adult is something we have to work
at. And that ties in with your observations(I was trying to find
a way of tying what you said in) about ordeal and ritual. It's
something I hadn't considered, and looking back it's part of the
resurrection spell itself. The Troika's testing of Buffy fits
in as well. And at the moment Buffy doesn't seem to be in a very
stable condition. Certainly she's undergoing an ordeal from which
she'll emerge much stronger. As always my reading of other people's
posts brings a richer view of this excellent series.
One last point:
Part of the transition period has to do with identity as the teenager
moves from being someone's child to establishing an identity of
his or her own. This got reflected in the loss of identity of
the Scoobies in tonight's episode; and then the departure of both
Giles and Tara as the former seeks to help his daughter figure
grow; and the latter establishes her own identity separate from
the 'parent' who has nurtured her thus far.
No, one more last comment:
The ordeal in 'helpless' was part of a theme about power: it was
meant to portray a society where males have it all and women are
'Helpless.' I got the impression that the test was meant to kill
Buffy to coincide with her becoming of adult age. A patriarchal
organization doesn't want adults; it wants children it can control.
Kill one girl slayer and another is called, no big deal. They
are the foot soldiers, the grunts as alternate Buffy in 'The Wish'
shows us. Having said this, I don't want you to think that I'm
discounting your idea. On the contrary, what Buffy goes through
is an ordeal, one to coincide with her eighteenth birthday. It's
just that several interpretations can be made.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Sorry, In Above, Spoilers: S3,
S5, S6 including 'Tabula Rasa' -- Age, 20:37:49 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Cruciamentum as Rite of Passage
-- Rahael, 08:42:54 11/14/01 Wed
Yet again, more valuable insights in your post Age....
Just a quick note about the Cruciamentum in 'Helpless'. I singled
this out as a classic rite of passage, because it seemed to me
to fulfill all the criterion.
1) it is linked to age - all Slayers have to face it when they
turn 18.
2) It is a test, along the classic lines of some African Tribes
where the putative warrior is sent out alone into the wild to
see if they can survive.
3) the slayer has to demonstrate her worthiness. There is no way
to strip the unworthy slayer of her powers, unless by death. So
the Slayer has to escape death to survive it.
4) Yes, I agree with you that it has extremely mysoginistic overtones
in 'Helpless' - the Watcher's council clearly don't care for Buffy
as a human being, and want to demonstrate their power over her.
But then female circumcision is also a 'rite of passage' - and
that is far more brutal and mysoginistic than anything Buffy has
to undergo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cruciamentum as Rite of
Passage -- Shaglio, 09:39:39 11/14/01 Wed
What exactly is female circumcision? :/ Or do I even want to know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cruciamentum as
Rite of Passage -- Rahael, 10:07:10 11/14/01 Wed
It is most unpleasant and could possibly be classified as torture.
I really don't want to go into the specifics on the board!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cruciamentum as
Rite of Passage -- Kimberly, 11:12:21 11/14/01 Wed
I'm going to have to disagree with Rahael slightly here. (Like
her, though, I don't want to go into specifics here).
". . . could possibly be classified as torture." No.
It IS torture, and a peculiarly misogynistic one. You can check
out the details at http://www.fgm.org/TheBasics.html and prepare
to be appalled.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cruciamentum
as Rite of Passage -- Shaglio, 20:08:27 11/14/01 Wed
OH MY GOD!!! Why??? Why would anybody be inclined to do such a
thing? I think I'm scarred for life! At least, moreso than I already
was.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cruciamentum
as Rite of Passage -- Kimberly, 08:35:15 11/15/01 Thu
I wish I knew. It makes me sick to think about it, and has ever
since I heard of it. Sorry if I should have put a stronger warning
on the link; I sure don't want to go around scarring people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Cruciamentum as Rite of Passage -- Rahael, 09:17:52 11/15/01 Thu
An Angel kind of dealt with this issue; the one about women in
a demon dimension having to undergo an operation in order to control
them. I think the ep was called 'She'. Female circumcision or
mutilation is truly terrifying.
The reason I only said it could 'possibly' be called torture,
is because I generally think of torture with a capital T: ie what
happens to you to make you confess something. But this practice
almost qualifies a T in its viciousness and hatred of women.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Cruciamentum as Rite of Passage -- Kimberly, 12:57:43 11/15/01
Thu
Didn't really think we disagreed; just using words differently.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> questioning eden & incest -- anom,
20:24:52 11/14/01 Wed
"But the Eden myth is not followed exactly: Giles is not
the jealous God punishing his children for disobedience, but the
kind father figure understanding that suffering is inherent in
living and something we have to face; and Dawn's sexual awakening
may be frightening, but it's not shameful."
Hope I'm not getting too theological here, but I wouldn't call
the God of the Eden story a "jealous God"; that wording
doesn't come up in the Bible until Exodus, w/the giving of the
Law. It clearly has to do w/jealousy over the worshipping of other
gods, & Adam & Eve seem to have no concept of other gods (something
that never occurred to me till now). So the God of Eden may be
wrathful, but not jealous, & there's even been speculation that
the humans were intended to disobey & eat the fruit (interestingly,
the Tree of Life's fruit isn't forbidden, either in the Biblical
account or in myths that parallel it). Yes, suffering is inherent
in living, but parents (in a healthy relationship, anyway) try
to protect their children from it in their early life, & the time
when children face that suffering often coincides w/the time when
they establish separate identities from their parents', which
in our society at least usually includes some disobedience.
I liked your point about the naming.
"Did you notice that Giles' remaining in Sunnydale was equated
with a kind of emotional incest where the daughter figure would
not be able to break away from him, but would rely on him?"
I can't see how this equates w/incest, even emotional incest.
It's normal for children to want to rely on their parents, even
at the same time as they're trying to break away from them, although
overreliance on parents can be unhealthy. Incest, on the other
hand, is decidedly not normal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: questioning eden & incest;
ThanksOMWF and Tabula Rasa Spoilers -- Age, 06:53:38 11/15/01
Thu
Thanks for the clarification.
The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines 'jealous' as:
demanding complete devotion; suspicious of a rival or of one believed
to enjoy an advantage; vigilant.
I meant it in this context. Adam and Eve's act would make them
as if gods: they were the rivals.
Hopefully, I've got this right.
The interpretation of the fall as intended is a valid one. In
order to become properly separate from God, Adam and Eve had to
live their own lives. This is what I meant about the emotional
incest. If Giles didn't separate from his daughter figure, then
she couldn't separate from his parental influence, relying more
on it, and becoming dysfunctionally attached to it. She couldn't
make the move from using him as an emotional partner/strength
in her dealings with life. It was this enmeshment with him that
seemed to me to be portrayed in the partnership/romantic episode
between Giles and Anya in 'Tabula Rasa.' Buffy couldn't move on
in her life and separate herself from her parental figure.
I do see the point about this being a natural process of growing
up, but I think that the writers wanted to stress the dysfunction
that can result from this process not taking place. Again, I think
that the point you make is a valid one about young adults relying
on their parents. But, Buffy wasn't just gaining strength from
him, she was tending to allot her responsibilities to him. There
was a blurring of identities as to who really is Dawn's parent.
It's a parallel to Willow who is blurring the line between empowering
herself as a human adult and allowing the power of magic to run
her life.
Thank you.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike and Sensativity Spoilers S5 and S6 -- Age, 18:31:20
11/12/01 Mon
Thanks for the analysis. It's great to see how we all put our
ideas together on this board.
In reply to your question, I think that Spike has undergone a
certain evolution in his thinking. He has gone to some extent
from reliance on dominance to expecting nothing in return. This
is a much healthier way of dealing with feelings. He's been allowed
to do this because the chip in his head has rendered him powerless
before living things. Given the basic themes of the series, it
would seem that Spike is on the road to some human recovery(I
don't see this as feminist, but human in the sense that male-dominated
ideas hurt both men and women, destroying the chance they were
both born with to become friends and natural partners; although
from the standpoint of violence and devaluation women have taken
the brunt of the harm.) I am however of two minds about Spike's
motivations as he is still a vampire. Perhaps my concern is simply
a reflection of your idea of Spike not being vampire and not being
a man, but dead, in the sense of being between worlds, not one
thing or another. I'm concerned that Spike's influences and his
self worth are still external to him: the chip and Buffy's respect.
The latter is sort of like Dru's conferring power on Spike by
making him a vampire. Also, Spike's saying that he's a willing
slave still smacks of the structure of dominance, albeit with
Spike taking the submissive role as a reflection of what the chip
has made of him. That may be too cynical an interpretation, but
certainly the adolescent card playing scene and Spike's cheating
in 'Life Serial' point to the teenager aspect still alive and
kicking in the vampire metaphor. What I'm getting at is that he
still has as a vampire to get what he needs to feel alive from
without because he's dead. While he does have quite a different
perspective, he's still having to get something from someone else.
That it is not blood does show that he's not the sexual predator,
but he's still a vampire.
However, quite clearly in the fifth season ep with Dru he'd picked
one way over another. But, is the evolution sustainable? That
will only be answered if and when the chip comes out..if it ever
does.
From a thematic point of view Spike seems to be evolving in the
direction towards some human redemption, but this series is a
deconstruction of the fairy-tale world and happy endings...whether
Spike continues...the analogy to the card playing scene may be
something like this: perhaps because of Buffy and the chip Spike
is 'cheating' in his more human attitude, with the external factors
playing a dominant role. If and when the chip(s) are down, will
Spike stop himself and not bite the kitties? How much of an influence
is the love of a man for a woman? To what extent has Spike's thought
processes changed?
Sorry that this is so short, but this is the distillation of ideas
from a much longer and meandering posting I was working on that
doesn't say any more than the above.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> you call that short? @>) -- anom, 20:01:59 11/14/01
Wed
"Sorry that this is so short,..."
All right for you--no one expects you to be succinct!
"...but this is the distillation of ideas from a much longer
and meandering posting I was working on that doesn't say any more
than the above."
On the other hand, I gotta give you credit--there are way too
many people who don't realize when that happens!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike and Sensitivity : Spoilers for 'Tabula Rasa' --
Age, 21:10:08 11/13/01 Tue
It's intriguing that in 'Tabula Rasa' the writers actually have
Spike ask a question similar to the one you pose using the same
word, 'redemption', but they do this in the context of his adolescent
card playing. And, after Spike has taken out the Shark's minions,
and therefore has the power to ignore his debts, he insists that
he will still pay them. Is this a new Spike? The ambiguity of
Spike's path is brought out by the irony between what Randy(?)/Spike
thinks he's doing fighting the vampires, and what the reality
is. There's no sense that Spike has put himself on some path to
redemption, but that circumstances are perhaps changing him. He
isn't a vampire with a soul as he speculates, but a vampire with
external influences. Intriguing.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dracula (yeah, the book thing)
-- Sheri, 21:30:45 11/11/01
Hey, everybody! Hope you all have enjoyed "Dracula".
I'm posting my comments a smidge early (yeah, I know I said monday,
but I'm impatient).
I thought it was really interesting the sort of elements that
we see in Buffy on what makes a vampire that have been taken from
the Dracula mythos. (ex., the whole no reflection deal). Yet,
there are a whole lot of things that Dracula does the vamps in
Buffy don't (mind control, shape shifting, etc.). This would all
be find and dandy, but in "Buffy vs. Dracula", Dracula
is portrayed as in keeping with the mythos that Stoker had created.
The episode is definately developing from Stoker's "Dracula",
for instance, we've got Xander playing the Renfield role. And
the contrast between a vampire like Dracula and a vampire like
Spike is pointed out (Spike doesn't turn into a bat).
Additionally, the way Dracula became a monster doesn't mesh the
way the vamps on Buffy became vampires. I'll take Dru for an example,
since she'll provide the best contrast. Becoming a demon for Dracula
centered around his leaving the Eastern Orthodox Church--his rejection
of religion. Dru, on the other hand, was joining a nunnery when
Angelus vamped her.
Alright, so my question for everybody: how do we make sense of
the decision to lift Dracula directly from Stoker's work and place
him in the Buffyverse?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> First reactions -- Rahael, 04:26:46 11/12/01 Mon
For me, the Buffy vs Dracula episode seemed to perform two functions.
One, a chance for the series to pay a humorous hommage to the
ancestral novel, and secondly to investigate the nature of fame.
Dracula is the world's most famous vampire....and Buffy has now
replaced van Helsing as the world's most famous slayer. The episode
seemed to investigate the power of fame, notoriety and legend.
The 'thrall' of Dracula's fame is shown to affect Buffy, Xander,
Anya, Willow, Giles...and in itself is a amusing shadow to the
'thrall' that Bram Stoker's book exerts on the imagination of
Western culture. Yes its showy, yes its melodramatic, but the
power of the book, and its comments on the disturbing and disruptive
quality of female and male sexuality still makes it resonate today.
It is an interesting footnote that Bram Stoker based his portrayal
of Dracula's hypnotic power and charisma on his great friend Henry
Irving, who was an actor who exerted a great fascination on Stoker.
There was a deep affection between the two which might perhaps
have gone beyond the platonic.
I don't see any contradiction between the different vamp legends
that come into conflict in the episode - its the writers acknowledging
to us that they have tampered with the legend. Its almost a form
of our second favourite activity - spot the metanarration - that
Spike dismisses Drac's showy gypsy tricks. And Angel had earlier
already complained of media hype about Vamp activity - sleeping
in coffins etc.
I didn't dislike the episode as so many others have done. Personally,
I don't need every ep to 'advance the plot'. I thought the ep
showed BtVS at its witty and intertextual best. Little details
like the fact the description of the castle matches the one we
see in the ep, down to the roaring fire and so on, the little
Xander - eating bugs joke, all of them made me laugh. There were
other lovely touches - the sudden storm, which also appears in
the book, and the scene at the beach.
Finally, it puzzled me when people complained that the castle
had been suddenly foisted on Sunnydale, as a major blooper - didn't
the characters themselves make a joke about it? that this castle
which had never existed before suddenly dematerialised?
All in all, I found the book a great read, especially having read
a lot of 18th century gothic lit (I especially recommend Melmoth
the Wanderer) and a great addition to the Buffy episode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Homage -- Malandanza, 08:23:24 11/12/01 Mon
a chance for the series to pay a humorous homage to the ancestral
novel
I think the BvD episode is more a homage to the vampire movies
of the past than to Dracula. Consider that Renfield's bug-eating
begins long before Dracula arrives in the UK -- on June 5th we
first learn about his bug collections but the Demeter doesn't
arrive until August. It seems as though in the book Renfield is
already insane -- although his insanity seems to allow Dracula
to exert the same sort of influence over Renfield as Dracula exerts
over the lower animals. By comparison, the movie Renfields' (and
Xander's) bug-eating is a direct result of the vampire's influence.
Also, Stoker's Renfield isn't eating bugs for the sake of revulsion,
he is carefully consuming lives (and would prefer to eat things
higher up the food chain). The movie Renfields seem to consume
bugs merely for the disgust factor.
Add to that, Dracula in the book is extremely careful to blend
in. He practices his English with Jonathan Harker to remove any
traces of his Transylvanian accent even though he speaks the language
flawlessly -- in the movies (and BvD), Dracula speaks with a pronounced
accent and his costume is rather flamboyant. The three female
vampires are little more than sex kittens -- in the book, they
are predatory (the Count gives them a sack with a young child
to feed upon). Stoker's Dracula is fastidiously careful -- 50
coffins? Joss' Dracula seeks out the slayer.
Also missing -- the wolves. Much scarier than bats -- even large
bats. Even poor old Bersicker, the zoo wolf that Dracula sends
crashing through Lucy's window. In fact, animals are missing altogether
-- where are the dogs balking at entering a room the vampire inhabited?
or filling the night with their uncanny howling? One of the things
I liked best about Lovecraft's writing was that he followed the
tradition of natural animals attuned to the unnatural. Or the
old back and white classic horror film, The Cat People, where
a pet shop erupts into cacophony at the entrance of a supernatural
being. And Stoker's Dracula is not the romantic, brooding, misunderstood
vampire of the Anne Rice novels: he is evil incarnate. His breath
has a charnel reek and even the air of an enclosed room becomes
fouled by his presence. The language Stoker uses to describe Dracula
is anything but romantic: "It seemed as though the whole
awful creature were simply gorged with blood; he lay like a filthy
leech, exhausted with repletion." His eternal youth is dependent
upon the consumption of lives -- he becomes younger as he feeds
and ages when he fasts.
However, I do think that BvD was a very effective homage to the
vampire movies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I'm ashamed to admit......... -- Rahael, 11:42:40
11/12/01 Mon
That I have never watched a single movie featuring any kind of
vampire, scary or not, or even any horror films.
So those references flew right over my head. I only got the ones
between 'Dracula' and the Buffy episode. And of course, the gothic
tradition which 'Dracula' belongs to.
What do you think the BtVS episode actually got from the book?
or did they actually focus on the movie tradition, and bypass
the book altogether, any references to the book being coincidental
to the fact that the movies came from the book?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Homage/movie vampires -- matching mole,
13:51:39 11/12/01 Mon
Excellent point - it's been many years since I read Dracula but
the portrayal on BtVS clearly owes more to the movie versions,
mostly the original sound version with Bela Lugosi and various
more recent ones. I think a lot of Dracula variation has to do
with changings attitudes towards sexuality over time. In late
Victorian England it was not socially acceptable to publish work
in which sexuality was portrayed positively. The reaction towards
Thomas Hardy's last two novels, 'Tess of the D'Urbervilles' and
'Jude the Obscure' was so strongly negative that it prompted him
to give up on prose and take up poetry. The Count is clearly a
sexual being - ergo he is foul and monstrous as well as evil.
In pre-code Hollywood sexuality was perceived much more positively
(e.g. Mae West) and hence we have an evil but charming Dracula.
In the more puritanical late 40s and 50s Dracula is portrayed
more as a savage animal in the Hammer Films starring Christopher
Lee.
Slightly off topic but my two favourite Dracula films are both
from the 1970s. One is a BBC miniseries starring Louis Jourdan
(I think) which is nicely understated and very faithful to the
book. The other (which may be from the 1980s rather than the 1970s)
is 'Love at First Bite' starring George Hamilton. Aside from being
amusing I really like the portrayal as evil yet noble. He may
be an murdering predator but he is true to his nature and not
a cynic or a hypocrit like the humans around him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Dracula (yeah, the book thing) -- verdantheart, 06:53:10
11/12/01 Mon
Looking back at season 5, I tend to agree with the point of view
that the whole Dracula adventure served as a way for the monks
to get Buffy's blood to create her sister, Dawn. Dracula drinks
of Buffy, after all, and we know that the key has the power to
shape reality. The monks shaped a sister and the memories surrounding
her. It would be a much smaller task to create a legendary vampire.
Besides, I can just see the network and others begging Joss, "Let's
see Buffy meet Dracula! Wouldn't that be neat? It would be a real
ratings winner!" He could shut them up and still (subtly)
use it as part of the season arc.
I haven't gone back and combed the script yet as I had promised
myself I would to look for more clues to back this view up. However,
it's hard to see Joss trotting Dracula out just to trot Dracula
out.
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Dracula (yeah, the book thing) -- Yellowork, 08:20:20
11/12/01 Mon
I think the show sometimes works by hinting little details which
are never affirmed and later turn out to be red herrings; for
example, a lot of on-line fans took the character of Ben and the
story of the 'three hellgods' and ended up just assuming that
Ben must therefore belong to this pantheon of three gods with
Glory. It turned out, this was a false trail. Other times, things
are stated more or less categorically, if melodramatically(!):
e.g. 'You are not looking at your friend; you are looking at the
thing which killed him.' from season one. I think the 'Angel'
story was already conceived by this point, and this line was put
in to build up the belief that all vampires are inherently murderous
and inhuman 'things'. Therefore, when it came to Angel's true
nature the rug is pulled from underneath the viewer and thus begins
a developing dialogue between the first assumption and the revision.
I think this is one of the show's strategies with the overall
structure, so 'Buffy vs. Dracula' is meant to open up the vampire
mythology established previously in the show, going back to interesting
borderline cases earlier on, such as the survival of the Master's
bones after his flesh is dusted in 'Prophecy Girl', and of course,
the current enigma of Darla's 'impossible' bairn. Suddenly the
words 'Angel' and 'broody' are taking on a whole new significance
...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> How much longer does everybody need? -- Sheri,
09:34:03 11/12/01 Mon
How far into Dracula are you guys? Or, more precisely, when would
everyone like to get started on the next book (Herman Hesse's
Siddhartha)?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: How much longer does everybody need?
-- LadyStarlight, 10:43:15 11/12/01 Mon
I'm about 1/4 through (should be finished by Friday, or so).
Would Monday suit for Siddhartha?
Something interesting in my copy (annotated, so I'm spending lots
of time reading the footnotes), Stoker's Dracula is immune to
sunlight! Apparantly the whole 'burst into flames' was a movie
invention. (to show off early special effects?) More anon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Movie Draculas -- Sheri, 11:22:15
11/12/01 Mon
Ok, how about everybody just reads and posts at their own pace,
and we'll plan to discuss Siddhartha for the first week of December.
Yeah, the whole not bursting into flames deal is pretty interesting.
It's a shame that this wasn't demonstrated in "B vs. D".
I do think that the "no sunlight" rule for vamps works
on more levels than just a special effects one (thought that is
certainly a bonus). If we go with the idea of "light"
representing life... than I think it's understandable that a creature
that defies the natural order of things should be denied the ability
to embrace that light/life. I'll see if I can find out what the
root of this myth comes from (cause we know that vampires have
been around long before Dracula and BtVS).
You know, despite his god-awful attempt at an English accent,
I now believe that Keanu Reeves was an excellent choice for playing
Johnathan Harker.
When you come down to it, Harker is the sort of innocent fool
that only Keanu could play. (I'm not saying that Keanu is stupid...
he just plays stupid people so well... really it's more to do
with his speech patterns than his acting ability).
At first, when I read Harker's portions, I was aghast to hear
Keanu's voice doing the narration in my head... but really, it
fits Harker. Here's a guy who, when seeing people look at him
like he's a puppy that's about to be run over by a cement truck,
thinks, "Gee, what quaint peasant folk! I'll have to tell
Mina all about them!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Movie Draculas -- LadyStarlight,
12:24:39 11/12/01 Mon
The book (copyright 1979) I have also has a filmography, and as
a throwaway bit the authors say (hold onto your hats here) that
John Travolta will be playing the lead in Interview with a Vampire!
Scary visual place, anyone?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Some folklore info.
-- Sheri, 12:54:10 11/12/01 Mon
Ok, I can't vouch for the accuracy of this person's information...
but she says that these are ways that vampires are killed in various
folklore (notice, that sunlight is not included--so I'm still
trying to find the origin of that myth):
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_039.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Ack! -- listening, 05:56:20
11/13/01 Tue
What a Revolta-n experience that would have been!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: How much longer does everybody
need? -- verdantheart, 05:59:24 11/13/01 Tue
Of course, I last read Dracula quite a while ago, but it seemed
to me that there was a point made that Dracula's appearing in
the daylight meant that his power was growing to an alarming measure.
That is, most vampires cannot tolerate sunlight (though it is
perhaps unclear whether they would be destroyed by it), but the
most powerful ones can.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The sunlight issue --
Malandanza, 07:45:57 11/13/01 Tue
"Of course, I last read Dracula quite a while ago, but it
seemed to me that there was a point made that Dracula's appearing
in the daylight meant that his power was growing to an alarming
measure. That is, most vampires cannot tolerate sunlight (though
it is perhaps unclear whether they would be destroyed by it),
but the most powerful ones can."
Was it daylight when Jonathan Harker saw Dracula in England? The
Harkers had just returned from a funeral -- if it had been an
afternoon service, mightn't they have encountered the count sometime
after sunset? I don't think it is clear that Dracula can move
about during the day -- certainly in Transylvania he was helpless
while Jonathan Harker attacked him in his coffin -- unable to
do anything more than stare malignantly at his assailant (although
he did seem to be conscious of the attack and may have exerted
some sort of mind control over Jonathan Harker to deflect the
blade of the shovel -- but it is the arrival of the Gypsies that
halts the attack).
I think the youthening was meant to demonstrate his growing powers,
but I think that all other instances in the book are consistent
about vampires being all but powerless during the day (not just
in direct sunlight).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Dracula (yeah, the book thing) -- LoriAnn, 03:01:25
11/13/01 Tue
Seems to me that the idea that Dracula became a vampire by renouncing
his faith comes from the movie with Gary Oldman as Dracula, not
the Bram Stoker book.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
My take on the meaning behind
the colors in OMWF -- Nina, 23:46:36 11/11/01
Well it's late but see... I was sleeping and then I was thinking
and then I had to get out of bed and type this! That's what happens
when the world is but a Buffy world! ;)
It all started with Sweet! Why the hell was he wearing a red then
blue outfit? Why so many red props spread throughout the whole
episode? Why did Spike dug back his red shirt? Why the red hydrant?
The red fire trucks? Red, red, red everywhere! So why the blue?
I don't say that my theory is right but I like it and it explains
a lot to me, maybe you'll find it entertaining too?
The episode starts with the cast faces smiling in a full moon.
We have the heroin, the good guy, the entertaining girl, the drama-queen
(Dawn is so serious and angsty), the bad/cool guy and what looks
like a super friendly friend-you-just-love-to have-around! The
name of the show and the actors name are red, as is the title
of the episode when we come back from the first commercial break.
Drings! The red alarm rings in the morning air!
Red, red, red! Red it is. The color of passion. It's the first
Chakra. Connected to the earth. It's the color of the oxygenated
blood. It's an active color, about action and moving along. Feelings.
Opposite to red is blue. Blue is the color of the fifth chakra.
Connected to the throat (no wonder they sing and dance!) It's
the color of the desoxygenated blood. The old blood is pumped
back to the heart to be turned red again.
Sweet impersonates those two colors, those two states. He is a
metaphor for the ciculatory system. Blood is what makes us alive,
different from vampires. While pumping the blood to the heart
we are alive.
During the episode four people from the regular cast wear red:
Anya, Xander, Buffy and Spike. They are the only couples that
may have a chance to work it out.
Anya and Xander sing and dance in their apartment. Anya wears
red while Xander completes her with a blue pajamas. They are a
balanced couple. The blood circulates well. In the finale, Anya
gets to wear a blue dress while Xander wears a Shirt with red
leaves on it. They show us that they can both be the leader and
the follower. They can both be active or passive in the couple
and despite their fears, they are propbably going to make it to
the wedding (don't know any spoilers so if I'm wrong please don't
tell me! ;)
Spike gets his red shirt back. Confidence, passion. He is obviously
set to be a contrast with the SG. The scoobies, minus Willow,
all get to wear blue at one point in the episode thus showing
us that they are a liability to Buffy, quite like blue blood,
toxic. Spike with is red shirt is standing on his own, wearing
the color of fire on his chest. The fire Buffy seeks so desperately.
Buffy is caught in the middle wearing either black and white outfits
or white and grey. In the final scene, Buffy finally opens up
her heart and takes away her black jacket (rejecting the blackness
of her life) and reveals a red shirt on top of blue jeans. She's
coming around. She wants to live. Be blue and red. Have her blood
circulate again in her body to feel alive. She pleads for something
to sing.
In their first exchange, Buffy and Spike are set in contrast.
Buffy is black and white and Spike has a touch of red. He is more
alive than she is at that point. In the end, Buffy is more alive
than he is as he can't be blue. He can't have a circulatory system.
His heart doesn't beat, it doesn't pump blood. So Spike sings
"so one of us is living" reminding her that he is not
alive but that she can be.
When they finally kiss, it's red embracing red. We have a front
shot and Buffy's jeans are cut. All we see is their red tops.
For a short moment they are kind of alike in their "redness".
Buffy can forget their differences, forget what it may mean for
later. Interesting that in the background we see blue and red
props in the alley!
Back to sleep now...... Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> That's simply brilliant, Nina. Thanks for waking up! --
OnM, 00:36:48 11/12/01 Mon
Going to go to sleep myself. Just finished and posted my weekly
ep review, and it's ludicruously late here.
G'nite!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Liked it a lot! -- Cactus Watcher, 04:55:47 11/12/01 Mon
I usually don't go in for this kind of analysis, but Nina is clearly
on to something.
I don't remember exactly what color Dawn's top was during the
ballet, but it seemed neutral (gray maybe?). I do clearly remember
Sweet changing her black pants into a shiny, pale-blue skirt.
Anyone remember if she wears any red in the ep?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I hadn't thought of the... -- Aquitaine, 05:54:49 11/12/01
Mon
red/blue as a metaphor for the circulatory system. I had limited
my analysis to red/fire/passion, blue/water/proverbial wet blanket.
Thanks for showing me an extra dimension..
Aqui.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: My take on the meaning behind the colors in OMWF --
verdantheart, 06:57:43 11/12/01 Mon
And Tara's green bodice? Heart chakra? Symbol of being connected
with the earth/nature?
The episode had me thinking colors too. Thanks for your thoughts!
- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> More thoughts on colors -- Nina, 08:13:22 11/12/01
Mon
I am happy if my late night ramblings don't seem so stupid! I
really don't trust this kind of analyses either usually as it
is too easy to see what we want to see, but I realized this morning
that even Willow is wearing blue at the end of the episode. So
all the scoobies wear blue at one point! Very interesting!
As for Tara, I focused on the color yellow for her. Yellow is
the color of power. Connected to the solar plexus. (3rd chakra).
In her singing number she is wearing a blue and yellow dress (not
unlike Snow White as some people noticed earlier) To feel the
power of the yellow color you really have to wear it as a top
so it can connect you to the solar plexus. (You also have to believe
that colors mean something too, but we can't deny that the way
we dress affects the way we feel!;) Willow wore a yellow top with
a smile in Bargaining reminding us of her ever growing power,
at the end of OMWF Tara is the one wearing the yellow top. She
is strong now because she knows what's been going on. She can
now act upon her knowledge and affirm herself.
The 3 wooden minions and Dawn. Now that's interesting. Dawn is
wearing a blue top and black pants. The wooden minions' hair match
the hair of Spike, Giles and Xander: the three men in her life.
She is not wearing red in the episode, but she did last week when
she wore that red jacket for the last part of the episode. Like
Buffy she is struggling to find a balance. She is struggling to
be free from the men who shelter her, she wants to emancipate
herself. Sweet changes from red to blue to match her own outfit.
He's like the big bad wolf tempting her to come into the woods
while the minions (Spike, Giles and Xander) try to protect her
from a bad fate.
Anyone has other thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Circulatory System in Musicals -- Wisewoman,
16:42:47 11/12/01 Mon
It's been many, many years since I saw the film version of Bob
Fosse's "All That Jazz" but one number that has always
stuck with me is the one where two dancers are duck walking on
point (which has got to be about the most painful thing I can
imagine!) and I seem to recall that they are dressed in white
leotards with red and blue veins running all over them. I think
the number had something to do with Fosse's heart attack, and
that's why they were portraying the circulatory system.
Okay, it's a stretch all right, but I'm trying to get my TTMQ
up there.
;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> The Circulatory System in Musicals --
Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 18:48:48 11/12/01 Mon
Wisewoman:
I concur; that was the final scene that led to the Fosse-avatar's
fatal heart attack. Both dancers were important women in his life;
one was his lover, one his daughter (IIRC). Again, love and circulation.
I still think AtJ was one of the best films of that decade, but
it's been years since I've seen it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Very Cool -- Traveler, 10:01:54 11/12/01 Mon
I noticed the fact that Buffy and Spike were wearing red, but
I didn't notice all the blue. I think you're really on to something
here!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Same here -- Whisper2AScream, 13:38:08 11/12/01 Mon
The blue went right past me. I was thinking more about the similiar
attired couples in the episode. Both Willow and Tara were wearing
medieval-like dresses, Anya and Xander wearing satiny pajamas,
and Spike and Buffy dressing in red and black. Mostly focused
on Spike and Buffy both wearing red and black, with red symbolizing
blood/life/emotions, and black symbolizing death. I was thinking
of it meaning that Buffy and Spike both, are somewhere between
life and death. His existence as a vampire keeps him in limbo
physically, and she is in emotional limbo. They balance each other
becuase she makes him feel like he was alive, and he is urging
her to live and feel again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Another layer -- Rattletrap, 14:51:47 11/12/01 Mon
Interesting analysis, Nina, I'll have to go back and look for
the use of blue, I'd missed it. Red can also symbolize coming
of age and adulthood ("Little Red Riding Hood" being
a classic fairy tale example). That dovetails very well with the
"Oh, Grow Up" theme of this season. It is, I think,
significant that Dawn wears a red jacket at the end of "All
the Way," becuase that episode was sort of her Little Red
Riding Hood, initiation into adulthood episode for this season.
The red in this episode is a bit less clear cut, but it isn't
too much of a stretch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Woman's Reach should Exceed
her Grasp, or what's a Heaven for? - thoughts on *Once More WF*
-- OnM, 00:21:34 11/12/01 Mon
*******
As I am certain that you will have recognized, the title I chose
for the review this week is the famous quote by Robert Browning,
just with the gender changed in keeping with the gender of our
heroine. Like many famous quotes, we know the meaning it implies
even if the wording itself is a bit strange in the literal sense.
In a literal interpretation, if you can reach something, it seems
reasonable that you could grasp it, right? Browning knows this,
yet he doesn't say 'The ability of a person to strive for something,
be it a goal to be achieved or a material object of some variety,
does not guarantee, should they actually obtain the thing striven
for, that doing so will produce the intended results or satisfaction
desired.'
First off, the thing would be too damn long, which makes it hard
to remember. What good is wisdom if no one can remember it? I
mean, that's a whole lotta commas, ya know? Heaven knows I love
words, but the true art of wordsmithing often lies in taking a
complex concept and distilling it down to some pithy, but equally
accurate derivative. Such is the reason reason why we read '(wo)man...reach...grasp...heaven'
and then go 'hummmm...' after we think about it for a few introspective
moments.
As is usually the case, this week's episode brings forth yet another
dazed yet wondrous feeling of 'hummm...' from this humble viewer.
We are now seven episodes out, every single one of them has been
excellent to amazing (which I think is unprecedented so far),
and as we enter the point of being one-third of the way through
the season, there are no signs of the brilliance fading away.
It's a good thing that I've collected so many words over the years,
or else I might be at a loss for them!
This is really the kind of project that should be interesting
in a quirky sort of way at best, and (far more likely) a miserable,
misguided flop at worst. Even given the past track record of Joss
and the other creative individuals among cast and crew, this had
to be a daunting attempt. The last successful melding of the horror/fantasy
genre with a musical production that I can recall would have to
be The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and that was an exercise in
pure camp, and intended as such. While Joss could certainly have
gone this route, it would have been rather jarring considering
what has come before in terms of the story line and character
development. Not to mention, it would have been much too uncompressed
a phrasing for the Browning of the Buffyverse.
Multiple layers of meaning have become a standard modus operandi
for BtVS, but none of them are sacrificed for the sake of adding
the musical elements of style. Indeed, Joss uses the singing and
dancing to advance the plot, rather than deflect or distract from
it, and we are treated to a variety of personal revelations from
nearly all the characters in turn. The surfacing of these previously
buried secrets have not only an immediate effect on the proceedings
in this episode, but place in motion events for at least several
shows to come, perhaps even the entire rest of the season. I'll
go over some of the details about what I liked the most in each
of the series of songs/revelations in just a bit, but first I
want to make some general comments about the music and dance scenes
overall.
I really am at a loss to figure how one individual can bear so
many talents. According to the information I have at hand, Joss
was not only responsible for the writing of the songs, but also
composing the music. To what degree he worked with Christophe
Beck on the actual arrangements I have no idea, but the songs
are all eminently tuneful and or clever in composition, and show
a substantial understanding of how to tailor a given musical style
to the actors/characters who must perform it. While there is no
idication Joss also set out the choreography, it too is simply
inspired, and equally synchronous with the character's established
personality. This is a musical that even people who don't particularly
like musicals should be able to enjoy, ironically the only reason
they may not is that a non-regular viewer would not be able to
follow the multiple subtexts without some extensive explanation.
I have come to admire, though, that the show's creators refuse
to cater to the possibility of more widespread viewership if it
is at the expense of the core audience, who would quickly tire
of having excessive repetition of background material constantly
injected into the proceedings and slowing things down.
Speaking of garnering new viewers, I would like to state that
UPN is apparently taking their commitment to the series very seriously,
and that this is something we need to appreciate, despite the
horrendous frequency of commercials within the program itself
and the occasional preemption that occurs in order to satisfy
affiliate commitments to regional sports programming (such as
happened in my case just this past week, and BTW the reason for
this review being so late to post). Considering the bundle of
money UPN put up to spirit the show away from its former home
at the WB, they have obviously been giving Joss & Co. a pretty
free reign as to both content and intent. The fact that Once More
with Feeling was allowed to run the oddball eight minutes over
the hour, coupled with the numerous examples of hands-off behavior
from the standards and practices department despite potentially
controversial content speaks well of the network.
Now, on to some specifics, which in keeping with the harmonic
congruency of the show (I have no idea what that means, but it
sounds good ;) will be outlined in song order.
Nota bene: Despite my reputation of being highly knowledgeable
re all things cinematic, I want to point out (as I have in the
past, but for benefit of newer ATPo boarders, will do so again
here) that unfortunately I do not possess an encyclopedic memory
of the domain! Sometimes, as is the case here, I know that a reference
is being made to either a particular style of moviemaking/theatricality
or to a specific title, often a 'classic' film in the traditional
sense of the word, not the much looser one I use in my weekly
movie column. I may not, however, be able to place the specific
source. Please keep this in mind as you read some of my comments
where I seem to be evasive in terms of mentioning specifics, and
know that one of the main sources for my future enlightenment
in these matters is what I learn from you folks here at the board.
New Intro
One of several references to a more innocent day and age, the
normal, high intensity opening montage has been replaced with
a cheerfully cheesy series of head and shoulder shots in a circle
that is also the moon, complemented by equally funky lettering
introducing the actors. The innocence of the overall graphic design
is undercut by the fact that the moon represents not just the
presence of nightfall, and so the portents of danger in the Buffyverse
that we are all familiar with, but also is the realverse cause
of the tides and a symbolic object in Wicca. Later in the episode,
Tara makes a metaphorical connection between herself, Willow,
the tides, and sexuality that somehow connects with a sense of
inevitability for the events that follow. Thus, before the very
first commercial break, we have homage, metaphor, irony and foreshadowing
all crammed into a 30 second series of images. One parting shot
for all my fellow obsessives out there-- all of the characters
except Dawn are smiling happily during this sequence.
Overture
This is the 'wake up' sequence, which starts with Buffy reaching
out to silence and then stare enigmatically at a very old-fashioned
(and red painted) alarm clock. We then cut to a mostly continuous
camera shot of the rest of the household rising and doing typical
morning things, all looking fairly happy and content as they do
so. The final part of the shot pans back to look through the bedroom
doorway at Buffy, who is still in bed, and still holding and staring
at the alarm clock, or else has fallen back asleep. The music
score playing over this scene is happy and sweet and upbeat, almost
Disney-ish, but after a cut to the gang hanging out in The Magic
Box, the theme darkens just a bit. Buffy is sketching something
in a tablet, but we can't really tell what. Giles walks over,
carrying some variety of battle axe, and he and Buffy then disappear
into the training room. The very next cut takes us to Buffy in
the graveyard, apparently starting her nightly patrol. I was at
a bit of a loss as to why these abrupt temporal transitions were
happening so early on in the show, but my best guess at present
is that it means to represent that from Buffy's perspective, morning,
afternoon and evening are all running together, and each day has
become one and the same. Tidal motion and inexorability again?
Going Through The Motions
This is a masterful mix of all the traditional BtVS stylistic
elements, all done in exquisite fashion with the added format
of the musical actually enhancing it. Humor, wordplay, the ever-present
darker undertones and dazzling camerawork and editing suggest
that this is what Walt Disney might have come up with after spending
a night at the Bates Motel. I especially loved when we get to
see that the whole point of tonight's slayage is to free a handsome
young man who was tied to a tree, apparently by the demons d'jour.
Buffy dispassionately cuts the ropes securing him and then strides
off without looking back, ignoring his obviously earnest (and
probably carnal) desires to repay her for her valor.
I've Got a Theory and I am Under Your Spell
We're back in The Magic Box once more, it's the next day. Buffy
discovers that it isn't only her who is experiencing these bizarre
bursts of musical possession, but the other Scoobies and even
the normal denizens of Sunnydale. (Dave Fury does a short, but
hilarious bit singing about the dry cleaners 'getting the mustard
out'). The gang starts to research the cause, leading to another
wacky number involving Anya's bunnyphobia. Yeah, why do they need
all those carrots? Good singing and dancing work on Emma Caulfield's
part, although she's even better later on in her duet with Nick
Brendon.
Some hours of research time apparently passes, and Willow and
Tara hatch a rather transparent plan to get away from the books
and go out into what seems to be an almost impossibly sunny, glorious
autumn day, even for southern CA. Some passing men stare longingly
at Tara, who seems surprised at the attention, and Willow comments
about it, trying to impress on Tara just how 'hot' she is. This
conversation leads to one of the biggest and most pleasant surprises
of the evening, which was getting to hear what an absolutely wonderful
voice Amber Benson has. The love song she sings is one of the
most beautiful compositions of the group, and leads to some equally
delightful dance moves. The dance sequence leads both literally
and metaphorically to a romantic encounter beween the two women
that is at once funny, sweet and audacious both visually and lyrically.
I also liked how they arranged the set so that a continuous camera
move with a very carefully chosen angle and pan could record the
transition from outdoors to the bedroom rather than use a cut,
adding greatly to the 'magical' quality of the scene. This whole
sequence also shows how much Tara differs from Willow on what
magic means to each of them, since Willow doesn't get an equally
uplifting (pun intended) solo musical number to perform, I noticed.
I'll Never Tell
Another high-highlight, with EC doing great moves and decent vocals,
and NB overcoming his obvious weakness as a singer by really selling
his character's emotional depths, much harder to do in a lighthearted
scene such as this than during the more dramatic moments of the
show. Great costume choices, 30's-ish or 40's-ish it looked to
me, but struck exactly the right tone. I also liked the newspaper
with the 'Monsters Certainly Not Responsible' sub-headline, and
the contrast between their ebullient laughing at the end of the
'number' and the apparently crankier mood they exhibited later
on when talking to Giles.
No Parking
Marti Noxon gets her bit. Anyone else think that besides these
guys getting to do a cameo, the banality of their concerns contrasts
with the seriousness of what is actually going on 'behind the
scenes' with the main characters?
Rest In Peace
Spike telling us what we already knew, I liked the camera angle
and shot framing when he gets down on his knee ('You have a willing
slave') and makes it clear what the real power relationship between
the two of them is. The parting shot where Buffy runs away and
Spike peeps over the top of the grave and says 'You're not staying,
then?' was funny and touching, keeping up the 'more with less'
writing style I spoke of earlier.
Dawn's Lament, Sweet's Lair & Sweet's Song
I should be used to this kind of quality work from Tractenberg
by now, but it was still surprising to see her so perfectly balance
her budding sensual nature with the more awkward innocence of
her actual chronological age. I have come to accept that she could
easily move into SMG's place as the series lead if Gellar ever
decides to leave. Beautiful dance moves and choreography, again
I know there is some kind of movie reference here, not sure what,
but I've seen it before.
Standing in the Way & Wish I Could Stay
This eventual leave-taking by Giles is going to bring some serious
heartache, and this sequence really drives that home. Nice vocal
work by ASH, some equally athletic/graceful moves by SMG and/or
her stunt double. Liked Buffy making Giles' point at the end of
his song by asking 'Did you just say something?'
One of the more shocking scenes comes next when Tara finds out
that Willow has cast the memory-changing spell on her, and she
is so distraught that she suggests it could lead to their breakup.
I personally don't think this will happen in the long run, but
it could make for some substantial pathos in the near future.
(I expect that this topic will be a major part of next week's
show). Again, the pervasive sense that what transpires is all
inevitable underlies the scene, and there is the painful irony
of Tara realizing her joyful words sung previously to Willow were
every bit as literal as they were metaphorical. Wonderful duet
between ASH and AB, the lyrical interplay perfectly timed and
counterpointed.
Walk through the Fire, Life's A Show, Sweet's Song Reprise
'You are filled with love. Your love is brighter than the fire',
quoth the spirit guide to Buffy. Fire seems to be an increasingly
utilized metaphor this season. A few seasons back, we had 'Fire
bad, tree pretty' when Buffy 'graduated' from high school (after
blowing it up, of course). Then in Restless, Buffy remarks rather
insistently to the First Slayer that 'I'm gonna be a fireman when
the floods roll back'. In The Gift, she jumps into a mystical
fire and dies, saving the world and her sister, the two being
one and the same from her perspective. When Willow calls her forth
from the grave, she emerges into a world that has fires seemingly
burning all around her. As she begins to re-adapt to the world
after her rebirth, she makes a witty comment that reverses the
earlier usage of her phrase, when she suggests burning down the
house to collect the insurance, and states 'besides, Fire Pretty!'
Now, she sings to us that the fire 'freezes' her, a frightening
metaphor for emotional death, but also simultaneously that she
will 'walk through' it, and the others in the SG pick up this
refrain. This yin/yang motif seems to denote that Buffy is perched
on a knife edge of possibility, and that she will have to jump,
but to which side? That of despair, or of accepting the challenge
to move on and try to regain some passion for living?
In Fool for Love, Spike tries to convince Buffy that all Slayers
have a death wish, that it comes with the territory of their art,
which in it's simplest form is the making of death. I believe
that the incredible event that happens at the end of that pivotal
episode is only possible because Spike somehow looks into Buffy's
soul and somehow realizes that she is different, and doesn't have
this characteristic. If you accept that Buffy is a messianic figure
(and nothing to date has really contradicted this possibility),
then Spike's 'change of heart' has occurred because of some inherent
spiritual grace that Buffy possesses, and that he recognizes,
even if not consciously.
The tables are now turned, and Buffy, pulled from what she sincerely
believes was 'heaven', has succumbed to a death wish, although
she has kept this secret from her friends for fear of it causing
them pain. Spike's evaluation of her reason for telling him and
him alone appears pretty close to the mark, but despite his feelings
of anger at being held at an emotional distance by the woman he
loves, he cannot allow himself to abandon her. 'I'll save her,
then I'll kill her!'-- yeah, not bloody likely. It is perfectly
resonant and appropriate that like Buffy, who having visited heaven
longs for death, Spike, having seen a glimpse of that heavenly
perfection somewhere in Buffy's soul, will do anything to get
it back and so have her be 'whole' again. The Buffybot proved
to him that only the real thing will do, and that means the original,
'living' Buffy, not the 'dead' one that he now sees before him.
So, the vampire who once only wished for 'one good day' on the
occasion of the realization of the Slayer's death wish, the one
who told her that 'everything between them is just a dance', makes
up for all his past failures to 'save' her-- the first time on
the tower, and the 143 times in his dreams for the months thereafter--
and balances the scale when he stops her from dancing.
Buffy: Don't give me songs. Give me something to sing about
Spike: Life's not a song. Life isn't bliss. Life is just this.
It's living.
It slowly begins to sink in. Spike drives the point home.
You have to go on living So that one of us is living
What more is there to say? A great part of the elegance of this
mythology is that it leaves for the viewer to decide whether all
that has happened over the past several years is all just chance,
or all predestination, or possibly some combination of the above.
You could ask the same of the kiss that ends the show. One interesting
item is that in the script for the show, Spike is said to 'sweep
Buffy up in a passionate kiss', but in the actual broadcast, it
clearly appears to me that Buffy initiates the kiss. I might be
nitpicking here, but I think the meaning of the scene changes
substantially depending on this subtle distinction, so I would
be curious to hear what others think about this.
Where Do We Go From Here
Where indeed? Not that I care, I'm going wherever the writers
take me, and thanks to my local UPN affiliate and their hockey-loving
viewers, I now only have to wait another two days to get back
on board the mystery train that is the Jossverse.
So if you reach for heaven, and manage to actually grasp it, is
it better to let it go?
Heaven only knows...
*******
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> ***Spoilers*** in the above, of course -- OnM, 00:27:57
11/12/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> It sure pays to be patient.........load the printers.......:):)
-- Rufus, 01:07:54 11/12/01 Mon
You are right when it comes to the kiss at the end. I noticed
that Buffy was the one that moved in, not Spike, contrary to what
the script says. I wonder if Buffy is finally making that choice
to live her life instead of the tedious sleep walk since her rebirth.
Time is what matters here. Buffy has come from a place where time
has no meaning, no real importance except that Buffy did note
that she thought she had been in heaven longer than the gang experienced
her death. Buffy is frozen, stuck in a loop where she mechanically
moves through a life that no longer has the same meaning it once
had. I'd consider that a good case of despair. Buffy just doesn't
see an improvement from her pain of losing her place in heaven.
Spike was right, the only way to get over that pain is to actually
live again. Reconnect with her friends and family and actually
care about living again. I do think that Buffy is in a state where
she is confused about how to interact in real time. She has been
where she felt only happiness and love, only to be returned to
this painful life that is unpredictable and her only place is
to be a glorified body guard for humanity. I noted that when the
gang asked about Dawn getting to school alright, Buffy didn't
seem to know or care much about the sister she was willing to
die for. Dawns stealing has escalated to compensate for feeling
unloved. Buffy has to stop being self involved and reach out to
the friends and family that are there ready for her to embrace
them again. Buffy is here and now and she has to start living
to fully be in this reality, pain and all.
I waited for your post....it is great .....thanks..as usual...:):)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Well worth the wait. -- Cactus Watcher, 05:31:16 11/12/01
Mon
Re No Parking. I agree about the banality of the 'outer world'
contrasting with the seriousness of what's happening to the Scoobies.
This is emphasized by that mainstay of both grade A and grade
B movie musicals up through the early 50's, the dancing synchronized
broom pushers. (The funny aspect of it was that none of the many
folks passing by seems to notice.) We do have the counter evidence
of the fellow dancing himself to blazes, but we don't know what
his problem was. Fear of male-pattern baldness maybe? ;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Who started it? - Re: A Woman's Reach should Exceed ...
-- verdantheart, 08:11:44 11/12/01 Mon
Let me first add my thanks for your analysis! Illuminating as
always!
Who initiated the kiss, indeed? As you mentioned, the script indicates
that Spike sweeps Buffy into a kiss. Yet, I as you, had the distinct
impression that it was Buffy who initiated the kiss upon watching
the episode. (In fact, I almost started a thread on that subject.
What stopped me was that I didn't have - alas, darn KPNZ - a tape
to take another look at it.) The script also has "a kiss
unknown" whereas on the broadcast, if I remember correctly,
you can clearly hear "a kiss, God knows" in the "Where
Do We Go From Here" number.
They both lean in toward each other, yet I think it is apt that
Buffy initiate the kiss, considering the level of deference Spike
has shown Buffy (as her "willing slave" how could he
presume ...?). In any case, Buffy eagerly responds in kind.
So what is the significance of this? Is it simply a matter of
Buffy being drawn to yet another fire, that of Spike's passion?
She wants to feel. She's reaching out desperately to Spike for
that sensation. (Note that she didn't even consider the handsome
victim as a possible source of satisfaction.)
Any other opinions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Just shows, you can't always trust the script -- Cactus
Watcher, 09:33:03 11/12/01 Mon
Last moment changes do happen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Especially since the REAL script hasn't been
put up yet -- Tanker, 14:10:20 11/12/01 Mon
The script that is on Psyche's site is a very slickly-done transcript.
It has some errors. This has been confirmed by Rayne, who's seen
the real deal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Buffy and emotions -- Nina, 09:46:43 11/12/01 Mon
I was waiting patiently for you review OnM and yes it was worth
the wait! Thanks! I was about to start yet another thread, but
I can easily put my thoughts here, I think they'll fit well!
The kiss. I was a little puzzled when Masquerade said that Spike
sweeped Buffy in his arms at the end of her OMWF's analysis. But
I know you're more of a B/A fan Masq, so I didn't bother to comment
;) Still I just had to watch the scene again to make sure I saw
what I saw and yes Buffy initiates the kiss. Spike is not hard
to convince and reciprocates right away, but she is clearly making
the move.
About Dawn... Rufus you brought a very interesting point. Dawn
really is stealing to get attention. It's even more evident when
Dawn steals something when no one is impressed that she sung in
math class. Her life is too ordinary and no one cares anymore.
She's been used to be overcared for and now she is left abandonned
by Buffy and Spike. I am not sure I read that on this board but
I read somewhere that people didn't understand why Spike didn't
care much for Dawn in "All the Way". The way I see it
is that Buffy is Spike's moral compass. She is his conscience
for the moment. Now that Buffy isn't caring about Dawn as much
as she used too, Spike follows her. Dawn has no one to look out
for her but the wiccas. No wonder she was not feeling well about
their fight. They are symbolyzing her parents now (even sleeeping
in her mother's bed)
To come back to Buffy I love how we get to see her emotions a
lot more this year, even though everybody keeps saying that she
has none (even herself!) For someone who doesn't feel a thing
we never saw her having so many facial expressions with Spike
in the past. Since she came back, she smiled with him, laughed
at his joke, got angry, teased him like a friend. She used to
be stoned face in his presence, we could never know what she was
feelings. In OMWF there are so many expressions on her face that
it breaks the record just there.
If you allow me I'll just take a little time to show you what
I mean by analysing the crypt scene. OnM you pointed out that
the angle was very interesting when Spike sings "you know
you have a willing slave" and this is true, my favorite angle
in this scene though is the first shot when Buffy enters the crypt.
The angle is all wonky and it allows us to see both Buffy and
Spike at the same time. The shot is short and almost doesn't allow
us to see that Buffy is wearing a skirt! They meet on neutral
ground. Spike now lives downstairs (the upper level is clearly
less used nowadays and the red colors are all downstairs) Since
Buffy came back from the dead they mostly meet on neutral ground.
Once Spike took her down with him in his lair and twice Spike
came inside Buffy's house but otherwise if they want to meet they
have to meet in the middle. This emphazises that they don't share
the same world. Spike has to climb the stairs and Buffy has to
come down to the cemetery.
Buffy said to Giles that she would find information about the
dancing and singing extravaganzas by asking questions in the demon
haunts. It was clearly an excuse to visit Spike. A weasel date.
From memory I can't even remember the last time she wore a skirt
in front of Spike. And I am not talking Buffybot here. Though
one could argue that there are similarities in their outfits.
Buffy is wearing a short leather black jacket like the bot, a
feminine top and a skirt (completed with boots!). Buffy doesn't
have to say a word and we already know that the outfit is crying
out "date".
Buffy's facade is slowly melting away. She used to punch Spike
to get rid of what she might have been feeling, now she finds
out reasons to come to visit him. She slips away twice in his
presence. Once by misinterpreting Spike's words in "All the
way" and then in OMWF when she is unable to refrain her mouth
from saying "What else would I pump you for". Buffy
who used to be in control in front of Spike doesn't know how to
react anymore.
In the crypt scene something else new happens. For the first time
she asks him "what's up?" clearly showing concern about
him. Her talking buddy is in a bad mood and she wants to know
why. Spike recalls her that they are not talking buddies (as she
told him in "Crush") and he won't bore her with the
small talk. Buffy insists and Spike is forced into singing his
heart to her.
I know that it is discussed a lot whether Buffy is using Spike
or not. Personally, I can't bring myself to believe that she is
using him. Not because I want to believe it, but because the past
confirms it. Buffy is acting unconsciously with Spike and obviously
doesn't know what it all may mean to him. Buffy is afraid. She's
been abandoned by all the men in her life. She's in a fragile
state of mind since she returned from the dead. She is making
baby steps. She's taming Spike like the little Prince tamed the
fox. One step everyday. In "Afterlife" she comes and
visits him, but is stoned face and lets him do all the talk, in
"Flooded" he's the one coming to see her, after that
she is slowly looking for him, going to his lair dowsnstairs to
share a drink (with many "s" here!) They meet on neutral
ground again in the magic shop, they patrol together, she compliments
him on his fighting skills. It doesn't seem much, but for Buffy
it's a lot. She's allowing herself to feel again and she is protecting
herself against more hurt.
So when Spike is singing that he wants her to leave him in peace
she is hurt beyond belief. She has been abandoned again! She's
rejected. The only person she could talk to doesn't want her in
his life anymore. If Buffy had a better knack for communication
she would probably be in a better place both mentally and emotionaly,
but she does't talk much about how she feels. She saves Spike
from his demon by touching his shoulder, they fall in the grave
and then as the tension is too strong she flees the scene like
a school girl, like Dawn flew away from her vamp boyfriend in
"All the way". That's not the slayer who's running away,
it's the woman, hurt in her pride and her feelings. And I just
love the angle we have on Buffy's legs as she is leaving, fully
showing her vulnerability by revealing her skirt.
No wonder she is so hard with Spike when he comes to the magic
shop. Buffy was making a step towards him and in her view he shot
her out. When he finally saves her she can let her heart pours
towars him again. The most vulnerable look I have ever seen on
Buffy's face while sharing a scene with Spike happens right when
she follows him outside the Bronze, right after she says "hey".
"It's not real" can be interpreted in many ways, but
I personaly feel that Buffy is feeling so much vulnerable now
that she can't hide from herself anymore. It can't be real because
in her line of thoughts she can't be with a souless demon, she
can't let herself feel anything for him and yet she does. So she
protects herself again. She prepares herself for hurt. "It
will probably hurt me to love him, but it doesn't matter cause
it's not real. I will wake up tomorrow and nothing will have happened.
He will be the souless demon again and I'll be Buffy, the vampire
slayer."
Prepare yourself for a lot of denial. No spoilers here. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Sheesh, people! ;-) -- Solitude1056, 11:34:53
11/12/01 Mon
OnM & Nina: if you hear strange sounds coming from your monitor,
that's just me bowing to your posts on my screen and humming in
a monotone...
"we are not worthy... we are not worthy..."
as always, some major food for thought in this thread, and very
well-put! ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> More food for thoughts -- Nina, 12:03:10
11/12/01 Mon
"OnM & Nina: if you hear strange sounds coming from your
monitor, that's just me bowing to your posts on my screen and
humming in a monotone..."
Oh "that's what it's all about?" I was wondering! ;)
Don't go hiding anywhere your posts are so well thought up that
I am the one bowing when I read you! :) Should we receive honor
or something? ;)
More food for thoughts:
Speaking about metaphors, we have Anya wearing a butterfly on
her shirt in the magic box scene (in the beginning). Anya is growing
fast and has left the caterpillar world. She's becoming a full
human. She has flaws, but she truly has come along fine. Love
the butterfly metaphor!
At the end after Spike sings: "So one of us is living",
we have a shot of the wall behind them. On Spike's side we see
an angel and on Buffy's side a girly boxing girl. If my memory
serves right the angel is blue and the girl wears red boxing gloves
(again with the red and blue metaphor!). The angel associated
to Spike is quite ironic!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> the boxer and the angel -- Kerri,
12:30:26 11/12/01 Mon
"At the end after Spike sings: "So one of us is living",
we have a shot of the wall behind them. On Spike's side we see
an angel and on Buffy's side a girly boxing girl. If my memory
serves right the angel is blue and the girl wears red boxing gloves
(again with the red and blue metaphor!). The angel associated
to Spike is quite ironic!!!"
I didn't notice this Nina, I'll have to go back and look ,but
it seems to me that this is how they both view Buffy. To Spike
she is an angel. He can see in her what others can't (OnM mentioned
Spike seeing into the bit of heaven in buffy's soul). Buffy has
returned to believing she is only here to be the warrior. Time
will show if buffy can come to understand that her role is in
fact far more like that of an angel than a warrior.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Very Interesting point Kerri!
-- Nina, 13:48:59 11/12/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: More food for thoughts -- gds,
14:44:23 11/12/01 Mon
Not being into clothes, I gave no thought to her butterfly, but
the metaphor is apt. She was the first to disagree with Giles
about going Buffy to save Dawn. She was also quick to support
Giles when he changed his mind, in fact she was right behind Xander.
Instead of being dragged along to help someone else, she was active
initiating this support.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> S-1056 is right -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym,
18:40:24 11/12/01 Mon
Solitude stands correctly; very good and insightful points from
both OnM and Nina.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Suzanne Vega fan, Fred?... :) --
OnM, 21:48:40 11/12/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Nothing wrong with denial... -- Monique (having
a BuffyBot moment), 11:58:59 11/12/01 Mon
... because we know that in the end she won´t be able to
resist his sinister atraction ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Nothing wrong with denial... -- Kimberly,
12:30:16 11/12/01 Mon
"because we know that in the end she won´t be able
to resist his sinister atraction ;)"
ROFLMAO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Nothing wrong with temporary denial...
-- Millan, 14:26:48 11/12/01 Mon
"... because we know that in the end she won´t be able
to resist his sinister atraction ;)"
...well, who could!?
/Millan
"I can lay my body down But I can't find my sweet release."
- Spike, Once More, With Feeling
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Nothing wrong with temporary
denial... -- purplegrrl, 12:57:52 11/13/01 Tue
Not even my friend who is not a regular Buffy viewer -- after
the musical episode she called me and claimed that Spike was a
hottie. To which my response was "Well, duh."
;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> *Her life is too ordinary and no one cares anymore*
-- OnM, 22:04:59 11/12/01 Mon
Wow, lots of great stuff there, Nina, but your comment on Dawn
and what she perceives as her relationship to those closest to
her is very striking, I admit I hadn't thought of it that way,
but it makes perfect sense.
That also contrasts with the 'mundane, ordinary' people who were
singing about mundane, ordinary things like mustard stains and
parking tickets. It's all a matter of perception, Dawn is far
more involved in serious matters than she thinks, but relative
to the rest of the Scoobies, she feels left out and unimportant.
Buffy's comment, 'Dawn's in trouble? Must be Tuesday...' is funny
to us, but it would be extremely hurtful for Dawn to hear it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Spike sweeps Buffy--I took it out of the shooting
script -- Masquerade, 13:31:18 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Remember, it wasn't the shooting script -- just a
well done transcript. -- rowan, 22:01:51 11/12/01 Mon
It seemed to me that Spike leaned forward receptively and then
Buffy -- wham! laid one on him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Oh ... it was a link off the scripts page when
I got it ... it moved! -- verdantheart, 06:08:38 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: movie reference (Dawn)? -- Malandanza, 08:49:18 11/12/01
Mon
Beautiful dance moves and choreography, again I know there is
some kind of movie reference here, not sure what, but I've seen
it before.
Labrynth? The David Bowie coming of age movie where he played
the goblin king? Or that Tom Cruise movie, Legend? One of them
(or maybe both) has dancing scenes -- it's been so long I can't
remember which one I'm thinking of (maybe a mixture of them).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: movie reference (Dawn)? -- WW, 12:26:14 11/12/01
Mon
I'm thinking it was something much earlier, maybe from the 50's?
Something to do with the way Dawn was dressed in capri length
tights and ballerina flats reminded me of either Audrey Hepburn
or Leslie Caron. Was there a dance number like that in Funny Face?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> What about "Lily" -- Nina, 13:54:26
11/12/01 Mon
I'm thinking "Lily" with Leslie Caron. At the end of
the movie she gets to dance with the four puppets (that are all
human size for the purpose of the dance). The puppet faces of
the minions and the quality of the dancing really makes me think
of "Lily"... "A song of love is a sad song.. Hi
Lily Hi Lily Hi-Lo"....I loved that movie so much as a little
girl!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> I was thinking the same thing plus...
-- A8, 17:56:51 11/12/01 Mon
...also kind of reminded me of the dream sequence in "Oklahoma"
and it's been a while, but I think there was something similarly
dark in "Carousel." Additionally the Xander and Anya
number was reminiscent of Dick Van Dyke and Janet Leigh in the
'Put On A Happy Face' and 'Rosie' numbers in "Bye Bye Birdie."
And of course, as someone may have mentioned, the 'Walk Through
the Fire' sequence was very "West Side Story" 'Tonight,
Tonight.'
While I'm at it, there was a great Kubrickian tracking shot in
'Under Your Spell.' The screen wipes, superimposed shots, floating
dolly shots, and dramatic use of depth of field kept the ep in
constant motion and presented as close to a true cinematic experience
as you're ever going to find on a television broadcast. Yes, I
gush. Joss pulled out all the stops, but, and maybe I'm blinded
by my admiration for the artistry of BtVS in general, none of
the film techniques and/or homages employed seemed at all contrived.
My main gripe is that I'm going to wear out my tape YEARS before
we ever get a DVD or CD sountrack album. Those suits and business
toadies are worse than any Queller demon when it comes to stifling
the madness we love and have come to recognize as art.
A8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> don't fret, soundtrack available
soon -- purplegrrl, 13:07:09 11/13/01 Tue
Hey, don't get your Buffy tapes in a bunch. I read (in Entertainment
Weekly if memory serves) that the Joss will be releasing the soundtrack
to "Once More with Feeling" soon. (Sorry, can't remember
if they said a time frame.)
Hope this helps!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: don't fret, soundtrack
available soon -- Kimberly, 13:32:03 11/13/01 Tue
Can't wait. My six-year-old refers to the audio tape Edward made
for him as the "Buffy Sing-a-Long". And wants it to
listen to as he goes to sleep. (Two were made.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> From the stage version, Carnival... --
rowan, 21:59:18 11/12/01 Mon
Which has alot of parallels to the Spike/Buffy situation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Someone else mentioned Hepburn in one of the
mag/newspaper reviews I saw. -- OnM, 21:52:13 11/12/01 Mon
Perhaps it wasn't just a single reference, but a blend of a number
of them.
Even more insidious!
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: movie reference (Dawn)? -- Edward, 14:39:09 11/12/01
Mon
It looked like a scene from West Side Story to me. A combination
of several of the scenes actually.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> External link: Can Fantasy Take Flight? (slightly OT) --
Jules, 14:21:28 11/12/01 Mon
Your comment the mythology of BtVS reminded me of an article I
read online recently. You can find it at the link below:
http://www.calendarlive.com/top/1,1419,L-LATimes-Sneaks-X!ArticleDetail-46378,00.html
The article primarily deals with the upcoming movie versions of
"Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter", and
as such is mostly off-topic. But there's an interesting section
in the middle on the role of fantasy/mythology in literature and
why they've traditionally been avoided by movie producers.
I was most struck by the following statement:
"Back in 1977, when 'Star Wars' came out, there was a huge
and immediate following," says Ted Sherman, an English professor
at Middle Tennessee University and editor of Mythlore, a journal
put out by the Mythopoeic Society. "Everyone wondered what
the draw was, and many people missed the point-it wasn't the technology,
it was fantasy. That is what moves people. The classic confrontation
of good and evil. It is the ultimate theme of literature and captured
best in fantasy."
To move further off-topic, this inspired a day-long distraction
yesterday while I tried to figure out what would happen if ME
were to make a lawyer drama. Or a show about an ER. Or a cop show.
I have no doubt it would be funny and moving and well worth watching.
But would it resonate the way "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"
does? Is it possible for a show to fill the role of modern myth
without having something slightly fantastic about it?
But what really distracted me was trying to find a realverse equivalent
for the relationship between a recently resurrected Slayer and
her neutered vampire ex-mortal enemy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> that opening sequence -- anom, 21:08:26 11/12/01 Mon
Can I really be the only one who thought Honeymooners?
OK, the 2 shows have nothing in common (unless you equate Xander
w/Norton...nahhh), & the stars' faces weren't actually in the
moon (I think, were they shown at all?), but that big moon, & the
style of the script for the names...I thought Honeymooners! Maybe
crossed w/Bewitched, esp. for the music style.
So much more in OnM's post to respond to, but I'm reeaallly trying
not to stay up too late for once.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I thought it was Peyton Place. -- rowan, 22:00:23
11/12/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Woman's Reach should Exceed her Grasp, or what's a
Heaven for? - thoughts on *Once More WF* -- dream of the consortium,
09:59:39 11/13/01 Tue
Hmm.... I hate to be picky about such a wonderful and insightful
post, but I have a bee in my bonnet about "poetic accuracy"
- which is to say, I believe that the best poetry is effective
because it is accurate both literally and metaphorically. So,
a man's reach should exceed his grasp. And it does - by about
a third of a finger. If you have ever tried to grab, say, a book
from the top of a tall bookshelf, and been able to touch it, but
not actually grasp it, you'll know the difference. To have something
within your grasp is to have it just an inch or so closer than
within your reach. Thanks for a great post.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Hey, be picky! We're a picky bunch, surely you've
grasped that by now! ... ;) -- OnM, 20:47:08 11/13/01 Tue
Thanks!
You're right, of course. Poetic license with the poet?
Or you could just get a ladder.
;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Woman's Reach should Exceed her Grasp, or what's a
Heaven for? - thoughts on *Once More WF* -- purplegrrl, 13:18:33
11/13/01 Tue
Fabulous post, OnM!!
Haven't been thinking very many deep thoughts lately. (My "deep"
thoughts have been focusing on "will I have enought money
to pay the rent, car, electricity, food, etc. this month?")
So, I am happy to read yours.
Need to view the episode again to see if I can come up with any
intellectually stimulating comments.
(BTW, "Once More with Feeling" is being repeated Friday,
Nov. 16 at 7 pm (Central time).)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible influences on 'Buffy'
tv series -- Yellowork, 06:50:18 11/12/01 Mon
Is there anyone on the board who recalls UK CBBC productions of
the early 1990s? There was some dark (and good) stuff coming out
at the time which has a wide appeal, like 'Buffy' in some respects
and I can't help wondering whether any of the production team
are aware of these. The first thing that springs to mind is 'Dark
Season'by Russell T. Davies, a six-part science fiction series
from '91, which features a team of three 'outsider' teenagers
which makes you want to scream, 'Scooby Gang'. The leader of the
gang is a teenage girl called Marcie (Out of Sight, Out of Mind?)
who is witty and seems to be more able than her exterior would
imply. She does not possess any supernatural abilities, but her
sudden insights have led fans to think of her as a 'teenage time
lord'. If this makes no sense to you, think of Agent Mulder's
amazing leaps of logic in 'X Files'!!!
'Dark Season' is based around an educational establishment, like
Sunnydale High, and in Episode 5 it is revealed that the school
is built on top of a big problem! What is supposed to be a mythic
Celtic monster, or an archeological dig, turns out to be a huge
cybernetic defence computer (Behemoth). In the final episode,
the school becomes the site of a struggle between the forces of
good and evil and part of the building is destroyed by the Behemoth
in the process (as in 'Graduation Day'?).
A bit later on, Davies wrote another script, 'Century Falls',
which was also produced for TV. The cast was different (Kate Winslet
was in the first one; by this stage she was already set on the
course of stardom) and this time the material was darker, with
more horror elements. How either shows were brought out under
the CBBC banner astonishes me! It features people linking together
in a group mind and an embodiment of the group mind emerging as
a composite entity, which puts me in mind of 'Primeval'. Later,
it transpires that the joining of minds has also produced an unforeseen
and unfortunate side effect, in the person of the sinister Julia
(like 'Restless').
Is there a connection? Possibly. Anyway, if anyone on the board
ever chances upon either show, they are well worth a look. The
young protagonists are roughly the age of the Gang in Season One,
and Century Falls stars a girl called Tess, who is overweight,
and might recall the original actress cast in the role of Willow.
The acting is first rate, and the dialogue cracking good (Davies
now does mostly non-genre stuff in the UK, such as 'Queer As Folk'
which you may have heard of: also recommended!). There are more
one-liners in 'Dark Season' than in 'Century Falls', which is
darker and more intense and dreamlike. DS on the other hand, could
probably have run to at least a second six-part series, as the
first season really comprises two separate storylines, each three
episodes long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> cool,anyone know where I can get these? -- vampire hunter
D, 11:19:34 11/12/01 Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: cool,anyone know where I can get these? -- Yellowork,
11:10:04 11/13/01 Tue
I do not even know whether either of *Dark Season* or *Century
Falls* have ever been broadcast outside the UK. As far as I know,
they were re-transmitted just once, in a completely different
early morning slot, within months of the original transmission.
I did a recent check, and they were available neither on UK format
VHS, nor on DVD. As Rahael hints, the early 1990s saw an end to
this kind of thing coming out under the CBBC banner. Even at that
point, the 'ghetto' slot of kid's TV was used to sneak out genre
stuff that may easily have been transmitted in primetime in the
1960s, 1970s or 1980s. Sadly, the Beeb was badly affected by a
dwindling audience in the last decade, and having already decided
science fiction, fantasy and horror stuff not to be cost-effective,
they made next to none in the period; however, they show the US
shows and have no problem with their 'cult status'.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Thanks Yellowork! -- Rahael, 12:11:20 11/12/01 Mon
Those sound great.......I can't believe I missed them..when were
they broadcast? CBBC for a while in the 90s did excellent sci-fi/fantasy
stuff - with quality production and good scripts. Those seem to
have dried up now, which is a huge pity.And I love Russell Davies's
work - I am looking these up in the BBC archive soon!
I believe that the Americans saw redone, tamer version of Queer
as Folk than we did though.
Thanks again!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Did Davies influence Whedon? -- Yellowork, 11:32:20
11/13/01 Tue
Hi Rahael! Are you UK-based too? In reply to your question, I
am pretty sure *Dark Season* was '91 or '92 (same year as the
*Buffy* movie). *Falls* was no later than '93 at the most. Did
you see those *Who* references in *Queer As Folk*? Apparently,
Davies is a *Who* nut (he wrote a novel that was published under
the Virgin 'New Adventures' banner before the franchise expired).
He says he did not conceive the main character in DS, Marcie,
as a figure like the Doctor, but he acknowledges that there is
a possibility that the influence of the old show can be seen in
DS. Certainly, Marcie on the one hand and Reet and Thomas on the
other occupy places in the structure of the show which parallels
that of the Doctor and his various travelling companions (in this
regard they are more hierarchical and less like the more democratic
Scoobies). The shows are roughly the same length as most *Who*
episodes, and fall into two three-part episodes, with cliffhangers
between the first two parts and a denouement in the third; compare
1989 *Who* stories such as 'Ghost Light' and 'Survival'.
On another note, Gareth McLean, TV critic for the UK Guardian,
wrote last month about the similarity between *Bob and Rose* and
*Buffy* on TV, particularly in respect to the dialogue. I can't
help wondering whether Davies was an influence on Whedon when
he planned the TV series; especially seeing as similar elements,
such as the hidden menace beneath the school and an overweight
heroine were *not* present in the *Buffy* movie in '92.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Did Davies influence Whedon? -- Rahael,
15:46:17 11/13/01 Tue
Hey Yellowork,
a guardian reader and a Buffy viewer? Hail fellow, well met!!
Gareth MacLean and the Guardian television listings have been
extolling the praises of BtVS for years...its one of the reasons
I'm still fond of it.
Ooh..I'll just have to watch out for that Whedon/Davies thing!
I'm going to look out for those videos, if the BBC still do them.......I'm
intrigued.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow and Traumatic Stress --
DEN, 09:23:05 11/12/01 Mon
We all process BtVs through our own matrices. Some posters are
students of religion or philosophy. Others know literature. I
study war, and suggest that there may be some useful parallels
and comparisons to be drawn from that field as well. More even
than Buffy, Willow resembles to me one of those teenagers of the
"Greatest Generation" who became a fighter pilot or
a Marine rifleman and spent four years learning to do what they
had to in order to survive. That experience did not always produce
judgment and maturity in other areas of life.
Willow has been fighting on the Hellmouth since she was sixteen.
More than Xander, more even than Giles, she has been what Buffy
calls her in "The Gift:" "my big gun." She
has no Slayer powers (goddess knows she's been seriously hurt
enough times) and no Watcher. Willow's hacking and her magick
alike have been developed to fight evil. She has held things together,
rallying the Scoobies time and again when Buffy was absent, or
non-functional--or dead! Indeed, I believe Willow has never had
any time off the line since the show began!
If we extend this "combat" matrix, it is no wonder that
by now Willow's judgment is poor; that she uses threats rather
than reason in her interation with Giles; that she compounds mistakes
in spellcasting by casting more spells. She doesn't question herself
in the musical because she can't afford to: she might break. Even
the forgetting spell on Tara, inexcusable in any principled sense,
can be interpreted as the act of a person who can no longer bear
the limited stress of a lover's quarrel.
None of the above is meant to give Willow what another thread
on this board calls a "get out of jail free" card. I
do wish, however, to suggest that Willow is no less burned out
than post-resurrection Buffy. She has her own version of the thousand-yard
stare. I can hope other posters cut her the slack an exhausted
warrior deserves. And I can at least dream of ME giving her a
few weeks' well deserved R and R, with Tara, someplace quiet where
the monsters don't grow.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Maybe, but ... (SPOILERY BITS) -- Earl Allison, 09:40:48
11/12/01 Mon
But at least burned-out Buffy isn't likely to take someone's head
off at a moment's notice. Granted, she's hugged Xander and Giles
a TAD too tight (crunch-crunch goes the spine), but she's not
lashed out at, nor deprived anyone of free will.
I agree, Willow isn't doing these things out of malice, but out
of supreme arrogance, that she can handle them, and that she alone
can determine that they are right and necessary actions. Still,
she's robbed Tara of free will, and who knows WHAT Tara's thinking
now? Can she trust ANY of her feelings or memories? Can ANY of
the Scoobies? Granted, as omnipresent Observers (brains in plastic
bins sold separately) WE know Willow hasn't done anything else
(yet), but they don't.
How do you react to someone who can alter reality and perception
with a thought? She sounds more and more like Dark Phoenix as
I type this ...
Worst case, Buffy is a purely physical entity, with fairly easy
ways to stop her -- restrain her, shoot her, drug her, etc. What
the HELL do you do with Willow if you can't get the drop on her?
A confrontation with Buffy has the potential to get violent, but
might not ... Willow could simply rob everyone of their memories
of the event -- as I've heard she tries to do to Buffy's memories
of Heaven -- how do you fight that? How can you trust her EVER
again?
Maybe not the fairest way to put it (I really AM sympathetic to
Willow, but I can totally see the wariness of others here), but
certainly accurate.
Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Maybe, but ... (SPOILERY BITS) -- DEN, 11:04:00
11/12/01 Mon
I have no quarrel with your points. If anything they support my
position. A burn-out case is dangerous precisely because of the
unpredictability. Perhaps (SPOILER BIT) it's relevant that reviews
suggest the forgetting spell on Buffy to which you refer goes
spectacularly sour. If that is the case, and depending on the
circumstances, it may be another argument for the shell-shock/stressout
model, where the victim starts making mistakes in executing imortant
things s/he used to do well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Sympathy for the Willow revisited (*Spoiler for Tabula
R*) -- CaptainPugwash, 11:31:25 11/12/01 Mon
Whilst I still believe that the resurrection spell was wrong,
I (like Buffy), just have to deal with it. However, the threat
that Willow now represents outweighs any (selfish) benefit that
might have been derived from having Buffy back.
OMWF was difficult viewing - I've watched it several times and
the sheer anger of Buffy directed towards a (devastated) off-screen
Willow ('so give me something to SING about!') packs a real punch.
I don't believe that Buffy's secret needed to come out. I suffer
from depression myself, but I would only hurt those closest to
me (esp. my parents) if I told how I really felt about things
and the small, but significant, contribution they have made. I
took no pleasure in seeing Willow (and the rest of the SG) crushed;
my initial anger about their actions, like Buffy's, had been tempered.
What concerns me is that Willow's continued abuse of magic will
lead to her expulsion from the SG. The consequences for this could
be catastrophic. Like any addict, Willow needs love, support,
and infinite patience from her friends. It doesn't look like she
is going to get it...
Thing is, how do you treat a magic addict? If a heroin fiend goes
on a binge, then they only harm themselves. If Willow loses it,
then anything could happen! No Giles too.
I always liked Willow, but that love gave way to anger. The anger
has passed now, but I am just very very afraid.
Speaking of ethical dilemmas - Farscape just hit me with a belter
:(
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Sympathy for the Willow revisited (*Spoiler
for Tabula R*) -- IMCJ, 11:42:16 11/12/01 Mon
"Thing is, how do you treat a magic addict? If a heroin fiend
goes on a binge, then they only harm themselves. If Willow loses
it, then anything could happen! No Giles too."
There are "Binding Spells" which can render her power-less.
I'm sure, Tara and Giles and possibly Anya may have enough skill
and experience to do a spell with that kind of effect.
-CJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Binding Spell -- Traveler, 15:39:52
11/12/01 Mon
"There are "Binding Spells" which can render her
power-less. I'm sure, Tara and Giles and possibly Anya may have
enough skill and experience to do a spell with that kind of effect."
I'm really not so sure about that. By the end of last season,
Willow had the power to hurt a god, and she's been growing stronger
since then. If Willow really goes berserk, I'm not sure if the
entire scooby gang could stop her. Then again, do you remember
how the Dark Phoenix was stopped?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Binding Spell -- IMCJ, 16:42:38
11/12/01 Mon
"Then again, do you remember how the Dark Phoenix was stopped?"
I'm not sure about the comic version. (In the comic Jean was a
copy and she was really in the bottom of the NY Bay?) But I did
watch the cartoons long long ago. I remember they surpressed her
temporarliy via Prof. X's telepathic abilities, so Jean would
have a hold on the entity in her. Later I believe they terminated
Jean's body in order for the Phoenix Force to exit out of her.
Are you suggesting Willow is in a sense or perhaphs literally
possed by an entity?
If so I highly doubt it. But reguard less, there are majicks against
majicks. Counter-Majicks. Willows isn't that powerful. By far
she is no Phoenix. Yes, she did "hurt" Glory.. But she
still makes mistakes and she's human---MORTAL. Yeah, she can alter
reality, time and etc. Are the SG un-equiped to handel a berserk-Willow?
I dunno. However if a conflict occurs SG VS Willow sooner or later,
as we've seen she will become weak. For example: after use of
majicks against Glory and brining Buffy back to life, she was
"all majicked out."
-CJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Binding Spell -- Wisewoman,
17:24:41 11/12/01 Mon
As I said in a post a couple of weeks ago, I believe the only
thing that can stop Willow now is Willow.
As with any other addiction, intervention is useless without motivation
to quit on the part of the addict. And I believe Willow is powerful
enough now to defeat even Buffy.
I'm thinking Willow will end up hurting someone so seriously that
it'll be enough to snap her out of Dark!Willow and back to the
Willow we know and love. But then, there'll be the guilt to deal
with, so it won't be pretty.
:o|
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Dark Phoenix -- Earl
Allison, 17:34:11 11/12/01 Mon
The only thing that ultimately stopped Dark Phoenix was Dark Phoenix
herself.
Ignoring the retcon that Dark Phoenix wasn't Jean Grey, here's
what happened, in a nutshell.
Dark Phoenix had become so powerful that her thoughts and will
became reality -- she wiped out an entire star system by consuming
its sun to feed her hunger for power.
Realizing that she could never remain in control for every second
of every minute of every day for the rest of her life, she committed
suicide on the Blue Area of the Moon, disintegrating herself with
an ancient weapon found there. She did it out of love for those
around her, and because she KNEW that, lurking beneath the surface,
was the desire for the raw, ultimate power Dark Phoenix offered
her.
If you ever have the opportunity to read the actual comics, from
about Uncanny X-Men #129 to #137, do so. It's one of the best
story arcs I've seen in the X-Men.
Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree. Everyone
should read the Phoenix Saga :) -- Traveler, 21:13:51 11/12/01
Mon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Dark Phoenix
- One of the only X-Men arcs I could stand, personally -- AngelVSAngelus,
13:01:40 11/13/01 Tue
Marvel? Dude, all hail Vertigo. I wonder what Neil Gaiman would
do if Joss let him write an episode of Buffy...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Dark
Phoenix - One of the only X-Men arcs I could stand, personally
-- fresne, 16:56:55 11/13/01 Tue
Since the second Corinthian tends to put me to mind of Spike (ATLtS)
anyway, ummm...yeah. That would be of the coolness.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Willow and Traumatic Stress -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym,
18:26:41 11/12/01 Mon
Den:
This echoes some things I wrote about Buffy two months ago. Willow
(and Xander and to a lesser extent Giles) all should have serious
psychological effects from this constant pressure. Let's look
at this pressure:
1.) Loss of friends 2.) Constant fear of death or permanent injury
3.) The weight of the world's survival 4.) No safe place to be
to rest 5.) The need to always be in Condition Yellow (ready to
detect and counter a deadly threat) 6.) Virtually no support or
recognition from the larger society (aside from Buffy's Class
Protector Award and occasional praise from Giles)
For the Scooby Gang there is no Saigon year, no thirty-mission
tour; like the Irish Republican Army, once in , never out (although
this applies more to the Slayer than her comrades).
So, parts flying loose from the edges would be a normal and expected
result of this.
Heck, one might expect them to start babbling or singing songs
in public.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow and Traumatic Stress -- DEN, 20:29:04 11/12/01
Mon
Thanks, Fred. There's always a risk when one brings Realverse
experiences to the Jossverse--willing suspension of disbelief
and all that. But if ME develops a story line built around Buffy's
stress disorder, it seems appropriate to raise some of the same
issues for the other Scoobies. Cordelia underwent a similar exxperience
last year on "Angel."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show no Mercy.........Spoilers
for Quickening......... -- Rufus, 01:33:17 11/13/01 Tue
Love the new character Holtz...he is a tragic figure. The episode
started out with the details of exactly what Darla and Angelus
did to this man's family. They murdered his Wife, daughter, and
infant, just for kicks, just to keep the game going. They destroyed
this man's life. It would have been over if it hadn't been for
the intervention of the demon who made the deal with Holtz to
come to this time to deal with his enemies. The only catch.....show
no mercy. Sounds easy enough...you have two murderers who pollute
this planet with their existance, they deserve a painful death,
the world would be better for it. That is, if they had been killed
back those many years ago. Now we have a new situation that I
don't think Holtz was ready for. Angel is no longer just Angelus,
he is a man who is a good guy now, well...most of the time. Darla
has died and been brought back to die again. Now the impossible
has happened and Darla and Angel have a baby boy on the way. At
the very least Angel now has something living, breathing, helpless,
to lose. Darla, who knows? Holtz is back to avenge the death of
his family and the likely target may become the child that is
about to be born. So, is it a just punishment to Angel, kill this
child who may turn out evil anyhow, or will Holtz to the impossible
and find that he still has the ability to show mercy?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Spelling correction -- Rufus, 01:38:18 11/13/01 Tue
That is a "do" the impossible, in the last line.........lousy
speller, probably more but I'm tired..:):)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> methinks David Greenwalt is evil (spoilerish) -- JBone,
05:55:20 11/13/01 Tue
Either he's really telegraphing his punches here, or he's got
one hell of a twist up his sleeve. I have no spoiler knowledge,
but it looks like he's making us care about this baby so that
when Holtz or whoever kills it, it'll be that much more tragic.
I just hope that they don't do the rapid aging thing. Where all
of a sudden Angel will have a 21 year old son. That will drive
me nuts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> JBone, you read my mind -- Solitude1056, 05:50:22
11/13/01 Tue
I was thinking last night, while watching the promo, "if
that kid is 21 by the end of the season, I am gonna be royally
pissed..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: methinks David Greenwalt is evil (speculative
and perhaps future spoilerish) -- Cactus Watcher, 06:17:58 11/13/01
Tue
I get the feeling that all is not what we've been led to believe.
I'm still not convinced one way or the other, whether the baby
is Angel's or not. I do presume Angel is intended by the PTB to
protect the child, which means there is a better than a 50% chance
the kid will survive. But can you see Angel raising a baby on
that gloomy show? Darla is out. So guess who gets the baby when
the dust settles. Not many choices are there? (If Wolfram and
Hart kidnap the kid after it's born, and we're supposed to worry
about it the rest of the season, I quit. No more Angel show for
me.)
Got the bad news this morning. There's a basketball game on my
UPN station tonight, and they want to rerun OMWF before they show
this week's Buffy ep. So I'm out for this week. Have fun tonight
and I'll talk with you all next week!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Arizona UPN listings -- Malandanza, 07:19:27
11/13/01 Tue
Friday 11/16/01 7:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - Once More, With
Feeling Saturday 11/17/01 4:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - Tabula
Rasa 9:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - I Robot... You Jane Sunday
11/18/01 6:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - Lovers Walk Tuesday
11/20/01 7:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - Smashed Saturday 11/24/01
9:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - The Puppet Show Sunday 11/25/01
6:00pm Buffy the Vampire Slayer - The Wish
Saturday is so far away...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> You said it all! -- CW, 07:53:59
11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Show no Mercy.........Spoilers for Quickening.........
-- Neaux, 05:23:54 11/13/01 Tue
Well is it just me.. or am I the only one who thought Last Nite's
Angel sucked royally. (pun intended)
Yeah there were a couple nice quips from Fred.. but dammit.. that
baby should have been born by now!! In my own personal opinion,
unless the vampire ninja crew has any more relevance to the story..
that whole scene in the hospital could have been condensed. Or
is there a quota on fight scenes that must be in each episode
of Angel?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Show no Mercy.........Spoilers for Quickening.........
-- robert, 08:55:00 11/13/01 Tue
"Well is it just me.. or am I the only one who thought Last
Nite's Angel sucked royally."
Smart vibrant opinions are what this board is all about. My opinion
is that I would be sad if this board devolved to only two opinions;
(1) last night's show rocked or (2) last night's show sucked.
Besides being cliche', they dishonor everyone else with differing
opinions, and degrade the environment of the discussion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Show no MercySpoilers for Quickening.........
-- Neaux, 09:48:06 11/13/01 Tue
Sorry Dude. I thought I would make a bad pun. and I thought my
explanation was adequate.. usually I only post to be enlightened
anyway...for someone to explain something to me... and even for
someone to correct me. I am a firm believer in learning from others
and espcially learning from my own mistakes.
Maybe I should have elaborated on why I thought the show "sucked".
Its because I waited an entire week for this episode where supposedly
the baby would be born.. and then I found out I have to wait yet
another week to see if this baby will be born. I've been left
with yet another cliffhanger..
and since your opinions about opinions is a little confusing..
I'll just apologize and hope that was what you wanted to hear!
Sorry! Keep the Peace! ^_^
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Show no Mercy.........Spoilers for Quickening.........
-- Rattletrap, 05:27:17 11/13/01 Tue
I agree, Rufus, Holtz is a great character, even a somewhat sympathetic
one. With his arrival in LA, this season shows a lot of promise.
I rewatched "Offspring" the other day, and noticed that
our discussion on this board has been so heavy on the musical
(with good reason) that we've all but neglected an extremely well
done Angel episode and a new story arc with lots of potential.
Holtz seems to have compromised all of his principles in his quest
to destroy Angelus and Darla, so much that he's almost become
the very thing that he despises. I think there is a clear parallel
here to Gunn's crew in TOGoM--both have become more enamored with
destroying evil than with doing good. I would not be surprised,
however, if Holtz has changed his tune by the end of the season
and is an ally of Angel (*this is just speculation, nothing confirmed*).
I'm also liking the 3-way fight that's developing between the
AI crew, W&H, and Holtz and his demon mentor. Lilah and Gavin
have just been thrown two really hard curveballs, and I'm curious
to see how they will respond.
Just my $.02, I'd love to hear everyone else's impressions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Would have liked to see more of ... -- verdantheart,
05:50:29 11/13/01 Tue
... the paranormal obstetrician: he was cast perfectly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> W&H -- Solitude1056, 05:52:41 11/13/01 Tue
Is there anyone else while watching, wanted to wipe that smirk
off Gavin's face? Lilah talks a big show, but she wouldn't have
gotten even as far as she did if she weren't pretty good at what
she does... but I'm wondering, d'ya think Park's overwhelming
smarminess and sleaziness is supposed to a) make us feel bad for
Lilah, whose situation seems to have gone from bad to worse or
b) make us long for Lindsey, who at least had some kind of ethic,
even if twisted?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: W&H (spoilers Offspring and Quickening)
-- zargon, 08:20:07 11/13/01 Tue
And did anyone notice that Gavin/Mail Boy attempted to blackmail
Lilah with the tape of her and Marcus-Angel on the desk? Gee,
I guess he didn't see Lilah earlier on the tape going "Oh,
Angel, here's all the legal real-estate documents you need to
fight Gavin even though you don't own the hotel. And its not for
you, I'm trying to bring down Gavin".....or maybe that comes
later?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: W&H -- robert, 09:05:24 11/13/01 Tue
"a) make us feel bad for Lilah, whose situation seems to
have gone from bad to worse"
For me the most interesting story telling is when the author makes
us sympathetic to an otherwise disgusting character. I am sure
that the writers are trying to further blur the line between good
and evil. By the time Joss and crew are done with us, there may
be no clear distinctions between good and evil.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: W&H Good vs. Evil -- Kimberly, 10:53:08
11/13/01 Tue
Sorry, I can't imagine that Joss & Co. can ever blur the line
between good and evil to the point that there are no clear distinctions
between the good: ultimately, they are too separate, too opposite.
That said, people are never simply good or simply evil; they are
a complex mix of the two. And, in my experience, the less willing
an individual is to admit that they are a mixture, the more evil
they become.
A specific action may appear to be good or evil in and of itself;
however, seen in the light of other actions, that same action
may become the opposite of what it was as a "standalone".
Then there is the idea (I think it's Taoist) that a quality contains
within itself the seed of its opposite. In this case, that would
be the good of evil, or the evil of good.
What I'm trying to say is that Joss & Co. aren't so much blurring
the line between good and evil to the point that the line can
no longer be distinguished, but are pointing to what is true good,
what is true evil, and that much of what we call one or the other
is actually a mix of the two.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: W&H -- Dru Kalita, 11:11:22 11/13/01 Tue
-::but I'm wondering, d'ya think Park's overwhelming smarminess
and sleaziness is supposed to a) make us feel bad for Lilah, whose
situation seems to have gone from bad to worse or b) make us long
for Lindsey, who at least had some kind of ethic, even if twisted?::-
I love Gavin. I find him much more interesting, than Lilah, who
just seems to be bumbling through things at this point. She believes
in using brute force (physical and psychological) to get what
she wants. And Angel can fight against that. He knows how to work
against that. But Gavin's way... it's slower. More esoteric and
hard-to-deal with. And can be just as devastating. I like how
Gavin is looking at every angle too.
I've never liked Lilah. I liked Lindsey though. Lilah always struck
me as a little boring and clumsy (witness her lame attempts to
get Lindsey killed).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: W&H -- Deeva, 11:56:47 11/13/01 Tue
Lilah vs. Gavin
Lilah's style is big and over the top with lots of trash talkin'.
Gavin is weirdly Zen. Slow and steady does it. Like how waves
slowly wear away at cliffs and shorelines. You just don't see
it happening till it's maybe too late.
I have to say that I like Gavin as the new bad guy at W&H,
he has more finesse. I think that Lilah is too big on herself
to realize how much of a threat Gavin is. She thinks that he needs
her but it's the other way around.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Show no Mercy.........Spoilers for Quickening.........
-- Marie, 06:04:35 11/13/01 Tue
I would not be surprised, however, if Holtz has changed his tune
by the end of the season and is an ally of Angel (*this is just
speculation, nothing confirmed*).
As a mother, I have to say here (and yes, I know, I'm speaking
as a Spoiler Trollop - haven't seen the actual episodes) that
there is absolutely no way on earth that I would ever become the
ally of the fiend who ate my child! And yes, I also know that
Giles, say, is one example of someone who can be looked at as
someone who forgave Angel, after his murder of Jenny Calendar,
but it's my opinion that, while he may have accepted that it was
Angelus who killed his lover, and that the newly-returned Angel
was truly remorseful, in his heart of hearts, Giles didn't forgive
him.
Having said that, however, I can see Holtz in some future episode
fighting alongside Angel and his crew to defeat a common enemy,
whilst promising retribution at a later date, but I hope the writers
don't diminish his love for his family by having him too forgiving!
Marie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Interesting... -- RabidHarpy, 06:11:37 11/13/01 Tue
I haven't seen the latest "Angel" episode, (we get it
back-to-back with Buffy tonight), but I noted last week already
that it is quite ironic that this new "vampire-slayer"
is named Holtz, as this word is German for "wood" and
could loosely by translated as "stake". Clever!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Am I the only one... (Spoilers for Quickening) -- vandalia,
07:53:39 11/13/01 Tue
...who thinks this baby is the PTB's gift to Angel for all his
hard work and sacrifice? I mean, Wes's mangled translation of
shanshu has been both 'to die' and 'to live' and that Angel would
become mortal, human. What if it means that he will be able to
_give_ life? They need vamp-Angel as a warrior for good, that
much was made clear in the episode that he's briefly human. But
they also promised him some kind of reward via the prophecy. What
better reward than a form of human immortality -- that of a child?
All the 'oh it could be evil, demon spawn' is just a smokescreen.
The kid is a kid, plain and simple.
Now, there are those who've wondered whether or not Holtz would
be able to show mercy to Angel and not kill the baby, yet are
worried that to do so would minimize the impact his family's death
had on him. A good way to avoid this, in my mind, would be to
have Holtz decide not to kill the child, but take it and raise
it himself to be a vampire slayer. Kid lives, Holtz still gets
his revenge, Angel still suffers.
One last thing to those who will cry foul if the baby is suddenly
21 at the end of the season: don't forget that the demon that
brought Holtz into the future is a time traveller. He could whisk
the kid into an alternate dimension and have it eighteen and back
in time for May sweeps. Not saying this is a good thing...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Am I the only one... (Spoilers for Quickening)
-- Ryuei, 09:38:43 11/13/01 Tue
I think the demon's name is Saijan or something like that - and
considering he is a time traveller - maybe he is Angel's son.
Perhaps he wished he had never been born and is working on preventing
his own birth? Just an idle thought...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Am I the only one... another possibility (Spoilers
for Quickening) -- OnM, 09:41:40 11/13/01 Tue
A good way to avoid this, in my mind, would be to have Holtz decide
not to kill the child, but take it and raise it himself to be
a vampire slayer. Kid lives, Holtz still gets his revenge, Angel
still suffers.
How about another interesting possibility-- Angel freely gives
the child to Holtz to raise, so he effectively becomes an adoptive
parent.
Stop and think-- just what kind of parents could Angel and Darla
be? Let's face it, if Darla doesn't eat the kid, she'll most certainly
vamp it. Angel isn't in any position to raise a child, and it
would be grossly unfair for him to dump it onto any of the AI
crew. All of them, in fact, have many other serious obligations
already in play in being warriors for good.
Also, can you think of a possibly better way to convince a man
as (justifiably) bitter and vengeful as Holtz that Angel is no
longer Angelus?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> yeah, I was thinking the same thing. -- Solitude1056,
10:46:08 11/13/01 Tue
So we have two choices: either we've just figured out the major
plotline for AtS for the next six or so episodes, or we're in
for a major shock as Greenwalt pulls the rug out from under us.
I wouldn't mind the latter, but if it's the former, that means
it's time to retreat into catatonic optimism. Everyone is welcome
to repeat the ATPoBtVS Hail Joss; you can keep your place in the
ditty using our Season Four Memorial Jossian Bead Necklace (TM),
much as you might a rosary. So, all together now...
"I trust in Joss, I trust in Joss... Joss will lead us through
the Greenwalt darkness to a better AtS!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Am I the only one... another possibility
(Spoilers for Quickening) -- Kimberly, 11:12:00 11/13/01 Tue
And the pain of having to give up your own child, after seeing
him on ultrasound and becoming attached, might actually result
in sufficient pain for Holtz to feel he has granted Angel "no
mercy".
In addition, there is a great deal of justice in such an action:
Angel giving his child to the father of the ones he killed. Almost
symmetrical.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Am I the only one... another possibility
(Spoilers for Quickening) -- Rattletrap, 13:34:59 11/13/01 Tue
I'm not sure I really see the writers going this way, but I love
the idea. Holtz seems to blame himself for the death of his family.
While he isn't directly responsible, of course; I'm also not sure
he is entirely incorrect. My impression of him is someone who
became so zealous and focused on his work that he neglected his
duties as a husband and a father (I may be wrong, that is just
my impression so far). Raising Angel and Darla's child might set
him on that path to redemption that is the central theme of the
show.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Spoiler - Am I the only one - Not a cross
over -- fresne, 13:38:08 11/13/01 Tue
So, when the AtS team was discussing places to flee to, was I
the only one who thought, hey to bad you can't cross over to SunnyD
for a little backup.
The thought of everyone meeting up now, in our present configurations
makes my head hurt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I was thinking exactly that. --
Ryuei, 13:59:46 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spoiler - Am I the only one
- Not a cross over -- Kimberly, 14:15:16 11/13/01 Tue
And do it while Sweet was there so we could have all of them singing.
(Edward was laughing that it was a good thing Angel wasn't around
for this one. All that angst with his voice. ROFLMAO!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spoiler - Am I the only
one - Not a cross over -- Phoenix, 06:55:25 11/14/01 Wed
your not the only one when Angel kept repeating about a safe place
the only place I could think of that was safe enough was Sunnydale.
I noticed that both Buffy and Angel have been give the responsibity
of looking after possible powerful forces (Dawn and now the baby)their
lives still seem to parallel each others even when their not together.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Am I the only one... (Spoilers for Quickening)
-- Aurora Duane, 12:17:59 11/13/01 Tue
I'm new to this board, which is almost the only one I have found,
covering any subject, that is consistently worth reading and never
embarrassing to be caught reading. Give yourselves a round of
applause.
Now a rant: Giving the baby to Holtz might be a fine idea, and
I am not even against the rapid aging scenario. Or what about
a good old fashioned baby monster? Any of those scenarios would
allow the show to escape the typical callous, shallow cliche of
TV writers dealing with childbirth, which is to use pregnancy
as a titillating plot arc and then more or less forget about the
child once it is born. I swore off sitcoms a while back over just
this issue, and actual parenthood has made me feel even more strongly
about it. The Buffy shows have always had such integrity in terms
of allowing life-changing events to actually change lives of their
characters, and following out the consequences of the characters'
actions. I am going to be bitterly disappointed if a normal child
is born and then just hangs around neglected in the background
somewhere.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> time travel or clairvoyance? -- anom, 21:04:11 11/14/01
Wed
"...don't forget that the demon that brought Holtz into the
future is a time traveller...."
Now, this could just be another example of my missing something,
but did Holtz's demon ally say he could go back & forth through
time? He did say he moved through other dimensions where time
moved at different rates, but does that include backwards? I thought
he could see the future from the past, but not go there & come
back from it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow isn't evil... (Warning:
kind of random) -- Lucifer_Sponge, 08:49:41 11/13/01 Tue
.... she's sloppy. If she really wanted to make Tara forget about
that fight she had, she would have read the minds of Buffy, Anya,
Xander, Dawn, and Giles to make sure none of them knew anything
about the arguement, and fiddled with their minds accordingly.
That said, I hope the writers go all the way with this. I don't
want the extent of Willow's "flirtation with the darker of
the dark forces" to be a bunch of stupid, bratty mistakes.
I really do hope the character is corrupted to a point where she
becomes a threat to herself and everyone around her.
I was also thinking, the other day, that Buffy's death may very
well have had little to do with Buffy, and everything to do with
Willow. Think about it. The writers knew they were going to bring
Buffy back when they killed her... so it's possible this whole
"Ohhhh, everything's so dull and lifeless compared to heaven"
bit that Buffy's been going through is possibly just a smokescreen
for the real issues that Buffy's death was meant to bring out.
That issue being the reprecussions of Willow's "too much,
too fast," unbalanced approach to magic.
So, as pointless as that was, those -are- my two cents...
~Sponge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Buffy vs. Willow -- Kerri, 10:57:32 11/13/01 Tue
"I was also thinking, the other day, that Buffy's death may
very well have had little to do with Buffy, and everything to
do with Willow. "
As always I think it's both. Buffy's death and ressurection maybe
pivotal for several characters. Right now it seems that Buffy
and Willow are going down very dark paths. It doesn't seem a coincidence
that they are paralleling each other a bit. I couldn't help but
have the feeling, as Tara and Giles were singing about needing
to leave Willow and Buffy and Buffy and Willow were facing each
other, that the two friends are headed for a showdown not too
far off.
To this point they have been both on a simular path and yet opposites
at the same time. OnM pointed out in one of his essays that the
two have become spiritual opposites. Buffy being the unassuming
angel/god who is lost and doesn't know where her path leaves.
Willow on the other hand is taking on the jobs of a god, raising
the dead, playing with memories like glory, but she clearly is
not a god.
Thus we have two opposing characters heading down a path of self-destruction
in different ways for completely different reasons. IMO, Buffy
will be able to pull herself out of it and find some heaven on
earth and maybe begin to assume the role of angel. For Willow,
this won't be so easy. As we constantly see in literature, Willow
is headed for a huge fall. And IMO the fate of these two are intertwined.
Perhaps Buffy, as angel, is meant to keep Willow from destroying
herself. Pure speculation there. We'll have to wait and see.
"That said, I hope the writers go all the way with this.
I don't want the extent of Willow's "flirtation with the
darker of the dark forces" to be a bunch of stupid, bratty
mistakes"
I think the stupid mistakes and flirtation with the darkside is
the necessary lead in to total corruption. As we have seen with
Faith power is seductive. Control is tempting. And the power that
evil holds is incredibly strong. Buffy traveled down this path
for an episode or two with Faith but she rejected it. Willow,
seems to be more like Faith in this respect. She is pulled in
by the seductive power, and now in its grips can't get out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow -- T-rex, 12:54:03 11/13/01 Tue
>Willow, seems to be more like Faith in this respect. She is
pulled in by the seductive power, and now in its grips can't get
out.
Lately I've been thinking about VampWillow and her expressed desire
to "ride people like ponies". Seems like the desire
to control others has always been present deep down, even beneath
the sweet facade of our Willow.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow -- sanjerine, 13:23:20
11/13/01 Tue
T-rex:
> Lately I've been thinking about VampWillow and her > expressed
desire to "ride people like ponies". Seems like >
the desire to control others has always been present > deep
down, even beneath the sweet facade of our Willow.
I've actually been amazed that, as early as second season, there've
been little throwaway jokes about this:
Willow's a "secret evil mastermind" in one of the early
Oz episodes; she snorts at the idea of playing "evil mistress
of pain" with Oz, etc. And she's not afraid to use EvilWill's
attack on Percy in order to keep Percy in line -- small potatoes,
sure, but this stuff adds up over time. And I haven't even touched
"Something Blue" here.
My favorite blink-and-you-miss it has got to be Willow's reaction
to EvilWillow: "I'm so evil, and skanky, and I think I'm
kind of gay."
Buffy reassures her that a vampire has nothing to do with the
person that it was, but Angel says "Well, actually --"
and cuts himself off.
And my friends and I all thought we were *so* smart to remember
that when Tara showed up. But the watch-the-birdie was Will's
sexuality -- we thought that line was sewn up, and "evil
and skanky" were throwaway.
Then Willow goes and wipes her girlfriend's memory and uses their
artificial harmony in order to have sex with her. Well. That's
sorta skanky. And maybe a little evil.
We see the two halves of Xander in "The Replacement,"
and Willow directly refers to Dopplegangland during that episode.
I think the parallel is actually more apt than Willow thinks;
it's just that the other half of the incredible sweet and sensible
Willow is a very dark half indeed.
Willow may think she's "very seldom naughty," (Restless)
but we've seen that her mental image of herself has very little
to do with reality, and I think that image is losing its hold
as we go. Tonight should be interesting!
--sanjerine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow -- Yellowork, 14:08:11
11/13/01 Tue
I recall reading a speculation ages ago, when Buffy was still
in High School, which suggested that Willow would tread a dark
path, becoming more involved in occult magic and less involved
in the world of her friends and her needs. The source suggested
that perhaps Ethan Rayne could be the anti-watcher who 'helps'
her to unleash her dark side. (Of course this could equally describe
the Mayor and Faith.) Funny how things go ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow -- t-rex, 15:16:32
11/13/01 Tue
I also recall some FanFic where Buffy is long gone, and Willow
has become a Watcher herself. Perhaps the path she is embarking
on isn't that different from Giles/Ripper.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow -- dream of the consortium,
08:59:10 11/14/01 Wed
Here's my favorite piece of foreshadowing:
In, I believe, The Yoko Factor, Willow and Tara are discussing
which elective Willow should take next year. I won't look up the
exact wording, but Willow says something like "How about
drama? I can be dramatic (picks up Miss Kitty) No more catnip!
You have a catnip problem!" Tara's response: "Definitely
drama." I don't think it's too far-fetched to believe this
foreshadowed Willow's coming problems with addiction and the need
for someone to intervene (though, of course, she would be in the
opposite seat - perhaps because Willow herself would not have
believed she could ever be on the receiving end of that sort of
statement. I'm reading too much here). But definitely drama indeed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy vs. Willow (spoilers for TR)
-- Humanitas, 12:26:52 11/14/01 Wed
My favorite blink-and-you-miss it has got to be Willow's reaction
to EvilWillow: "I'm so evil, and skanky, and I think I'm
kind of gay."
Clearly, we are meant to recall that line, as in this weeks ep,
Willow says to Dawn, as they huddle in the sewer, "I think
I'm kinda gay."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow isn't evil... (Warning: kind of random) -- kostadis
roussos, 21:03:00 11/13/01 Tue
Hi!
Well, yes she is.
Unfortunately it depends on your definition of evil.
In classical judeo-christian morality, evil is to go against the
will of God.
Since neither the show nor I want to speculate what God has to
do with buffyverse, let's examine what "the will of God"
means.
If we take the christian point of view it means love for the other,
and in particular the other's free will, and love of God.
To love the other, is to respect the other, in the totality of
their being.
To be evil, is to objectify the other. The other becomes an object,
not an entity to be respected and protected and helped.
Willow's actions reveal an increasing objectification of the other.
In particular her utterly callous disregard for safety in the
bronze? (what if something did happen? dawn was not known to be
at risk, there were other ways that were just as effective) and
her treatment of tara, reflect a certain amount of indifference
to other people as whole entities that exist outside of her control.
As a concrete example outside of buffyverse, Lenin was the ultimate
expression of this objectification of the other. Lenin was evil.
His evil was expressed in his love for the "People"
and hatred for the "person". In particular the person
that did not conform to his wishes. He was willing to kill, destroy
and maim all those who did not conform to his notion of reality,
because as objects in his reality, they had no choice but to conform,
since his was the only vision that mattered.
And here is the crux, Willow's objectification becomes evil, when
the goal is not the happiness of the other (her concern for the
other) but her own selfish happiness. She is willing to alter
reality (literraly) to force the world to conform to her own vision.
Now granted between the gulag and a simple "forget"
spell there is a great distance, but the philosophical and moral
distance is a lot shorter than willow and people like willow would
like to believe.
Fundamentally, a vision of the world, coupled with the power to
make it real, and salted with an objectification of the other,
leads only to pain and suffering.
And that is why willow is evil, because all three elements are
there, and she has acted upon them all.
cheers, kostadis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Agreed - an even better example would be Stalin --
Rahael, 05:48:49 11/14/01 Wed
Though you might argue that Lenin's entire lack of insanity and
retention of some idealism make him far more objectionable than
his successor - looking at the end result and so on.
I keep persisting in retaining some childish illusions about the
Russian Revolution!! There was still a difference between the
'Red Terror' and the terror that Stalin inflicted. But I agree
that you have made a effective and thoughtful analogy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> kostadis' post Re: Willow isn't evil... (Warning:
kind of random) -- pagangodess, 20:33:26 11/14/01 Wed
I agree with the Lenin part you mentioned, and, growing up in
the former Soviet Union myself, I can certainly relate.
pagangodess
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letterbox mode -- Edward, 10:50:53
11/13/01 Tue
I can understand why OMWF was show in Letterbox mode, but what
was the purpose for last nights Angel episode being show in Letterbox?
Is this just Joss has a new toy and is going to use it? Or was
there something going on that I did not notice that required the
wide screen?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Letterbox mode -- Neaux, 10:59:00 11/13/01 Tue
I might be mistaken.. but I thought all of Angel episodes this
year were in letterbox.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Letterbox mode -- Rob, 11:00:33 11/13/01 Tue
Well, the letterbox for OMWF is obvious. Not only did it give
it a more theatrical, epic sweep, but it worked great for some
wonderful shots, especially evident during "Walk Through
the Fire," with Buffy walking down the street, with other
character's faces appearing on the right hand side of the screen,
and in "Wish I Could Stay." That shot of Amber Benson
in the foreground, up close, and ASH in the background was beyond
brilliant.
But as far as "Angel"...have you been watching all year?
Because every episode has been letterboxed since the season began,
so that wasn't just a new thing for this week. My theory on why
they're doing it is it gives the show some distinction, and looks
classy. But, again, it doesn't have anything to do with OMWF being
letterboxed.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- Kimberly, 11:04:32 11/13/01
Tue
We just hadn't noticed it until it was rather drastically brought
to our attention with OMWF last week. (BTW, Edward and I are husband/wife;
I have to put my $.02 worth in.)
You forgot to mention the COMMERCIAL last night that was in letterbox.
(And I'm not kidding; that's the other thing that made us notice
it.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- Edward, 11:12:18 11/13/01
Tue
Thank you my dear. Seems we were both responding at the same time...
See below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- Edward, 11:10:42 11/13/01 Tue
I have been watching all year, but hadn't noticed before last
night. In fact I didn't notice it last night until a commercial
break came up and stayed in letterbox mode. Then it was kind of
jarring and I noticed it from then on.
I wasn't complaining about it, just curious if there was a reason
as it is unusual for TV shows. (Not that either Buffy or Angel
fall into the category of usual TV Shows.)
In OMWF it made perfect sense to me, it was to provide more of
a movie feel, which it did.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- Rob, 11:28:05 11/13/01
Tue
There are actually a few other shows that use letterbox: ER, The
X-Files, The Sopranos, and Enterprise. With the advent of DVDs,
people have been becoming more aware of widescreen, and how it
preserves the original aspect ratio of the movies. Before, the
films had to be chopped into a box shape to fit the screens properly.
Now, however, people are liking the widescreen look. So, a show
that uses widescreen just looks more cinematic. And you're able
to fit more onto the screen, despite the optical illusion that
it is smaller. One could argue that a picture should fit into
the size of the medium for which it was intended, but I like the
look. Further, it looks GREAT if you have a widescreen TV.
But that's more a surfacey reason. There was actually an article
on widescreen TV shows in Entertainment Weekly recently. It said
that the network execs have come to see the look as more classy
and cinematic. It separates a great show from all the others on
the air. Personally, I think it can get overused, which the article
argues as well. I don't fully see the need for it in a show like
ER. I believe it works best for sci-fi/fantasy shows. But that's
just me...
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- Edward, 11:47:03
11/13/01 Tue
We don't watch ER or The Sopranos, so I haven't seen it used there.
We used to watch the X-files religously, but haven't been able
to keep up with it. In fact I haven't seen more than an episode
or two since the movie. We watched the first few episodes of Enterprise,
but did not notice it was letterbox. We watch alot of TV in the
computer room, and that TV is a little 14inch model with built
in VCR that we can take in the VAN, so that may be why we just
didn't notice it. This week we watched Angel in the Living Room
on the big TV.
I know that movies went to the wide screen originally to combat
their concern about TV, they wanted to be different to have a
competitive edge, and that movies have usually been edited to
be shown on TV which involved finding the most critical portion
of the frame and cutting out the remainder, letterbox allows the
whole wide screen image to be show on regular TV.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Letterbox mode -- RabidHarpy, 11:33:51 11/13/01 Tue
They've been using "letterbox" for the last couple of
episodes on "Angel"...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Letterbox mode -- matching mole, 14:04:15 11/13/01
Tue
That was my impression as well. I noticed that Angel was in 'letterbox'
last week and again this week but not before that. I wonder if
individual stations can convert the image to fill the screen (or
maybe I was just unobservant).
We have a fairly small television so in general I find the wide
screen format a bit irritating.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Expect more and more shows to use this format... -- OnM,
20:28:05 11/13/01 Tue
...as it is the HDTV standard. The program producers are working
to gradually accumulate material in this format, since over the
next decade as older 4x3 format sets wear out and disappear, they
will increasingly be replaced with 16x9 (widescreen) TV's. DVD's
have helped make people aware of just how much better this format
appears visually, and so more and more viewers are becoming interested
in widescreen sets.
I hate to say this, but the only fix for widescreen images on
a really small TV (less than 27") is to get a bigger set,
but a decent 36" set today sells for what a decent 27"
set sold for 10 years ago, so keep that in mind.
Questions about the Mayor...(Spoilers
for third season's major story arc) -- Rob, 10:10:12 11/13/01
Tue
I'm sure it's been a long time since any of us have thought about
the Mayor or the Ascension...or at least, unless you've been watching
the reruns on F/X, which has almost gotten up to that point.
I'm not watching the third season for the first time now. I saw
it when it originally aired. But I had some questions then that
I am reminded of again now. When I first started watching, I was
not on-line and couldn't discuss these questions with anyone.
Now I am and I can! So here they are...
I'd like to get some opinions/theories on how much the Mayor knew
about what was going on in Sunnydale. We know from "Lover's
Walk" that he knew about Spike's activities. We also know
from other episodes that the Mayor has been around a long, long
time. There's evidence that he's been around since the beginning
of Sunnydale, that he founded Sunnydale in order for the demons
to have a place to feed. In exchange, he was given power, never
aged, and would be allowed to ascend, to become a demon. But my
question is, if he knew about Spike's actions, which presumably
include the plots with Drusilla involving the Judge, and Angel
and Dru's plan with Acathala, why did he do nothing to stop it?
He has waited for a long, long time to become a demon, so wouldn't
he want to prevent them from ending the world?
My theories on this (and I've thought about it a lot!) are:
(1) Perhaps since he knew there was a Slayer in town, he allowed
her to clean up his "problems," i.e. Spike, Dru, and
Angel. He knew she'd take care of those things, so he didn't have
to...It was only when she got in his way, when the Ascension got
closer, that he decided to strike against her. Or...
(2) He might not have known all of the plots in-depth, particularly
the plot with Acathala. Angel presumably kept that one very, very
secret. Or...
(3) Being evil, he applauded the other villians' attempts to end
the world. Perhaps the world being sucked into hell wouldn't have
derailed his plans...or at least, that happening would be just
as much of a reward as the Ascension. As long as it happened long
enough before the Ascension was going to happen, it wasn't a big
deal. He did try to take measures to stop it happening as the
Ascension approached however (i.e. having his people attack Spike
in "Lover's Walk") because as it got closer he knew
he was very close to actually succeeding and so wiped out the
"competition" to end the world.
Anyone have any other theories or thoughts? Or, perhaps, help
me decide which one of my three theories is the most likely?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Questions about the Mayor...(Spoilers for third season's
major story arc) -- John Burwood, 12:00:03 11/13/01 Tue
I have had similar thoughts. Personally I would go for your options
1 & 2 in some sort of combination. It has occurred to me that
the Mayor might even have covertly facilitated Joyce's move to
Sunnydale so as to put the Slayer up against the Master and slow
or stop the latter. Wishverse Sunnydale sans Buffy must have given
the Mayor real problems. With the Master dead, came leisure to
pressurize Snyder into finding a pretext to expel Buffy - safer
than killing a Slayer himself & drawing premature attention to
himself before he had achieved invulnerability.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Quoting myself -- d'Herblay, 12:07:09 11/13/01 Tue
I would have recommended my Mayor character post, but it seems
to be available neither in the Voy archives nor on the Existential
Scoobies site. So please allow me to quote some relative passages:
He governs not only with the consent of the governed but with
demonic assistance. As Faith says, "Mayor's got it wired,
B. He built this town for demons to feed on and come graduation
day, he's getting paid." Evidence in "Lovers Walk"
suggests that he has sold his soul, and he refers to the tribute
to Lurconis in "Band Candy" as one of his "campaign
promises." It's fair to say that he enjoys his position only
with the understanding that he will tolerate Sunnydale's less
savory side. But the Mayor has been protective of his turf, driving
out El Eliminati and crippling Balthazar. Would his tolerance
extend to letting the world end before he has achieved his Ascension?
[ . . . ] I think it is entirely plausible that if Joyce had to
move two hours away from LA to find a school that would take Buffy,
then that school may have accepted Buffy only at the behest of
the Mayor. And she was accepted just in time; the counter-factual
world of "The Wish" has no place in it for the Mayor.
It is interesting that between the events of "The Harvest,"
when Buffy is essential to preventing the Master's release, and
those of "Prophecy Girl," when she is necessary to that
release, the Sunnydale government replaces the touchy-feely-but-sensitive-to-wrong-touching
Principal Flutie with the draconian Snyder. And it is when the
Mayor's "big year" is about to begin that Snyder expels
Buffy.
(Before someone starts waving "Becoming" in the face
of this theory, let me point out that less than forty-eight hours
transpire between Angelus's taking possession of Acathla and his
attempt to end the world. Compared to the events of "The
Harvest," awaited for sixty years, and those of "Prophecy
Girl," foreordained in the unimpeachable Codex, "Becoming"
is apocalypse as impulse. Whistler saw it coming, but Giles didn't,
and there is little reason to believe that the Mayor would have
either. There is also little reason to believe that he would have
suspected Angelus, who had shown no inclination to end the world
in "Surprise," of such ambitions. In "Lovers Walk,"
the Mayor says of Spike, "We had a world of fun trying to
guess what he'd do next"; I am willing to chalk up "Becoming"
to a failure of intelligence rather than to any tolerance of apocalyptic
activities in his town.)
I hope this has been helpful.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Quoting myself -- Rob, 12:28:48 11/13/01 Tue
Thanks, d'Herb...In fact, it has been EXTREMELY helpful. I'd love
to read the entire character analysis, as well. If you can e-mail
it to me, my addy is morningperson_2000@yahoo.com. Thanks!
I actually have one question, just to clarify. You mentioned first
that Buffy may have been accepted at Sunnydale High at the behest
of the Mayor, thus implying that he wanted her to keep the Master
from being freed in "The Harvest." But what would have
been his motive for hiring Snyder to keep an eye on Buffy between
that time and "Prophecy Girl"? Wouldn't he still need
the Slayer as a tool to combat the Master? We know from "The
Wish" that, were the Master to emerge, he would be the ruler
of Sunnydale, not the Mayor. Therefore, it would be beneficial
for the Mayor not to allow the Master to rise. I understand how
Snyder is an effective tool for the Mayor, in expelling Buffy
in "Becoming," as his big year approaches. But why would
he have needed him before "Prophecy Girl"? He still,
at that point, needed Buffy.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Questions about the Mayor...(Spoilers for third season's
major story arc) -- Yellowork, 12:32:43 11/13/01 Tue
There are hints in Season 2 episodes which include 'School Hard'
and 'Becoming' that there is a conspiracy operating in local government
circles. These become more frequent in early Season 3, leading
the viewer to expect a 'big bad' who will be villainous in the
mould of the Master or Angelus. When the homely Mayor Wilkins
finally makes his appearance, the viewer expectations are of course
de-railed. Then, later in the same season expectations are overturned
*again*, as it is revealed that the Mayor has been troubling/'nurturing'
Sunnydale far longer than either the Master (under sixty years)
or Angelus (a few months). Perhaps the question is, were either
of the *latter* aware of the *Mayor*? We see in Season 3 that
the mayor has a network of vamp contacts, and there is no reason
to believe that this is a recent affiliation, especially considering
the longevity of all parties! We know how prone to gossip vampires
seem, so if the Master and Angelus knew about the Mayor's influence
in the town, why did they not attempt to remove a possible complication
in their respective plans?
I wonder what you think? At the moment it seems either that
1. Angelus and the Master were ignorant of the Mayor. This would
mean that the Mayor's vamps were loyal to the Mayor, not simply
in his employ, and possibly were hardier fighters than those around
Angelus and the Master, which would also have helped to keep the
Mayor's secret secret.
2. One or the other did find out about the Mayor, made an attempt
to remove the threat he posed, and failed.
or
3. A deal was struck between the big bads.
Possibly these three alternatives could be combined, so that the
Master / Angelus was ignorant, *then* found out, tried to kill
the Mayor, failed, and was therefore forced to compromise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Questions about the Mayor...(Spoilers for third
season's major story arc) -- Rob, 13:04:25 11/13/01 Tue
That's an interesting persepective as well...one I completely
didn't even think about. I was so focused on whether the Mayor
knew about them, I never stopped to wonder if they knew about
the Mayor.
I'm gonna have to think about this one...
Rob
*ouch! this is making my brain hurt!*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Questions about the Mayor...(Spoilers for third
season's major story arc) -- Nadya V., 15:19:05 11/13/01 Tue
Well, Angel didn't seem to know about the Mayor until Buffy and
the Scoobies did, so Angelus wouldn't have known either. The point
of his curse is that Angel has to live with Angelus's memories,
after all. The Master is a different story. Personally, I wonder
if the Master "accidently" getting trapped in the Hellmouth
back in the 1930's really was an accident or if the Mayor was
involved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I've been thinking about it and... -- Rob, 19:14:16 11/13/01
Tue
I think I've finally come up with an answer that I buy! And believe
me, I've been thinking about this all day LOL. I was helped a
great deal by d'Herblay's Mayor essay, so thanks, d'Herb!
There's a reason my "Meet the Posters" profile says
I have a Think Too Much Quotient of 20/10. :-)
So, anyway, I finally realize that I was approaching this Mayor
issue from the totally wrong angle. I was wondering why he allowed
this other evil stuff to go on, when it might interfere with his
plans. I finally realized that he had no choice. I had forgotten
that he sold his soul in order to be mayor of this town. His price
was having to cater to the demons and serve them, and, further,
to cover up their actions. Cover up. NOT prevent them from happening.
In fact, I doubt that he was allowed to prevent any of the evil
from happening, or he would have lost his position.
What do we know about the first season? The Master was in charge,
and just about all the vamps we met were in the Order of Aurelius.
Their sole purpose was to help free the Master. We know from "The
Wish" that, had the Master arisen, he would be the leader
of Sunnydale. The Mayor would be a non-entity, and he obviously
has no way to prevent that. If he could have, he would have. Enter
the Slayer. She is able to solve all his problems, without him
directly angering the evil that he serves. Whether it was extreme
luck on his part, or whether he is the reason she is in Sunnydale
in the first place is up for questioning. But the fact remains
that the Slayer helps him cover up all the unusual things in Sunnydale,
without ever having to reveal himself or get his hands dirty.
His only power in the first season was covering things up. All
the vamps in the area were working for the Master. This is evidenced
by the fact that, after the Master is killed by Buffy, Sunnydale
is pretty much vamp-less for the next two or three months. I believe
the reason is that they have lost their leader. They were confused
and alone, with no evil to guide them, except the Anointed One,
who finally rallied them together and eventually formulated a
plan to resurrect the Master, which, of course, coincided with
Buffy's return to Sunnydale in September.
Again, the Mayor has no say in what happens. Buffy stops the plot
to raise the Master. Still, however, the Mayor does not have an
"in" on the evil plans. He can only hear them from outside
the inner circle of evil. I think the thing that lets him "in,"
that allows him to gain some vampire and demon lackeys, is Spike's
arrival in town. Spike kills the Anointed One and names himself
the head vamp in Sunnydale. But I wonder if not all of the vamps
were so keen on following him. There may have been at least a
few who were not willing on following whoever or whatever declared
himself the Big Bad. That may have begun the formulation of the
Mayor's vampire crew.
So what do I believe so far? That during the first season, the
Mayor had no way to control the vamps, but is very happy to have
the Slayer there. He is aware, however, that in two years he will
be ascending himself, which may anger the Slayer. Further, the
weak Principal Flutie is not a good enough cover for the supernatural
things at Sunnydale High. The hiring of Snyder allows the Mayor
to keep an eye on Buffy, and to cover up some of the supernatural
stuff. I can picture the Mayor having told Snyder to keep an eye
on Buffy, and Snyder taking that to mean that Buffy is a bad seed.
It is when the Ascension gets close that the Mayor wants Buffy
out of the way. Now the Slayer would be disadvantageous to him.
And that is when she is expelled. But the Mayor still does not
have absolute power. He cannot keep her out of school without
real reason. The state supreme court would override him, so that
is impossible. He has to find other ways to fight the Slayer...
Oh, and I think d'Herb is right about the Mayor not having been
aware of the events in "Becoming" since that happened
so fast and was not preordained.
Anyway, my mind's racing really fast, which may account for the
sloppiness of the grammar and some repetitiveness, but I just
wanted to let everybody know that I think I've come up with a
reasonable theory for myself. What does everybody else think?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blurring The Lines -- AngelVSAngelus,
13:13:17 11/13/01
I've noticed, or at least I get the impression, that alot of people
here on the board seem to enjoy the idea of grayness, blurring
the lines between dichomic forces like good and evil. While that
makes for the most interesting dramatic and literary writing,
it becomes a danger when people blur the line between the two,
good and evil, to the point of obscurity. Then it ceases to be
interesting, and starts to be contradictory. For, if good and
evil become one and the same, then what exactly is the point of
this massive conflict between the two that our favorite characters
find themselves in the midst of week after week. An example is
the character of Spike. I'll be the first to admit that I love
Spike, even in his modern incarnation as the Slayer's demon killing
ally, but I'm disturbed by people's rooting for he and Buffy to
be together. That anyone could think that that would be a healthy
relationship is a little surprising to me. On one hand, it seems
to stand against what Buffy is supposed to believe in. Yes, Spike
has committed good acts, yes, I do believe he truly loves, and
yes I do believe he remains evil. If he had the chance to kill,
he might not do so, but if his reasons for refraining are "Buffy
probably wouldn't like that," is he really considered a good
person? Painting a sympathetic picture for a villain is an interesting
and talented literary technique, but in doing so the writer must
still maintain that they are villainous. Spike's no longer a villain
granted, but I had hoped that the writers would maintain his selfishness
at least, and also maintain that Buffy doesn't want to be with
a man who has absolutely no moral qualm with eating people. That
having been said, I too am susceptible to sympathy for Spike.
When I saw her throw that money at him in the alley way and repeat
the words of his unrequited love Cecily last season, I didn't
really like Buffy. Until I put the situation into perspective.
Here's a fellow who's tried to kill her on several occassions,
now getting off on describing to her how he killed those that
came before her and how she'll be next. I hadn't intended for
this to be such a long post, and I hope no one kills me for my
ramblings or my being against the whole Buffy/Spike thing. Just
an opinion, not meant to be imposed upon others, just expressed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Blurring The Lines -- Kimberly, 13:24:19 11/13/01 Tue
And a good post it is. And an important point to make. Good and
evil are each separate, but making the distinction becomes endlessly
complex. And blurring that line further makes for great stories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Blurring The Lines -- mundusmundi, 13:34:28 11/13/01
Tue
I admit it, I love shades of gray, but also big splashy colors.
Spike has a way of fulfilling both for me -- the continuing graying
of his character, as well as the luridness of some of his statements,
actions and gestures. He's a great character because there's such
variety to him, a regular Mardi Gras parade.
I'm disturbed by people's rooting for he and Buffy to be together.
I think it's important not to confuse two different kinds of "rooting."
While granted there are some pulling for a shippy union, others
want to see it happen just to see what would happen. I fall into
the latter category. I love high drama, dark humor and unpredictable
storylines, and there's plenty of that to go on whenever Buffy
and Spike are together on screen. I certainly don't think their
relationship is 100% healthy, but I can live vicariously through
their screw-ups while knowing it's "just" a TV show.
(I don't see Joss & Co. endorsing a B/S ship altogether, either.
Like everything else they've concocted, I suspect they'll address
the issue within the context of the plot itself.)
No, I don't want Spike to be merely Buffy's boyfriend, or a total
square. But I'd be equally disappointed if he reverted entirely
back to his old ways. A static character is a boring one. Spike
was getting static right when the chip went in; and now I sense
we're on the verge of another change soon. What exactly will befall
I don't know, but I can't wait to find out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: She's kissing him and still kicking his butt!
-- bible belt, 20:09:45 11/13/01 Tue
She's liable to stake him in a moment of passion if they're not
careful. I like non-static spike too.:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Mini-rant if you'll bear it -- Chew-lean, 20:58:40
11/13/01 Tue
- I grudging agree that they're the source of a lot of interesting
stories that make the show more interesting, but I am bitter and
disturbed for another moot point: Angel. It feels so unfair that
it works w/ one vampire when it couldn't with the first (so much
broke them off: curses, spin-offs, Networks). Still, I am an un-repentant
Angel and Buffy shipper - their first encounter cemented my favor
during the pilot. - Let me back-pedal a little. I understand that
their lives do not end with their finished romance - the worst
i do is put their love on a pedestal. They have moved on, although
romantic-inside-me doesn't think they'll find anything that will
match it. - I hate what unholy changes the writers are making
and i love the show even more.
Dammit!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Mini-rant if you'll bear it (re-posted) -- Chew-Lean,
21:24:10 11/13/01 Tue
- I grudging agree that they're the source of a lot of interesting
stories that make the show more interesting, but I am bitter and
disturbed for another moot point: Angel. It feels so unfair that
it works w/ one vampire when it couldn't with the first (so much
broke them off: curses, spin-offs, Networks). Still, I am an un-repentant
Angel and Buffy shipper - their first encounter cemented my favor
during the pilot. - Let me back-pedal a little. I understand that
their lives do not end with their finished romance - the worst
i do is put their love on a pedestal. They have moved on, although
romantic-inside-me doesn't think they'll find anything that will
match it. - I hate what unholy changes the writers are making
and i love the show even more.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Mini-rant if you'll bear it (re-posted) -- Chew-Lean,
13:58:15 11/14/01 Wed
(the posting board hasn't been able to accept my posting - it's
obviously not in agreement)
- I grudging agree that they're the source of a lot of interesting
stories that make the show more interesting, but I am bitter and
disturbed for another moot point: Angel. It feels so unfair that
it works w/ one vampire when it couldn't with the first (so much
broke them off: curses, spin-offs, Networks). Still, I am an un-repentant
Angel and Buffy shipper - their first encounter cemented my loyalty
during the pilot. - Let me back-pedal a little. I understand that
their lives do not end with their finished romance - the worst
i do is put their love on a pedestal. They have moved on, although
romantic-inside-me doesn't think they'll find anything that will
match it. But why did it have to be Spike? - I hate what unholy
changes the writers are making and i love the show even more.
Grrrr
thanks, chuy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Blurring The Lines -- Yellowork, 13:48:31 11/13/01 Tue
It is not necessary to think of the world in terms of Good and
Evil all the time; in fact, this is a tendency which can become
unhealthy. Look at the Taliban, who as fundamentalists admit absolutely
*no* blurring of lines or distinctions; there are a chosen Few,
and everyone else is Evil by definition. This is the answer to
all those questions about the Muslims who died in the WTC Tower:
the Taliban just don't care. Simply because they were in the tower,
doing the jobs that they did, they must therefore have sold out
to the Evil; the West, capitalism, materialism, liberalism, the
modern age - the list goes on. This thinking *is* sick, right?
I don't mean to say that believing that there is a Good and an
Evil is wrong, just it seems more healthy to conceive of a temporal
world where nothing is entirely Good or entirely Evil - that is,
these things exist, but they exist somehow *outside* the ordinary
world, like two poles or stars towards which things in the world
are drawn. This feels to me to concur with current and previous
storylines on 'Buffy'. On the other hand, there are systems of
belief which do not admit the existence of a Good/Evil struggle
in the world, e.g. 'Beyond Good and Evil' (Nietszche) or some
ideas from the ancient Buddhist and Brahmin traditions of Asia.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The Jossverse and the War on Terrorism -- Ryuei, 14:23:53
11/13/01 Tue
And here is another angle on that: I would love to just write
off the Taliban as irredemably evil - but that old fiend relativism
comes in and screws everything up. One of the reasons the Taliban
came to power in the first place is because they were an alternative
to the even worse evil of anrarchy and chaos when those who are
now called the Northern Alliance were indiscriminately raping
and pillaging in Kabul and elsewhere. So just a few years ago
the Taliban represented law and order. As grey as Angel and Buffy
have gotten lately - they are still paint in pretty stark and
vivid colors compared to what we have to deal with here in the
real world.
In fact, over the years my attitude towards the demons in the
Jossverse has been that on the whole they are just trying to take
back what they see as theirs (this world) and in some cases they
require human beings as food, fodder, breeding stock, etc...Perhaps
that is no more evil that the way we eat other mammals or the
way we would fight to liberate our own homes from an invader.
However, evil or not, their interests our inimical to human interest
and therefore we must fight to the death for the sake our our
very survival and for our human values. No need to be mean about
it (like Holtz or the Initiative) but no need to show mercy when
such would be self-destructive (for instance the Scoobies letting
Spike live or Buffy letting Ben/Glory live). On the other hand,
since the demons are sentient beings and some of them do seem
willing to adopt human values and to assimilate (like Lorne or
the Prio Motu Buddhist) I think it is not unreasonable to try
to be discerning and not just opt for genocide or reduce the demons
to objects to be used and abused (as per the Initiative or the
Ring) - that would compromise the very values we are fighting
for: compassion and respect for the lives and feelings of other
sentient beings.
On the other hand, since the fight is to the death, I have never
been disturbed by the rutheless/shady tactics used by the Scoobies
or AI. All the breaking and entering, computer hacking, subversion
of the enemy, espionage, theft, torture (remember Giles with Glory's
minion), wholesale slaughter never really bugged me because they
were doing what they had to in order to save the world.
Now I think about real life and our war on terrorism. In the same
way, we are fighting people whose values are inimical to ours.
But at the same time, not all those who are on the other side
are necessarily evil. So like Giles and Wesley, I think we have
to find that fine line between resorting to rutheless tactics
and at the same time maintaining a sense of discernment regarding
when and if to be rutheless.
This is really bugging me actually. It didn't bother me when Giles
tortured Glory's minion, or when he murdered the helpless Ben,
or when Wesley lied to Angel and ordered men to certain death
in Pylea. I condone their actions. But that is just fiction, just
a television show. And they did what they did to save innocent
human lives. Now I realize that all of us are in a position where
our governments must use the same tactics and find the same amount
of discernment between ruthelessness and compassion in fighting
this war on terrorism. Will I be so approving if the CIA has to
torture suspected terrorists, if special forces are used to assassinate
terrorists in neutral or even friendly countries, if US and allied
soldiers are sacriced in guerilla wars, if lies and disinformation
are deliberately spread through the media to keep the terrorists
off-balance or to keep up morale on our side? The questions are
the same but much tougher to answer now that it's no longer a
television show and the enemy are not lumpy headed demons but
fellow human beings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Jossverse and the War on Terrorism --
grifter, 15:04:58 11/13/01 Tue
I think you have just described the dilemma of war, my friend...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The Jossverse and the War on Terrorism
-- yabyumpan, 15:50:26 11/13/01 Tue
It is also a question of perspective, the Taliban and many others
throughout the world consider what is called western civilisation
"evil" and would justify what they do as "survival",
in the same way that Vampires are condidered "evil"
when from their perspective they are doing what they need to do
to survive i.e. drinking blood. Many people consider eating the
flesh of other beings and experimenting on them to enhance the
lives of Humans to be ethicly OK,a question of survival, something
which from another perspective could be seen as "evil".
It's the seeing thing's in black and white which is the route
of Fundamenalism, the absolute belief the you are "right".
It's recognising the shades of grey and continually questioning
our beliefs and perceived realities, however comforting they may
be, which leads to real growth and progress. I think that's what
we get in Jossverse and why it's head and shoulders above anything
else on offer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Jossverse and the War on Terrorism --
Jim Baird, 17:04:33 11/13/01 Tue
Interesting - after reading Bernard Lewis's (excellent) piece
in the New Yorker this week about the history of Islam, the concept
of Jossverse demons as a metaphor for Muslims seems to be fairly
apt. The Bin Ladens of the world see themselves as taking back
the preeminent position that Islam rightfully holds, and that
has been usurped by the nefarious West. As evidenced by his popularity
in the middle east, many Muslims seem to go along with his general
rhetoric, even if they are provatley attracted to western culture.
I'm reminded of Spike's speech to Buffy in B2 - how vampires like
to talk big about "destroying the world", but most like
all the things the human world has to offer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> I am offended by this post -- Rahael,
05:24:55 11/14/01 Wed
As a human being, as a Christian and a member of a multi-faith
community.
I've never slated anyone's post on this board before, but there's
got to be a first time for everything.
The Buffyverse isn't Narnia; the evil, cruel and ancient Calormen
aren't equivelent to the demons in Sunnydale. If I thought Joss
was equating demons to a whole group of people I would never have
anything to do with BtVS ever again. Isn't it funny how these
kind of sentiments have found ground over the centuries.......just
substitute a different 'race' of people for each occasion.
Rufus has answered more moderately and more wisely no doubt, but
anyway..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Rahael, if you're still online,
want to chat? -- LadyStarlight, 05:55:53 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Think broader, perhaps. -- Solitude1056,
06:28:37 11/14/01 Wed
I wouldn't say that Joss is using his demons to be a metaphor
for a specific group of people. Instead, I'd suggest that Joss
just took one of the oldest stories we tell our children about
our enemies, and made the tellers non-human.
For instance, Native Americans in the US were in North America
before Anglo-Saxons, and were shoved out in a brutal fashion.
But if you head to the reservation, there's an awful lot o' stuff
around that's part 'n parcel of the American capitalist society,
and not derived from the N.A. traditions or technologies. Oh,
like TVs, radios, ready-made clothing, sneakers, cars, computers,
satellite dishes.
Or we could say, 'hah, must be the Chinese!' For three thousand
something years, the Chinese were the preeminent culture in their
sphere, wowing every jaw-dropped Anglo who came within a hundred
miles of Beijing. They had paper, fireworks, running water, and
the largest bureacracy in the world. And then they turned their
back on the western world, and they spent a hundred years as a
technological backwater. No, they don't like the Western world,
culturally, since they see it as an upstart, but they'd love to
get western corporations to bring more work.
Or, ooh, it could be the Japanese. Still the slang term of "round-eyed
devil" (or whatever it is) still exists, and is used... but
that didn't stop Japan from using western post-WWII money to rebuild
their world, taking advantage of all the western knowledge about
factories and new technologies. Seventy years ago, they were an
isolated island, refusing to congregate with non-Japanese, and
they still hold - culturally - these same prejudices... but that
doesn't stop them from courting the western consumer.
The idea of demons "being here first" and considering
themselves in a "preeminent position until usurped"
- usually by devious means on the part of the opposition - with
a promise to "come back and prevail" while at the same
time wanting to "get all the good things" offered by
this brave new world... no, this story didn't start with a bunch
of radical fundamentalists in Afghanistan. Sorry, Rahael, but
this story is as old as dirt. I suspect Joss uses this classic
Us-Them kind of self-congratulatory consolation tripe for past
wrongs & future retribution... as a way to break it the Us-Them
dichotomy and explore ways & means of becoming an Everyone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> online now Lady S - plus some
further comments -- Rahael, 08:32:30 11/14/01 Wed
I'll hang around the chatroom while I browse, see if you drop
in.
Solitude, I thought that line was a throw away by Spike, firstly
to give him a motivation for helping Buffy, and secondly to make
him endearing. THere was nothing hypocritical about him liking
human society. In fact, we as the viewers are meant to be struck
by why Angelus does in fact want to end the world - Spike's position
is totally logical. Vamps need humans to live on.
Secondly what I was offended by was first the equating of a whole
group of people of one faith being equated with a bunch of evil
bloodsuckers, preying on 'the west'. It may have escaped some
people's attention that Islam is a worldwide faith, and many Europeans,
East Europeans and Africans are Muslims too. All these groups
of people have varying outlooks and cultural attitudes. Even in
the middle east, there is a great deal of variation. Not to mention
the fact that Islam is made up of two different philosophical
outlooks - Sunni and Sufi.
Secondly, what does the term 'western culture' mean? Should it
not go beyond money, capitalism and luxury goods? For me, Western
culture is made up of literature, philosophy, science. All of
which by the way Islam and the Arab countries in the middle ages
made a immeasurable contribution to. A lot of Ancient philosophy
would have been lost to the West if Muslim scholars hadn't translated
them into Arabic...the Renaissance was to a large measure spurred
on by the retranslation of these Greek to Arabic to Greek/Latin/Vernacular
again classics for the consumption of the West. WHat about the
Muslim contribution to Science, astronomy, mathematics and architecture?
What about Moorish Spain?
Secondly Jim Baird's post makes a number of assumptions: 1)all
Muslims think alike 2)all of them hate the West, live in it, but
hypocritically want to bring it down.
Secondly, associating demons with real life groups of people (rather
than seeing them as 'inner demons' or metaphors a la Age's posts
below) is dangerous - how do we know most demons are demons? Because
of the way they look.
As for Japan and China - capitalism is not the sole preserve of
America.The whole logic of capitalism is that it has to be global
to function properly - it's propensity is toward the free movement
of trade, labour and ideas. (Hence Marx's theory that revolution
could only occur after capitalims has conquered the world - laying
the grounds for an internationlist worker solidarity, where national
boundaries become less important that the fact that the majority
of the world are united by being workers). And America isn't responsible
for all the creature comforts that are available in the world
- plenty of the scientific work behind modern innovation has come
from all over the world. At least one good thing about the scientific
and academic community is that it is an international one - good
ideas don't have national boundaries.
As for the 'first people' myth - I would agree with you Sol. It
is dangerous, just as many kinds of nationalistic myths are dangerous.
Just as all racial and cultural stereotyping is dangerous.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Not to nitpic, Raheal,
but -- Shaglio, 09:44:37 11/14/01 Wed
In your post you used "Secondly" four times :)
I don't know if you did it intentionally, but it was rather humurous
nonetheless.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> LOL! oops.........please
pretend that I didn't do that! -- Rahael, 10:03:20 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: online now Lady
S - plus some further comments -- Jim Baird, 10:05:58 11/14/01
Wed
"Secondly Jim Baird's post makes a number of assumptions:
1)all Muslims think alike 2)all of them hate the West, live in
it, but hypocritically want to bring it down."
I'm sorry I gave that impression; I actually was trying (badly,
I see now) to say the opposite.
Originally, Jossverse demons were portrayed as being uniformly
evil, all equally bent on destroying humanity. As the seasons
have progressed, we have been shown that many, if not most, demons
simply want to peacefully cooexist. While many might be susceptible
to rhetoric about "sending the world to hell", most
don't actually want to do it, and really just want to get along
in the human world. Some eps of Angel have even gone so far as
to show them as a persecuted minority.
Similarly, most in the muslim world are not terrorists, and don't
particularly want war with the west. But there is still some cultural
memory of lost greatness that prompts many to buy Bin Laden t-shirts
and join in chants of "Death to America", even as they
express sympathy for the victims.
My point was not "demonize" muslims; it was just to
point out the analygies that can be drawn, particularly as the
show's portrayal of demons has evolved. Sorry again if I offended.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks for the
explanation Jim -- Rahael, 10:21:06 11/14/01 Wed
Mollified, but still troubled here with some aspects of this analogy.
Muslims are as vast and varied a group of people as are Christians
and Buddhists. I have known Buddhist monks who have marched carrying
guns, and demanding death to a whole community. And yet I would
hardly categorise buddhists as bloodthirsty, unjust or militaristic.
The point I was trying to make was that Muslims are too varied
to ascribe similar cultural, political and social motives to all
of them. In Afghanistan, Muslims are fighting with Muslims. Islamic
Pakistan supports one side; Islamic Iran another. Some countries
in the Middle East don't get on at all.
Another thing which was troubling to me was the link between Human
World = Western World Inhuman = Muslims
The evil of the demon world is precisely that of prejudice, ignorance
and the very human propensity to demonise and stereotype the 'enemy'
as 'the other'.
Matching Mole and Ryuei have already said (much more eloquently)
what I wanted to say about good and evil in the Buffyverse.
Just a quick off topic point - in the week that one American commentator
suggested torturing Al-Quida suspects, we would be much better
of taking the beam out of our collective eyes than taking the
mote out of the 'enemy's'.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You just proved my point,
though. -- Solitude1056, 10:42:47 11/14/01 Wed
...Jim Baird's post makes a number of assumptions: 1)all Muslims
think alike 2)all of them hate the West, live in it, but hypocritically
want to bring it down.
As humanity goes, there is a tendency to get into an Us v Them
situation. The Others, being demonized, are either turned into
folks who deserve their subjugation by virtue of inferiority,
or if the Other is seen as the new oppressor, then they're demonized
as usurpers who will someday get what's coming to them. Your description
of Jim's post could be used to demonstrate the Us v Them for every
case I brought up. Hmm, all settlers think the only good injun
is a dead injun, but they want our resources and land. All Hindus
are ignorant idol-worshippers who should be converted but their
biotechnology is the best in the world, dammit. All Chinese hate
the west, but they want our technology, our cash, and our pop
music. Blah blah blah. The point is that we're all thinking the
same thing about the Other, when we see the Other as not-us.
Yes, just about anyone can take the human/demon story and say,
"ah-hah! Joss is making a point about such-and-such."
Well, of course he is... but then, you could say the same thing
about any other story that uses the same Us v Them ancient plotline,
and use it to describe just about any set of current events that
involves an Us v Them situation. It's not a big stretch, and it's
one of the reasons that such manipulations of a classic issue
can make a story "universal" or "timeless"
- because it's repeated in every generation, ad nauseum. Every
bleedin' generation that comes along is gonna have to learn that
life isn't black and white, things are grey... just like Buffy
is learning in her own hero way, each person/culture/community
learns - eventually, or hopefully.
Yes. It's true that China had good parts, and the Western European
world wasn't the only reason it lost ground in the race to be
industrialized. It's true that Japan has made a huge contribution
to the world's technologies, and that not all Japanese are convinced
that non-Japanese are evil creatures bent on destruction. And
it's true that American money isn't the envy of all countries,
anymore than American money is the root of all evil in the world.
That's exactly my point: that it's not that simple. Joss has set
up this "simple" storyline in his demon/human background...
and spent the past six years deconstructing it.
I can see you're refusing to fall for the Us v Them, Rahael. But
don't let it bug you that it seems someone else is, because it's
always possible that we've just got another devil's advocate in
our midst. (We've got a lot of those, it seems; I think it's a
natural side-effect of philosophy.) The way I see it, yeah, Joss'
version is just another retelling of the Us v Them, and can be
considered one more metaphor for situations such as the Israeli/Palestinian
conflict, the Trail of Tears, the French/Indian War, the Spanish/American
War, blah blah blah. But if, through stories like Joss', someone
out there recognizes that 'Other' does not necessarily equate
with evil, then the story's done its job of helping at least this
generation move a step closer to understanding the non-absolute
quality of our humanity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, great points!
-- Rahael, 11:05:57 11/14/01 Wed
I 'get' them now!! lol.
The only thing is that a lot of fans, Riley's Ghost being a pertinent
example do see the demons as unremittingly evil who must be killed,
and persist in seeing the situation as black and white. ( Let's
kill all of them, because even if 20% are good, the other 80%
are bad. The only good demon is a dead demon etc).
In my mind Joss has always gone far out of his way not to portray
Buffy as some blonde Aryan warrior, battling the darkness threatening
suburban America.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> i read it differently
-- anom, 22:12:06 11/14/01 Wed
I think the problem here is that Jim B. was comparing demons as
shown in the Jossverse to the perception of Muslims by (many)
Westerners, not the reality. And in fact, even the perception
of demons as "a bunch of evil bloodsuckers" has been
shown to be false. Demons on our 2 favorite shows have been portrayed
as having as much diversity as you point out is represented by
Muslims, like most other racial/ethnic/national groups, in the
real world.
"Not to mention the fact that Islam is made up of two different
philosophical outlooks - Sunni and Sufi."
Pardon the correction, but the 2 major streams of Islam are Sunni
& Shia. Sufism is a much smaller movement (if that's the word)
of mystics, which seems to hold a much more open attitude than
either of the others. If I'm not overgeneralizing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> drat again --
Rahael, 04:52:11 11/15/01 Thu
There must be some law that the more you post the more silly mistakes
you make. Yet again, I'll say - yep, got that wrong. I meant to
say Shia, though in fact Sufi is the aspect of Islam that I am
most interested in.
As to the topic at hand, I think I'm officially back to 'not getting
it'. Ah well, it's just me again obviously. I was frightened by
yet another instance of Islamophobia, on this of all boards. But
perhaps I'm mistaken about it since everyone else has a different
perspective on this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> "What
we've got here... -- Humanitas, 12:28:01 11/15/01 Thu
...is a failure to communicate."
Don't feel too bad, Rahael, I was also offended when I first read
the post in question. I didn't respond, because you'd already
done so, and I didn't feel the need to pile on. I think his clarification
went a long way toward explaining what happened. Many of us, from
time to time, try to make a point, and our words get away from
us, and we end up not saying what we actually mean. That's the
bad news.
The good news is that our failure is not for lack of trying, nor
even for lack of civility. As long as we can maintain that, this
board will continue to be the home that it has become. We can
disagree, even radically disagree, and still continue to be civil,
and clarify any misunderstandings that arise. Would that the rest
of the world were thus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Totally
agree with you. I'm with the clarified now! -- Rahael, 19:14:23
11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Think broader, perhaps.
-- Ryuei, 09:45:36 11/14/01 Wed
Solitude, Your take on this was what I had in mind. I do not think
Joss is equating the demons with any specific group of people.
But I do think he has all along been exploring the dynamics and
implications of the Us vs. Them syndrom and then deconstructing
it. This works on both sides of the equation. So for instance,
we see religious extremists as "demons" whereas religious
extremists see secular humanists as "demons." At some
point we have to go beyond appearances and assumptions. This,
to me, is one of the great things about the Buddhist teaching
of the mutual possession of the ten worlds. It is a powerful metaphor
for the fact that none of us has an intrinsic nature. We are what
we are in terms of causes, conditions, and perspectives. One moment
I might be an angel, the next a demon, and then very and simply
human and this goes for everyone. At the same time, hard choices
have to be made when the conflict is a matter of life and death
but even then one must be discerning and compassionate and not
compromise the very values one is trying to preserve.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> It's easy to kill a Metaphor........ -- Rufus,
18:33:21 11/13/01 Tue
Demons are the metaphor for all that we hate about ourselves.
They are easy to kill because we have the dual excuse of they
aren't human, or they don't have a soul. That can excuse almost
any action. Buffy is a killer who slays the worst part of our
own capacity for evil. Even Buffy will say that it would be easier
if she had just killed Spike but now that he has become more real
to her she is stuck with him. It's harder to kill what you feel
a connection to. BVS also has shown us that the most evil monsters
are the people we become when we get complacent about our actions
towards others, even demon others. The line between the metaphor
and reality is slowly changing as we get to know more about the
demon others that Buffy battles all the time. Notice that Buffy
doesn't kill everything that is different from the human norm,
she has the instinct to only go after the true threat, even if
that includes some Knights. Knights were generally seen to be
the protector of the people, but when they lost their ability
to show mercy and compassion for a young girl they fell prey to
the slayer. Tells me that just because a person is a Knight, or
demon that we can't assume they have only one capacity to interact
in this world. Some knights are not gallant protectors but men
who have become inhumane in their quest to win the war, and some
demons are quite humane and caring. Buffy kills the metaphor,
it's us that kill each other, some of the reasoning is the same.
Human, demon, Taliban, American...all have the capacity for good
or evil that is unique to each individually. In BVS it's easy
because it is fictional, we are what our actions make us, not
because of how we started be it demon or human. Real life is hard
because for us to kill we first have to stop feeling that our
opponent is human, and that we are right in everything we do.
"What we once were informs all that we become".......great
line from Darla that also applies to how we act as people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Individual and metaphor, clarity and action
-- matching mole, 08:48:23 11/14/01 Wed
I think it is important to distinguish between individuals and
actions when discussing good and evil. While it may be possible
to describe an action as being wholly good or wholly evil (as
well as a mixture of the two) I think that, in real life at least,
it is impossible to characterize a person as being completely
good or completely evil.
In fiction (including TV) any given character falls somewhere
on a metaphor-individual continuum. A metaphorical character fulfills
a plot device, represents a particular human attribute, etc. Metaphorical
characters can be very powerful - people love to love or hate
them. Individual characters are attempts to recreate an actual
human being (or other sentient entity). They thus have specific
motivations for their actions (past experiences, other things
going on in their lives). Any realistically portrayed individual
character is going to have both sympathetic and unsympathetic
attributes.
As the major characters in BtVS and AtS have developed over time
they have tended towards the individual end of the spectrum with
attendant blurring of good and evil. Willow and Spike are probably
the extreme examples of this. Minor characters (e.g. Glory's minions
or even Glory herself) are largely metaphoric. Ruthless action
towards a metaphor (as long as it is established that it is a
"evil' metaphor) is not generally as upsetting as ruthless
action towards an individual.
In the real world everyone is an individual, even if they are
perceived metaphorically by others. A large portion of the western
world may view Bin Laden as a personification of evil while at
least some in the Moslem world may regard him as a hero but in
reality he is a human being. A dangerous and fanatical human being
but still one that undoubtedly has a complex set of motivations
for his actions. The same is true for everyone else. For those
of us who resist the temptation to view individuals in metaphorical
terms, ruthless and violent action, while possibly necessary,
is always unsettling.
Actions are also often less dubious in fiction because the choices
are often clearer. When Giles kills Ben there is no doubt about
the consequences of his failing to do so. Glory would remain on
earth, wreaking havoc and unstoppable. Similarly when torturing
the minion it is clear that this being is culpable - it is definitely
one of Glory's alcolytes. BtVS and AtS have shown the unfortunate
consequences of certain actions but they have generally been actions
of mercy rather than brutality (Buffy's failing to kill Angelus,
Angel's freeing Billy to rescue Cordelia). Mistakes of violence
(Faith's killing of the deputy mayor, Angel's killing of a guardian
demon) have been perpetrated on very minor characters in the heat
of the moment and the consequences of the mistakes have emphasized
those taking the violent action rather than the victims. In real
life brutal actions (even if well-intentioned) may be perpetrated
on the wrong people or may have unforeseen and even more negative
consequences. The clarity of choice in decision-making found in
fiction is often absent in real life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Individual and metaphor, clarity and
action -- anom, 21:56:38 11/14/01 Wed
Bravo, mole! You said just about everything I've wanted to say
on the subject, but better than I would've. I wish more people
would keep all that in mind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow and *The Tempest* -- Yellowork,
14:16:32 11/13/01
Does anyone see parallels between Willow and the character of
'Prospero' in Shakespeare's 'Tempest'? Prospero is a Renaissance
'mage' figure, who is not evil, but he does have a fatal flaw.
In the play, Prosero has neglected his kingdom, which represents
the ordinary world, as Willow seems to be growing distant from
her friends in the series. This is a comedy, so in the end Prospero
regains his kingdom (that is, rejoins the world), but to do so
he must first renounce his magic, burying his precious books.
Perhaps it is also possible to compare aspects of the relationship
between Tara and Willow with that between Prospero and his 'airy'
spirit Ariel, whom he abuses, but on whom he must rely to perform
spells (like Tara and Willow's complementary abilities as witnessed
in 'Hush', 'Who Are You' and so on).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> This rough magic -- Rahael, 05:35:46 11/14/01 Wed
Yellowork, this is an intriguing line of thought.....especially
since Joss is such a fan of Shakespeare, and the Tempest explicitly
addresses the questions of Magic use (power) and responsibility.
Thinking about it, I would more associate Prospero with Giles,
since he is such a paternal figure, and because he treats magic
with caution.
I shall have to go back and have a look again at the Tempest....but
one thought strikes me immediately. When thinking of Adam, the
automatic thought was of 'Frankenstein'. Did anyone mention Caliban
as a good source for his character? Especially with the whole
evil mother thing (which according to David Fury, Joss is fascinated
by - sick mother/son relationships).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Past and Current Loves (spoilers
for Tabula Rasa) -- Solitude1056, 19:48:28 11/13/01 Tue
There've been several conversations, here and there, over the
past few months, since we first saw Xander proposing to Anya.
And then, of course, we got to see Willow's petulant expression
when Xander announced the engagement. However, I think tonight
Joss was clearly saying something.
I mean, hell, everyone's forgotten who they are. Anya and Giles
were hilarious together, thinking they were a couple. In comparison,
Willow drew the conclusion that she and Xander were also a couple,
but their awkwardness together was plainly stating someone inherently
wrong with that assumption, and they both seemed to drop the assumption
as soon as they got in the tunnels. On the other hand, the chemistry
between Tara and Willow continued, despite their lack of memory.
In some ways it was meeting-all-over-again, with a second first-kiss
about to happen just as the spell was broken.
After Rowan (I think it was) pointed out Joss' use of the traditional
couple-comparison model (ending, stable, and forming), it's curious
to see how this week he turned that on its head to show us the
instinctive aspects of relationships. For instance, Dawn and Buffy
discovered right away that they must be sisters, by dint of their
reactions to each other. Giles and Spike expressed the animosity
that's an undercurrent to all their interactions, with some begrudging
respect or civility apparently based entirely on the expectations
of appearances. Again, those expectations are what formed the
Giles/Anya temporary match, given the information at hand in the
shop and the fact that they woke up side-by-side.
But our 'stable' relationship was non-existent, since Xander and
Anya weren't seen side-by-side for the duration of the episode
(in a relationship manner, at least). And the 'forming' relationship
was submerged, or cloaked, for the duration of the episode as
well. My expectation was that Xander's and Willow's long-term
attraction would prove to be also instinctive, augmented by the
circumstance of waking up together, as well. Instead, Joss showed
us that Willow doesn't see Xander as her main attraction on an
instinctive or chemical level, but sees only Tara. So in that
sense, I'm hoping he's letting us know that somehow their relationship
will prevail... or if not, he's preparing to break our hearts
even worse. Go figure. That man is evil.
On an unrelated note:
"I help the hopeless!"
and, of course... BUNNIES!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Excellent thoughts indeed -- Dedalus, 20:08:59 11/13/01
Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> To hell with the bunnies, I'm hiding my (only half)Siamese
cat from the loan shark...;) -- Rufus, 21:07:32 11/13/01 Tue
She's older too so I'm sure she would be too tough and stringy
for the demons out there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Aw, Rufus...you know that many Siamese are a match
for any demon! -- JoRus, 16:01:27 11/14/01 Wed
I'm kept on the run by only two. Good that Joss and Co have picked
up on the cats theme...now I await chocolate references.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Past and Current Loves (spoilers for Tabula Rasa) --
Talia, 22:10:37 11/13/01 Tue
I was also noticing whether the normal relationships manifested
without memory. Tara and Willow, the disintegrating couple, seemed
to be the only ones who were fairly clearly about to recouple
without memory. Reinforcing their rightness for one another just
made Tara's exit at the end of the episode all the more painful.
I should probably go back and watch the tape, but I didn't get
the impression that Xander and Willow were behaving with excessive
awkwardness towards one another. My impression was that they might
have continued to believe that they were a couple if it weren't
for Tara's presence. Xander's first reaction was to check Willow
out. The old potential love was still there, but Tara was proving
a much stronger draw for Willow. The stable couple, as you mentioned,
really didn't seem to notice one another. I am a little worried
as to what this means for their future. However, Xander and Anya's
relationship has always been more of a deliberate creation than
an unavoidable consequence of chemistry and fate. She moved from
vengeance demon to grudging attraction to an almost entirely sexual
relationship into true love. It makes sense that with the slate
wiped clean they might have needed that time again. About Spike
and Buffy: they were not showing the same clear chemistry as Willow
and Tara, but they weren't indifferent to each other either. When
Buffy (or shall we say Joan?) saw that Spike (Randy?) was a vampire,
she did not immediately stake him. They seemed to instinctively
protect one another. If the spell hadn't been broken, I'd wager
a persian or two (though not my Siamese kitten, who is coincidentally
named Spike) that they might have become the forming couple again
real soon.
Side note: I loved Willow's echoing of her Doppelgangland comment
"I think I'm kind of gay." Also Spike's disgust when
he figured out that he was English and his deciding that he was
a vampire with a soul :p. Interesting that he decides that he's
a good vampire; perhaps he knows himself better without his conscious
memory than with it. Or perhaps not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Past and Current Loves (spoilers for Tabula Rasa)
-- PHOENIX, 05:37:19 11/14/01 Wed
Id have to disagree with whether Xander and Willow would stay
together if Tara wasnt there. In the beginning when everyone wakes
up and have coupled, Xander and Willow are preparing to leave
both take the role of male when they extend their elbow for the
other. Clearly Willow knows that she is a girl yet, she does something
that is clearly a masculine trait. So, long before she states
that she thinks shes gay to Dawn I think she knew even if it was
on a subconcious level.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Willow, Tara, and dominance -- Traveler, 12:13:10
11/14/01 Wed
"In the beginning when everyone wakes up and have coupled,
Xander and Willow are preparing to leave both take the role of
male when they extend their elbow for the other."
First, I would guess that Willow is bi, not gay, since she did
have a long relationship with a man (Oz). Secondly, has anybody
noticed that Willow always takes the dominant role with Tara?
I don't think that it was an accident, for example, that Willow
was "on top" in the "Under Your Spell" song
(OMWF). Willow probably extended her elbow to Xander because she
was used to having the dominant role in her relationship.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tara and Oz -- T-rex, 20:12:38
11/13/01 Tue
I was thinking tonight about how Tara's breakup with Willow compared
to the departure of Oz.
In Oz's case, he left because he realized he did not have as much
control over the monster within as he thought. So he left to avoid
hurting Willow.
In Tara's case, it is Willow who has the monster inside that she
can't (or rather won't) control. It is up for debate whether that
monster is her addiction to magic or her hubris. (I tend to think
the real problem is the latter.) Yet she doesn't withdraw to protect
her friends. She doesn't yet have the self awareness or maturity
that Oz exhibited.
I wonder what Oz would say to Willow right now if he had the chance?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Oops...spoilers above -- t-rex, 20:27:23 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Tara and Oz -- Shiver, 20:42:39 11/13/01 Tue
Both Tara and Oz left Willow for her own good. Oz so he would
not hurt her. Tara so she might be jolted out of her addiction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Tara and Oz -- DEn, 21:03:12 11/13/01 Tue
Tara's leaving seemes to involve her own self respect more than
it did sending Willow a message. Willow broke her word about magic
almost as soon as she gave it, and her actions show she never
intended to keep it.IMHO, her use of magic to get dressed was
arguably worse than the original forgeting spell. The spell could
still be interpreted as part of Willow's "fix-it" approach
to conflicts. But using magic for something so ordinary, so closely
after the initial discussion with Tara, is a sign that Tara's
feelings and beliefs on this core issue mean nothing at all to
her lover. And isn't it ironic that Tara's relationship with Willow
is what gave her the self-worth to leave it?!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Tara and Oz -- Hauptman, 21:12:25 11/13/01
Tue
And isn't it ironic that Tara's relationship with Willow is what
gave her the self-worth to leave it?!
Wow! That is so true and so deep. What did you make of Dawn's
reaction to Tara's leaving? I was hoping that Xander would be
there to give her a ride, that she would hand him a box, there-by
showing that she had some support. But all she got was Dawn, running
away from her. Just shattering. Buffy seems totally unaware of
what is happening with Willow and Tara.
Just to point out something I have been thinking about, I am sure
this has been mentioned before: When Faith had co-opted Buffy's
body it was Tara who spotted the shift, not Willow who, even then
was surpassing Tara magically. I think that indicates that Tara
is about balance of natural forces while Willow is about sheer,
raw power. I am quite worried about her.
And why didn't Giles drop a bomb on her before he left? You would
think that this little stunt, which resulted in a lip lock with
Anya, would have pushed him over to postal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> no kidding. giles, where were you? --
ism, 23:48:45 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Giles and Dawn (spoilers) -- Iago, 02:28:43
11/14/01 Wed
Well, as far as Giles, my guess is that he probably didn't get
a chance to confront Willow or simply didn't know that she was
the cause. The show didn't demonstrate that Giles knew why they
had all lost their memories, only that Giles and Anya both got
them back at the same time.
As for Dawn, at first I thought that it was just her being immature.
It was totally in character for her. On a deeper level though,
I think that Tara and Willow's relationship was a way for Dawn
to anchor. Dawn has been through a lot too, and when one of the
only seemingly static things in her life suddenly changes, I think
that her action reflects her need for stability. On some level,
Dawn probably blames Tara for the break up, and that's why Dawn
shuns her.
How awful for Tara on top of it? I mean, she loses her true love
and then the person she took a lobotomy for basically disowns
her? That's even more sad than the break up to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Dawn (spoilers) -- Solitude1056,
05:49:16 11/14/01 Wed
My reaction to Dawn shunning Tara is that she's probably going
to be shunning Willow, as well. These two were her replacement
parents - and she has memories of divorce already. She could be
fully expecting that this means she'll never see Tara again, and
may also in some way be blaming herself for Tara and Willow breaking
up. Not saying it's a rational thing, but it is a human thing,
to feel responsible while knowing intellectually that this isn't
so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Dawn (spoilers) -- Lucifer_Sponge,
06:52:34 11/14/01 Wed
Just what I was going to say, Sol. Glad someone else was thinking
it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Remember, Dawn said
last week that Tara and Willow fighting gives her "belly-rumblings."
-- Rob, 08:45:32 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Giles and Dawn (spoilers) --
maddog, 07:06:54 11/14/01 Wed
I completely agree. Dawn said during OMWF that she was glad that
they'd made up(prompted Tara to wonder what fight had occured)
and how perfect they were for each other...you could tell that
those two were her relationship rock. And with Tara being the
one to do the actual leaving I can see why the uninformed young
mind would jump to conclusions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara and Dawn (spoilers)
-- Sebastian, 08:00:32 11/14/01 Wed
I also got the impression Dawn was upset with Tara because Dawn
felt a particular closeness with her.
Since the beginning of this season, we have seen Dawn and Tara
interact together more than any of the other Scoobies (with the
exception of Spike, of course)
When Buffy was gone, I got the impression that Tara took more
of a mothering role to Dawn. She didn't try to replace Joyce -
but she, more than the rest of the Scoobies, knows what its like
to lose a close relative.
And since Dawn had lost Joyce and Buffy within a few months time
- Tara could empathize regarding the emotional turmoil Dawn has
gone through.
Also, Tara seems to be the 'voice of reason' among the Scoobies.
Even when the spell hit in last night's ep - her comments kept
the group grounded when they were in the tunnels.
I mean, if you think about it, the rest of the group is a little
unfocused. Buffy is a shadow of her former self, Giles keeps appearing
and disappering, Willow is a magic junkie, Xander has been dealing
with commitment issues with Anya.
And Spike has become absent since Buffy's return and yo-yo treatment.
The only one who is showing constant emotional stability was Tara.
I think Dawn took clear comfort in that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara and Dawn (spoilers)
-- Kimberly, 08:24:56 11/14/01 Wed
Not only has Tara been closest to Dawn this year, she was also
close to Dawn last year. In fact, in Real Me, it was Tara who
understood how much like an outsider Dawn felt, who waited outside
the magic shop with Dawn while the others were checking the place
out.
There's more in my brain trying to get out, but the migraine won't
let it so I'll end here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara and Dawn
(spoilers) -- Calluna, 12:48:03 11/14/01 Wed
I was thinking the same thing, That Tara was Dawn's mother figure.
I have a feeling that Tara won't disappear anytime soon. With
Willow on a magic bender,Giles in England, Buffy and Spike so
self-involved and Xander and Anya getting ready for marriage,
I think that, even though Tara no longer lives with Dawn, Dawn
will seek her out when emotional trauma happens. I have a sneaking
suspicion that at some point, Dawn will seek out Spike, like she
used to, and will find Buffy and Spike in bed together. Thus finishing
the destruction of her world. And when this happens, Tara will
be the one she eventually turns to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara and Dawn
(spoilers) -- anom, 10:57:08 11/15/01 Thu
I agree w/the various Tara/Dawn posts. I wonder if the departure
of Dawn's mother figure & Buffy's father figure will bring them
closer or drive them apart. Especially if it's the latter, look
for Dawn's stealing to increase & maybe come out into the open
before long.
BTW, does anyone else think Dawn seems to be getting off on the
stealing more this season than in earlier ones? She used to just
be furtive about it, but now we see her w/a pleased expression
& kinda swinging her body after each instance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Maybe Giles didn't know -- briseis, 05:23:40
11/14/01 Wed
I think it was only the people in the sewer who knew, who saw
the crushed Crystal as the spell lifted, and realized Willow did
it. Possibly only Tara and Xander. We aren't really shown any
meeting of Scoobies taking place between spell lifting and Giles
on the plane. But my question would be, why didn't Giles take
more positive measures to intervene with Willow? Why didn't Tara
speak to Giles and the others about the issue, even before this
ep and the first forgetting spell? Of course, things like that,
folks hiding problems, and other folks not noticing them, do happen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Echoes -- Kimberly, 06:13:04 11/14/01
Wed
This season has had lots of echoes. Of course, there are LOTS
of echoes from Restless in this episode (Giles and Spike as father/son,
LOL), but your comment also brings out echoes from The "I"
in Team and The Yoko Factor. Each person is going very much their
own way this season; the group is splintering. In part, this is
what happens when you grow up--those who were important to you
in childhood frequently become less important in adulthood. But
it also feels like a dysfunctional family: people are running
away, ignoring what's happening to others, divorcing, etc. We're
in for a very bumpy ride. (And we wouldn't want it any other way
from Joss.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Understand we go hand in hand...(spoilers)
-- Slayrunt, 22:41:46 11/14/01 Wed
though we walk alone in fear. Well the alone is happening now
for W/A.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Sorry, meant W/T --
Slayrunt, 04:53:11 11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> willow -- briseis, 05:16:08 11/14/01 Wed
I agree that Tara's leaving is not about sending Willow a message,
and that the dressing spell& then the second forgetting spell
were "crossing the Rubicon" not the original forgetting
spell. Although I definitely think that was bad, that could easily
have been interpreted as an impulsive mistake. The dressing and
second spell were clear betrayals. Also, people are using the
term "addiction"-its more than just addiction here,
that would be adequate to describe it if say Willow just couldn't
resist using the dressing spells, etc.-someone being addicted
to cigarettes is different than someone smoking to much and grinding
a cigarette out in someone's face, for example. Tara's line, "we
are in a relationship, you don't decide what to do, WE decide
what to do" was great, and really described the problem,
which is not so much magic(although that makes the possibilities
of abuse more extensive and scarier) as narcissism and disrespect.
A problem I have with that is, in my experience, people either
HAVE this problem or they DON'T, they can hide it from some people,
by appearing considerate, but their attitude is always, me, me,
me. Look up narcissistic personality disorder on the web! And
Tara is totally correct, a relationship with someone like this
is completely destructive and non-existent, except to the extent
that one of the people allows themselves to be consumed. Stuff
like this really bothers me about the show, for me, its as if
they said that one of the characters was born in France and did
all kinds of French stuff with her, and then just erased the past,
and started saying she was a diplomats child born and raised in
Mongolia. Willow's showed some human failings in the past, like
the "slipping" with Xander, and she didn't know the
"limits with magic" but that is natural to not know
the limits with something you are new with. She KNEW the limits
with relationships-one example, she pointed out last season that
BUFFY wasn't being mutual with her in regards to Buffy's caring
about Dawn, but not bothering to think about Tara. Willow was
angry, as non-mutuality does indeed threaten a relationship, and
Buffy responded by becoming aware of fairness of Willow's position--ie.
they both acted like reasonably healthy human beings. Oz would
have DUMPED her QUICKLY, if she had behaved with him the way she
did with Tara. No, Willow's new personality just does not make
sense. Personalities can change, and some changes, like Spike's
are realistic. When people are in a situation where they are practicing
love and sympathy, they just get better and better-one psychiatrist
wrote that if there was some way to get all his patients find
a loving relationship, he'd be able to heal them right quick.
Buffy's deciding not to take orders was a natural evolution too.
But what just happened to Willow was ridiculous, unless, unbeknownst
to us, she somehow lost a chunk of her brain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: willow -- Solitude1056, 05:56:17 11/14/01
Wed
I see Willow's controlling behavior as an outgrowth of the end
of her relationship with Oz, although that's too simplistic. And
I don't think I'm the first to argue here that in the wake of
Oz' second visit, Willow wanted someone, something, of her 'own.'
There's also notes, from the get-go, of Willow taking the upper
hand and leading the way through the relationship, as Tara was
obviously low on the self-esteem totem pole. And that does set
up a pattern, and those are hard to break. Combining Willow's
natural thirst for power/knowledge, her self-protective mechanism
after Oz' departure, and the development of her own leadership
abilities (especially with Buffy's death and Tara's insecurities)...
and you have someone who likes to be in charge, can be in charge,
and does things that s/he determines to be in charge kind of things...
like, oh, fixing things.
And the "first option is always magic" isn't surprising
to me, since I know a few computer programmers whose first answer
to everything is "I can write a program for that." But
when I'm writing down directions that I'll only use once, I really
don't need a program that files all of it in a database for future
sorting and reference, thanks. The same ol' when all you've got
is a hammer...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: willow (MILD SPOILERS) -- DEN,
06:21:51 11/14/01 Wed
As usual, Sol is on target: the catalyst is the synergy beween
the breakup and the new relationship. For the first time Willow
takes the lead--takes over the lead really, since the first initiatives,
magickal and sexual, clearly come from Tara. And it's scarcely
surprising that Willow stumbles in a role unfamiliar to her. In
that context I still like my "pet rock:" the argument
I've made in other postings that Willow has met heroically the
challenge and the stress of supporting a Slayer--but that did
not necessarily mature her. The "wanna dance?" sequence
in next week's promo is flat-out vicious--a LONG way from ANYTHING
Willow's ever been part of.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Am I the only one... (was
Re: willow (MILD SPOILERS)) -- vandalia, 07:55:41 11/14/01 Wed
That thinks that Willow getting up close and personal with Glory's
brain at the end of S5 to get Tara back has affected her somehow?
Who was the last obscenely powerful and self-absorbed person on
the show? Glory. Who did Willow face off with twice, once sticking
her hands in Glory's brain much as Glory did to her victims? I'm
wondering if perhaps there isn't some residual...contamination
to explain Willow's flirting to outright commitment to the 'Dark
Side.'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Am I the only one...
(was Re: willow (MILD SPOILERS)) -- Solitude1056, 09:58:09 11/14/01
Wed
But that would remove all accountability, and allow Willow to
point at Glory and say, "that's why, so I'm not responsible
for my actions." We've had the same discussion about vampire/soul
for Angel... now we get it with Willow. Whatever choice Joss takes,
I can only promise it won't be one that gives anyone an easy out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: willow (MILD SPOILERS)
-- anom, 11:32:36 11/15/01 Thu
"The 'wanna dance?' sequence in next week's promo is flat-out
vicious--a LONG way from ANYTHING Willow's ever been part of."
Either I missed it or not all promos include all the same things.
But it reminds me of something I didn't see mentioned on the board
after All the Way aired: Tara sitting on the couch looking angry
as Willow "gets her dance on" w/Xander & Anya, not even
noticing. Seems like Tara's feelings already didn't matter to
her. And I think she still doesn't understand why Tara doesn't
like what she did to her. How would Willow feel if someone did
the same thing to her? It doesn't seem to even occur to her. She
sees the problem as the fact that Tara doesn't like it rather
than that she did anything wrong.
One thing's interesting, though--in the conversation at the beginning
of Tabula Rasa, Willow seems to feel genuinely guilty & even willing
to take responsibility for her mistake in bringing Buffy back
from heaven. I don't really understand the disconnect between
her reaction to this & to what she did to Tara. (Her emotional
reaction, that is--her solution to both was the same.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: willow -- Nadya V., 15:03:26
11/14/01 Wed
I think her and Oz's breakup escalated Willow's preexisting need
for control. The Willow we met back in "WttHM" was a
shy, timid girl, with little control over her surroundings. I
think we can see how Willow developed a sense of powerlessness
from her mother's distant psychological child-rearing. Yet, even
before Willow gains magical power we see her exalt in technical
prowess and the power it gives her. Also, how many times has Willow
referred to Xander as her Xander or her "people" and
gotten angry because Xander acts or feels in a way she doesn't
like or anticipate. In "Restless" we saw that Willow
still sees herself as shy and weak. Her addiction is IMHO not
so much hubris as fear and low self-esteem. She has pushed herself
to gain more power both because it makes her feel stronger and
it makes her feel needed. As her addiction grows and she finds
herself losing control of it, her hunger for control her surroundings
grows. This causes her to seek more power and traps her in vicious
circle. The saddest part is that as the people closest to her
Buffy, Tara & Giles draw away because of her addiction, they are
inadvertantly feeding her self-pity and hunger for control. Nadya
V.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> But Xander's also called Willow,
"his Willow" in the past as well. -- Whisper2AScream,
09:46:51 11/15/01 Thu
So, for the longest time, the two of them (X/W) have been a bit
possessive of each other. Plus, both have leaderships skills.
And as for Willow's end, both of her relationships (Oz and Tara),
it's mostly Willow calling the shots. Oz: "As Willow goes,
so goes my nation." Tara: "She's a brainy type."
Willow becomes more self-confident as those closest to her refer
to her. But on Xander's end, his relationship with Anya is more
mature, because he considers her as an equal. (Well, that plus,
his whole attraction to empowered women, but that's a whole issue
unto itself.) But Willow seems to prefer relationships where she's
the one in control. Um, mirroring her mother a bit there?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: willow -- maddog, 07:21:10 11/14/01
Wed
I disagree...narcissism is defined as "Excessive love or
admiration of oneself". A second definition even calls it
a pyschological condition. Do you see that type of behavior out
of Willow? What I see is someone who's so addicted to magic that
even when she promises to stop she just can't...it's just second
nature to fix things with magic to her...even now after both Giles
and Tara yelled at her. That's an addiction my friend...plain
and simple.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> squares & rectangles in willow --
Solitude1056, 07:50:25 11/14/01 Wed
Junkies tend to be narcissist in that they are only concerned
about their own wants/needs, but not all narcissists are junkies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: squares & rectangles in
willow -- maddog, 09:14:11 11/14/01 Wed
When I think junkie I don't think narccicist...I think more "desperation"
being the reason they don't care about other's feelings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Good point. -- Solitude1056,
09:59:19 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Much Bigger Problems -- darrenK, 07:53:15 11/14/01
Wed
I think you're right about Tara's self-image, but Willow has crossed
a different line, one that we're more used to here in our less
magical world.
Willow has attempted to control Tara. To deny Tara the free will
that comes with being able to make her own decisions based on
her own interpretation of events. The events she can't remember
if Willow has blocked her memories.
This control is the same sort that many men and women, but unfortunately
mainly women, face in abusive relationships every day. Many times
this abuse is the result of an addiction like Willow seems to
be facing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Tara and Oz -- t-rex, 21:34:08 11/13/01 Tue
Nah, I have to disagree with you there. I don't think it is in
Tara's nature to leave just to "jolt" Willow out of
her addiction. That would seem manipulative to me, and that isn't
what Tara is about.
I think Tara is prepared (or is in the process of preparing) to
stay away for good. If Willow has a major change of heart, and
can prove it to Tara, then there might be hope. But I'm not counting
on it, and I don't think Tara is either.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Tara and Oz -- maddog, 07:48:07 11/14/01
Wed
Isn't that the same thing though(only less harsh). If you leave
with the possiblity of coming back if the person changes their
mind, then isn't that kinda like leaving with the sole puprose
of wanting them to change? It's not manipulative...it's called
tough love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Tara and Oz -- T-rex, 10:52:26 11/14/01
Wed
I think there is a difference. If you leave in the hope that the
person you are leaving will "wake up and smell the coffee",
that is manipulative. Understandable, but usually transparent
and not effective.
If you are leaving with the knowledge that your loved one will
probably NOT change, and that you are leaving to preserve your
emotional health, that is different. In Tara's case, that is the
mature decision to make and for the right reasons.
But leaving for the second reason does not mean that a relationship
can't reform at some future date IF the person with the addiction/problem
manages to transform and heal. But that, to me, would be a new
relationship. Both people would have grown, and changed, and had
new experiences away from each other.
Hope that makes sense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Tara and Oz -- Max, 21:16:44 11/13/01 Tue
GET READY TO MAKE OVER $40,000 IN AS FEW AS 6 WEEKS WITH ONLY
A $6.00 INVESTMENT!THIS IS FOR REAL! JUST SEND $6.00, POST TO
200 MESSAGE BOARDS, AND START COLLECTING THE MONEY FROM YOUR OWN
MAILBOX!IT'S THAT SIMPLE!I MADE OVER $2,500 IN JUST OVER 3 WEEKS,
AND OVER $40,000 IN JUST UNDER 6 WEEKS! ************************
The first thing you want to do is print this letter, you will
want to refer to it later.
Awhile back, I was browsing through newsgroups, just like you
are now, and I came across an article similar to this one. It
said you could make thousands of dollars within weeks with only
an initial investment of $6.00 plus stamps! I was very skeptical
at first! But like most of us I was curious and kept reading.
It said to send $1.00 to each of the 6 names and addresses listed
in the article, then place your name and address at the bottom
of the list at #6 and post the article to at least 200 newsgroups
(there are aprox. 32,000). No catch that was it.
Even though the investment was only $6.00 I had three questions
that needed to be answered before I would get involved: 1. IS
THIS LEGAL? Yes! I talked to a lawyer myself. I thought it sounded
like a chain letter, but the details of the system actually made
it a legitimate business. 2. IS IT MAIL FRAUD? No! I called them
#1-800-725-2161 and they confirmed that it is completely legal
(See Title 18,h sections 1302 NS 1341 of Postal Lottery Laws)
3. IS IT MORAL? Well everyone that gets into this will make alot
of money! With those questions answered I invested my $6.00 and
6 stamps, and within a week I started getting money back! I promise
you that if you follow the directions EXACTLY, you will start
making more money than you thought possible by doing something
so easy! This program remains successful because of the honesty
and integrity of the participants. Please continue it's success
by carefully adhering to the instructions. You will now become
a part of the business of Mailing Lists. *HERE ARE FOUR EASY STEPS
TO SUCCESS: ********************************** Step 1:Get 6 seperate
pieces of paper and write the following on each piece of paper
"PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST" and also your name
and address. Now get 6 US $1.00 bills and place one inside each
of the pieces of paper so the bill can not be seen through the
envelope to prevent thievery. Next, place one paper (with the
bill inside) in each of the 6 envelopes and seal them. You should
now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of paper stating
the above phrase, your name and address, and a $1.00 bill. Mail
the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
#1)Sam Howard P.O. Box 1065 Jennings, LA 70546 #2)J.Gibson P.O.
Box 2099 Vineyard Haven,MA 02568 #3)Lynda Smith 3642 Avon Rd.
Grimesland, NC 27837 #4)Tyane Steward 1719 Kimberley Drive Phenix
City, AL 36867 #5)P. Kaplon 67 Old Farms Road Southington, CT
06489 #6)Robert McCalister P.O. Box #243 Clovis, CA 93613 ******************************
Step 2:Now take the #1 name off of the list that you see above,
move the other names up (6 becomes 5,5 becomes 4,etc....)and add
YOUR NAME as number 6 on the list. ******************************
Step 3:Change anything you need to but try to keep this article
as close to the original as possible. ******************************
Step 4:Now post your amended article to at least 200 newsgroups,
but remember the more you post the more you make!
HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS You do not need to re-type this entire
letter to do your own posting. Simply put your cursor at the the
begining of this letter and drag your cursor to the bottom of
this letter, and select 'copy' from the edit menu. This will copy
the entire letter to your computer's memory. Open a blank 'notepad'
file and place your cursor at the top of the blank page. From
the 'edit' menue select 'paste'. This will paste a copy of the
letter into notepad so you can add your name to the list. Save
your new notepad as a .txt file. If you want to do your postings
in different settings, you'll always have this file to go back
to. Now use Netscape or Internet explorer and try searching for
various newsgroups, forums, message boards, chat sites,etc..Visit
these sites and post this article as a new message by highlighting
the text of this letter and selecting paste from the edit menu.
Fill in the Subject, this will be the header everyone sees as
they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group,
click the post message button, and you're done with your first
one! That's it now post away! You should start recieving money
within a few days! People ask me if it is legal. Well it is, you
are assembling a mailing list of people who are interested in
home based computer and online business and methods of generating
income at home. Remember people send you a small fee to be added
to your mailing list. It is legal. So build your mailing list,
keep good accounts, and pay your taxes. Good Luck!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Tara and Oz -- maddog, 07:00:24 11/14/01 Wed
After this episode I'd say it's a combination of both...because
first of all, she just won't stop using the magic for even the
smallest things like dressing herself, and while she apologizes
left and right, I think she still doesn't understand what the
overuse of her magic is causing as a result(which is where the
hubris fits in).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotta Say ... (SPOILERS for Tabula
Rasa) -- verdantheart, 20:13:46 11/13/01
Very funny (and ultimately sad!) episode! The capper for me was
that, romantic that he is, amnesiac Spike came to the conclusion
that he is ... Angel! Perhaps that's why we find Buffy nearly
in tears at the Bronze. Verrry complicated emotions ... gotta
think about this ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Gotta Say ... (SPOILERS for Tabula Rasa) -- Aquitaine,
20:51:51 11/13/01 Tue
Yeah. I'm all... ambivalenty too.
:-/
- Aqui, munching on a world of food for thought
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> About the song -- Iago, 02:12:13 11/14/01 Wed
Was anyone else kinda disappointed in the choice of song? I thought
it was both not inclusive enough of the characters and too empowered.
I mean, when Michelle sang "I want you / But I'm not giving
in this time" that clearly limits the main thrust of the
speaker of the song. Willow's perspective isn't encompassed by
that, nor is Buffy's (with respect to Giles) or Spike's (with
respect to Buffy). Personally, I would have chosen something much
more melancholy to play with the departure of both Tara and Giles.
If anyone's heard or seen the video for "Trouble" by
Coldplay (it's in light rotation), that's the song I keep thinking
about when I imagine the scene. It's got a beautiful, sorrowful
piano riff and the lyrics just seem more appropriate to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: About the song -- maddog, 06:50:55 11/14/01
Wed
I actually think this was a very appropriate song(and the most
appropriate off of Michelle's album). I mean, look at the chorus:
Goodbye to you Goodbye to everything I thought I knew You were
the one I loved The one thing that I tried to hold on to
While having slightly different meaning for each of the three
situations I still feel it fits well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Tee-hee! I see Maddog and I got the song
right, A8! -- Marie, 07:11:43 11/14/01 Wed
Do we get chocs now?
Marie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Tee-hee! I see Maddog and I
got the song right, A8! -- maddog, 07:28:53 11/14/01 Wed
I tried not to make a big deal that I was the first one to suggest
the song... :) but I could see it coming...knowing Tara was on
the verge of leaving Willow...know Giles was ready to head back
to England...it only made sense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> How about...? -- rowan, 17:17:14
11/14/01 Wed
//Feels like I'm starting all over again/The last three years
were just pretend//
Facts are starting to get faced all over the place by Buffy, aren't
they? Wonder what this wonderful lyric sung while Buffy is in
catatonia at the bar means?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> How's a gallon of Baskin & Robbins
World Class Chocolate over frozen fudge covered Oreos sound? --
A8, 17:31:47 11/14/01 Wed
Death by chocolate! Sweet, sublime and sticky.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Re: About the song -- Iago, 11:13:56
11/14/01 Wed
"I actually think this was a very appropriate song(and the
most appropriate off of Michelle's album). I mean, look at the
chorus:"
While I am not disputing the lyrics of the song or that it might
be the most appropriate song off her album, I still stand by my
original claim. Although the chorus does seem to fit on its own,
in the context of the verses which clearly lean towards Tara's
perspective, I think a better choice could have been made. I also
still think that the song was too empowered, since the speaker
of the song is the one who initiates the break up, rather than
the other party (in this case, parties) affected.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Gotta Say ... (SPOILERS for Tabula Rasa) -- Isabel,
21:06:43 11/13/01 Tue
Did you hear the lyrics of the song playing? (I was paying attention
because I remembered the thread last week speculating on which
song was going to be used.) Just before Spike shows up the song
says something like 'It's like the last three years didn't happen
and I'm back where I was before.' (Three years ago she was dating
a vampire who loved her, helped her out, and not too long before
that had been trying to kill her.)
But maybe I misheard. I don't listen to Michelle Branch.
Plus, let's not ignore the fact that she's upset that one of the
men who has been a constant in Buffy's life has just left her.
Buffy has loss issues with men. I seem to remember her complaining
(in Fear, Itself?) that 'you open yourself up to someone and they
leave.' Giles is GONE. He's said he's not coming back. And it's
because of her. Of the males in her life that leaves Xander and
Spike who have yet to leave her. (In her mind is she thinking
'When?')
And the females aren't much better. Mom is dead, Dawn is her responsibility
(Not to be her support), Tara and Anya are other peoples' S.O.s,
and Willow, her best friend who evicted her from Heaven, just
tried to erase her memory.
The pain just keeps on throbbing...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The actual lyrics were... -- A8, 21:20:58 11/13/01
Tue
Of all the things I've believed in I just want to get it over
with Tears from behind my eyes But I do not cry Counting the days
that pass me by
I've been searching deep down in my soul Words that I'm hearing
are starting to get old It feels like I'm starting all over again
The last three years were just pretend And I said,
Goodbye to you Goodbye to everything I thought I knew You were
the one I loved The one thing that I tried to hold on to
I still get lost in your eyes And it seems that I can't live a
day without you Closing my eyes and you chase my thoughts away
To a place where I am blinded by the light But it's not right
Goodbye to you Goodbye to everything I thought I knew You were
the one I loved The one thing that I tried to hold on to
And it hurts to want everything and nothing at the same time I
want what's yours and I want what's mine I want you But I'm not
giving in this time
Goodbye to you Goodbye to everything I thought I knew You were
the one I loved The one thing that I tried to hold on to The one
thing that I tried to hold on to
And when the stars fall I will lie awake You're my shooting star
"Goodbye to You" by Michelle Branch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "it hurts to want everything and nothing
at the same time..." hmm. -- -, 23:51:58 11/13/01 Tue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> not knowing what Buffy knows -- briseis, 05:37:11
11/14/01 Wed
The thing for me is, do we know that Buffy even KNOWs what Willow
did, yet? If she hasn't met up with Tara yet, perhaps she was
just sitting in the bar mourning her loss of Giles, and the worst
is yet to come. Because if she hasn't met up with Tara(or Xander
or Dawn, presuming they know), how would she know that Willow
was responsible for this magic attack, and not some Sunnydale
mayhem-maker? I really feel sorry for Willow now, because with
Tara leaving her, and presuming, now that she has done the same
to her friends that she has done to Tara, that they too will turn
their backs on her, why would Willow NOT "go dark"?
I hope she doesn't though. And, I didn't think of Buffy's life
as too much to bear, but losing Giles, and her best friend, and
having to deal with her sister's losing her best adult friends,
whoa, that really is too much to bear.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: not knowing what Buffy knows -- Rob, 08:43:09
11/14/01 Wed
It seems that everyone has retained their memories of the spell,
and what happened when they had "amnesia." I think that
Buffy was sad at the end, because she had enjoyed being Joan,
full of the joy and excitement of having superpowers. All of a
sudden, her memory of who she really was and what had happened
to her came crashing back into her mind. She liked being Joan,
and that blissful ignorance was taken away from her. That is why,
I believe, she was depressed at the end.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> and what dawn knows -- anom, 22:31:41
11/14/01 Wed
Buffy also was free of the memory of heaven, & of losing it, for
a few hours, & then it all came crashing back. Actually (as I
said last night in chat), I think that's why she didn't/couldn't
get up after one of the vampires knocked her down just before
her memory came back.
And what about Dawn? While her memory was gone, she didn't know
she was the Key. She & Buffy both had the illusion of being normal,
& then had it taken away. I'd be surprised if that didn't have
consequences down the road.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spike fighting (spoilery) -- Hauptman,
21:29:21 11/13/01
Did anyone notice how well Spke handled himslef tonigh? Lately
he has been a punching bag for beasties or staying out of the
fight altogether while he lets the slayer strut her stuff (as
in Flooded). He seemed like the old badass we know and love. Could
it be that this clingy love he feels for Buffy is slowing him
down, making him even more timid than that chip?
I wonder what will happen if Buffy gives in and shags William?
Will it casue that chip to short-circuit? Is this familiar territory
we are getting into? I mean, what kind of battery does that chip
have anyhow?
And...what's Angel going to have to say about it?
And...when Buffy kisses Spike, does he have kitten breath?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike fighting (spoilery) -- ism, 00:01:01 11/14/01
Wed
i kind of interpreted the source of spike's fighting prowess tonight
differently. I think he was more able to fight "his own"
because he was without moral qualms about the prospect. He thought
he was an Angel (an arrogant one, but whatev). He didn't know
that he is actually deeply involved in the demon world, not nearly
striding above it. going a little farther (further?) Spike (un-enchanted)
must have a more forgiving opinion of demons, or, more specifically,
vampires, since he himself changed so much without the help of
a curse, (curse vs. chip. hmm) mustn't he?
ps-sorry if i'm repeating oft-discussed topics, i'm green here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I noticed that (spoilers) -- verdantheart, 06:04:29 11/14/01
Wed
At the beginning, Spike vanished as Buffy was talking with the
intruders. Later on, when Spike didn't know who he was, and tries
fighting the pursuing vamps, he finds he has superhuman strength
and assumes, he like Buffy, must be some kind of superhero. Since
then, we see him fighting with the kind of confidence that we
haven't seen in a long time, perhaps since "Crush."
He not only helps Buffy with the vamps, but even saves her when
reality comes crashing in on her and she loses her concentration
and advantage. It was notable how long he wore his vamp face,
not losing it even when talking things over with Buffy/Joan. I
thake this as further indication of renewed confidence. It was
good to see. (Plus, Mr Marsters handles action well, which is
always a pleasure to watch ...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I noticed that + Buffy's fighthing (spoilers)
-- Sebastian, 07:39:55 11/14/01 Wed
>>He not only helps Buffy with the vamps, but even saves
her when reality comes crashing in on her and she loses her concentration
and advantage.>>
Did anyone interpret Buffy's 'loss of concentration' as 'giving
up'?
As noted - she fought as well as Spike until she regained her
memory. And then she *allowed* herself to be kicked by the vamps.
She lost the willpower to continue fighting - which is the major
problem she has had since the beginning of the season. Which ties
into the comment she was making when the spell hit about feeling
dead inside.
My apologies if this is something very obvious. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I noticed that + Buffy's fighthing (spoilers)
-- Traveler, 09:59:00 11/14/01 Wed
"Did anyone interpret Buffy's 'loss of concentration' as
'giving up'?"
I wondered about that too. However, she was also overwhelmed by
emotion. I mean, over the space of a few seconds, she suddenly
remembers about Angel, Glory, Spike, and heaven. It must be a
lot to take all at once.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I noticed that + Buffy's fighthing
(spoilers) -- cat, 10:23:50 11/14/01 Wed
...over the space of a few seconds, she suddenly remembers about
Angel, Glory, Spike, and heaven. It must be a lot to take all
at once.
And if she were angry and resentful of Willow before for ripping
her out of heaven, how much more pain and anger is there now for
this new betrayal? Not only did her best friend rip her from heaven,
but she has now stolen her memories as well. Granted the amnesia
was only temporary, but the reason it was not permanent was accidental,
the theft itself was completely intentional. I think Willow is
headed for some serious fallout / retribution from Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Buffy's fighting (spoilers) -- Javoher, 23:23:50
11/14/01 Wed
It seemed like another suicide attempt.
Buffy fought instinctively. The rhythms and patterns she favors
are ingrained in her body's "memory" and not in her
mind's memory. So she didn't fight like she might have if she
hadn't remembered how to do any of the moves at all. Remember,
when the vamps attacked the shop Buffy puzzled over which end
of the stake to hold. How else would she remember how to fight?
When the memories came back, they all flooded back at once. She
was in the middle of a fight and was suddenly overwhelmed by these
bad feelings and thoughts, and the split second she was distracted
was enough for a vamp thug to take her down. It looked like she
took one of those kicks in the gut. But our girl is a girl of
action. How often have we seen her take a horrible hit, then pop
up with some witty put-down of her opponent? When her mother died,
she went looking for a demon to kill. When Glory ripped the wall
off Willow and Tara's dorm room, Buffy took them running into
the desert. This time she didn't get back up and left all the
thugs to Spike (JM was amazing in this episode!). And I wondered
what would have happened if he hadn't been there? Our girl of
(in)action would have been dead, and likely stayed that way.
I call this a passive suicide attempt, allowing it to come. This
is opposed by the active suicide attempt last week in The Bronze,
dancing to death in front of Sweets and her sister. And once again,
Spike is there to...what? Bring her out of it? Show her life?
Allow her body to take over and her mind to shut down? This belongs
on another thread though...
Rambling, as usual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Kitten breath! LOL! Sorry, that cracked me up. :D -- Whisper2AScream,
09:19:12 11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't resist: more Buffy ruminations
(SPOILERS for Tabula Rasa) -- verdantheart, 07:20:13 11/14/01
Wed
OK, I can't resist. Must talk Buffy/Spike and elaborate on my
first reaction which I posted last night much more succinctly.
In Tabula Rasa, Buffy/Joan finds herself going through many of
the same things with Spike/Randy she did with Angel at the outset.
(Is it significant that Buffy and Spike are the only ones who
don't find out their real names?) She finds herself fighting by
his side. She discovers, to her horror, that he, too, is a vampire
when a blow causes him to vamp out.
For his part, Spike reasons that since vampires are after him
and he doesn't want to bite Buffy (interesting in itself, for
a "serial killer in jail") he must have a soul -- in
essence, he has unwittingly made himself Angel, his rival. He
displays a confidence that we haven't seen in a good long while
-- and fights more effectively as a result. It's notable that
he retains his vamp face for a good long while, even when calming
down and talking things over with Buffy.
When the revelation comes and memories are restored, Spike goes
on fighting, carried on a wave of renewed confidence. Reality
crashes in on Buffy, who is distracted from the fight and set
at a disadvantage, only to have Spike carry the day.
In the Bronze, we see Buffy fighting back tears. The similarities
between Angel and Spike, beloved and despised, have been thrown
into her face. What feelings were developing in Buffy's blank
brain about "Randy"? If they were anywhere in the vicinity
of what she first felt with regard to Angel, it's gotta hurt.
Now, more than ever, she must see Spike's feelings for her as
making a mockery of what she and Angel had -- particularly when
you realize that the danger came out of a game of kitten poker
-- ouch! That wouldn't have happened with Angel, would it?
Both Angel and Spike love her intensely; both have fought by her
side; both have a dangerous, dark, evil side; both have demonstrated
a capacity for good actions despite their demonic nature. The
nature and degree of all these things differ between the two.
But it was the good of Angel and the evil of Spike that Buffy
saw first. She fell in love with Angel before she met Angelus.
Knowing the evil of Spike, and knowing that he is not dedicated
to good, it is hard for Buffy to get past that (especially since
he almost killed Angel, no doubt!). She reasons that Angel has
a human soul and Spike is pure demon, but Spike's actions and
feelings have belied his nature. As she turns to him for help
(first with Dawn, now for emotional support upon her return from
heavenly bliss), her emotions become more and more complicated
and it becomes harder to resist the pull of his longing for her.
Add to that the pressures of having her friends pull her out of
heaven and her watcher leave. She could use some "sweet release"
just as much as Spike.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Oops, forgot to add -- verdantheart, 07:26:59 11/14/01 Wed
This is all coming out in extremely ambivilant behavior (turning
away, telling him she doesn't want him vs. following him and kissing
him).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Oops, forgot to add -- maddog, 07:31:53 11/14/01
Wed
It's funny...I sat there and said...who is that Spike's making
out with? cause I was positive Buffy wouldn't follow him...I mean,
she'd just ignored him. :) Had to replay my tape to come to my
stunning conclusion...that and watching next week's preview when
Spike mentions multiple kisses.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Oops, forgot to add -- vandalia, 07:41:22
11/14/01 Wed
Glad I'm not the only one who thought it was another woman! For
a heart-sinking moment I thought Spike had grabbed a chippie and
said to hell with Buffy, then when they panned closer I saw it
was her. That and the previews make for a very agonizing wait
for next week.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> vandalia ... (OT question) -- verdantheart,
08:19:48 11/14/01 Wed
Do you call yourself Vandalia because you're from Vandalia? And
is that Vandalia, IL? Just curious, since I hail from IL ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: vandalia ... (OT question) --
vandalia, 11:33:55 11/14/01 Wed
Nope. :) I actually needed a character name a long long time ago
and just made it up (I think I took it from Lando Calrissian's
ship in one of the Timothy Zahn novels I was reading at the time
- it was called the Coral Vandal or something like that. I liked
the last part but wanted it feminized so added the -ia. Then I
find out its a small town in about 20 states, including Michigan,
Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia, Arkansas...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Oops, forgot to add -- Z, 07:40:22 11/14/01 Wed
And what a kiss!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> "I want what's mine, and I want what's yours."
(Spoilers for TR) -- Traveler, 09:03:08 11/14/01 Wed
Near the end of the song that is being sung while Buffy and Spike
kiss, we hear the line "I want what's mine, and I want what's
yours." To me, this perfectly incapsilates Buffy's attitude
toward Spike. Buffy/Joan was horrified when she saw that Spike/Randy
was a vampire. After fighting through a mob of vampires, she screamed
and ran from HIM. We see Buffy wearing white at the beginning
of the episode, the symbol of innocence, and often associated
with heaven. She wants to retain her innocence and she wants to
go back to heaven. As a vampire, Spike symbolizes sin and lust,
and his origins are anything but heavenly. So, Buffy rejects him,
but is attracted to him for the same reasons. Furthermore, she
knows that he really loves her. She is using the fire of his love
to warm herself, regardless of the consequences. Indeed, I wonder
if a part of her wants to hurt Spike in revenge for his saving
her life in OMWF. Regardless, I think we will see next week (speculation,
not spoiler) that the more Spike allows Buffy to abuse him, the
less she will respect him.
Minor spoiler for next ep: the trailer that I saw suggests that
Buffy won't just abuse Spike; she is going to be BRUTAL with him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: "I want what's mine, and I want what's
yours." (Spoilers for TR) -- rowan, 16:32:13 11/14/01 Wed
Joan ran from Randy. Why didn't Joan stake Randy? As she told
him, "I kill you kind." Randy said, "And I bite
yours. But I don't want to bite you."
Joan (like Buffy) is less of a talker than Randy (like Spike).
However, let's link up this reaction with the teaser. Why does
Buffy save Spike's life when she could just kill him to 'simple
things up'? Because life isn't simple. Nor is what Buffy feels
for Spike simple.
This is ME's chance to tell what they consider to be a real love
story, IMO, to replace the Buffy/Angel mythology.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Delicate Dance -- darrenK, 08:57:59 11/14/01 Wed
I think that's a good summation of the whole Angel/Buffy/Spike
problem: the vampire with a soul is someone else. The writers
can't do that with Spike. It's a retread, yet they've already
gone far away from our previous conception of vampires.
Spike is capable of good deeds and nobility, without a soul. This
does mock Angel and his relationship with Buffy. That's an abstract,
but necessary way to view their relationship.
The writers have locked themselves into a delicate dance. They
have to figure out how to balance Spike's nobility, his loyalty,
his love for Buffy and for Dawn while trying to keep the whole
thing from going stale or becoming an Angel retread.
Maybe, they're won't be a way out and they'll finally find themselves
caught. Or maybe they'll kill him? I hope not.
BtVS without Spike is a worse prospect than BtVS without Angel.
Just my opinion...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Delicate Dance -- verdantheart, 09:16:23 11/14/01
Wed
By having Spike envision himself in Angel's place, the writers
are confronting the retread issue straight-on. I'm confident they
know what they're doing. They still have plenty of differences
between Angel and Spike to play with, from Spike's romanticism
and indulgence in food, drink and kitten poker and Angel's brooding
tendencies to evil Spike's and Angelus' differing views on how
best to express one's vampire nature. It will be interesting to
see where these differences take the action. The teasers suggest
that Buffy will start by beating Spike up; that seems a little
different from the Angel relationship, but just could constitute
foreplay for these two.
(Though, I, too, will greatly miss Spike if he leaves the show
-- OK, *that* goes without saying.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Delicate Dance -- o, 14:59:24 11/14/01 Wed
"BtVS without Spike is a worse prospect than BtVS without
Angel."
excellent. just, excellent. i've been wondering, for a while,
just how to express how i felt about the spike/angel discussions...
i feel the same way. Angel was Buffy's untouchable ideal, in some
odd way, and so he couldn't stay. the 'have not' scenario only
lasts so long before you get tired of it- 'yeah, i love you, can't
have you, so what ?' but spike on BtVS fills a different role.
he is the awkward outsider-slash-insider, privy to her secrets
but not to her friend's trust. (side-note : i felt giles' 'i'll
never want your opinion' was too harsh, particularly after the
'band of buggered' and the bonding we saw in 'bargaining'...)
at the time angel left, there was enough conflict to continue
the show without him. and more importantly, buffy was wrapped
up in the center of her friend' crises. willow and tara are a
sad, conflicted side-story, but they're just that. a side story.
xander and anya's possible cold feet, another side story. the
unusual anti-romance that is at the center of these is the buffy
and spike 'relationship'. this doesn't necessarily imply romance,
but interaction. buffy is so far removed from her friends right
now, and i believe the loss of spike would further distance her
from the people she knows. it would be become 'buffy the vampire
slayer... and these people that brought her back from the dead.'
in a way, they need spike- without giles, there is no one off-center
figure to play buffy off of. buffy can conflict with her friends,
but they form a sort of balanced circle around her. only giles,
spike, and dawn are the odd 'men'(pardon) out. with these three,
she reveals secrets, argues, goes to them for advice and support,
and criticizes them. a dawn/buffy conflict is good, but must inevitably
end with buffy in charge, as the adult she must become. no giles
? that leaves one bleached wonder. ha, unless they decide to throw
in a new character mid-season.... ;) but they wouldn't do that....
forgive my ramblings, but it's just something i've been throwing
around for a while.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Can't resist: more Buffy ruminations (SPOILERS for Tabula
Rasa) -- Deeva, 09:04:01 11/14/01 Wed
I also noticed (thanks to all those FX reruns!) that Buffy/Joan
screamed, upon seeing Spike/Randy was a vampire, almost the way
she did as when Buffy discovered Angel was a vampire, too. Or
maybe it's just me reading too much into something.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> As usual, we are on the same page... -- rowan, 16:36:42
11/14/01 Wed
I posted a similar theory today at BAPS that Buffy couldn't take
Spike's hand and went into catatonia partially because tabula
rasa was forcing her to deal with Angel (as well as Giles, whose
departure directly resembles Angel's).
Notice how in WOTW, Buffy goes catatonic. Willow must go into
Buffy's mind to 'snap her out of it.' But in that ep, Spike is
the one who gives Willow the key to break Buffy's emotional distance.
In this ep, Buffy is again, for all intents and purposes, catatonic.
She warned the Scoobies immediately prior to the spell that she
was on the verge of a breakdown. At the end of the episode, she
is entirely alone, not interacting with anyone in the Bronze.
She stares, entirely disconnected.
Then Spike arrives. As has been their pattern, he manages to break
through her shell. She turns away, but now tears have risen to
her eyes and her chin trembles. He leaves, rejected again, and
strides away.
Our next scene is the two of them passionately kissing. Spike
has retrieved Buffy from the emotional wasteland her life has
become, if only for a moment. He's again part of the lesson she
is learning about reconnecting to her life and overcoming the
emotional freeze that she's been in since Angel left.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What will Angel say? -- Karen,
08:33:44 11/14/01 Wed
Re >I wonder what will happen if Buffy gives in and shags William?
Will it casue that chip to short-circuit? Is this familiar territory
we are getting into? I mean, what kind of battery does that chip
have anyhow?
>And...what's Angel going to have to say about it?<
I don't think Angel will be in much of a position to object to
Buffy's romantic entanglements now that Darla's having his baby.
If Spike is to Buffy as Darla was to Angel, I'd say Buffy's coming
out ahead! Just one woman's opinion...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: What will Angel say? -- Neaux, 08:46:29 11/14/01 Wed
Yes..it really makes you wonder about Buffy and Angels' off camera
conversation... what was actually said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What will Angel say? -- Aquitaine, 08:57:01 11/14/01
Wed
I find myself wishing I had seen that little encounter too. I
would also very much like to know how the kiss at the end of OMwF
broke off and who run away from whom. And I would really have
liked to have seen how Buffy went from the bar to Spike's embrace.
These missing links show up as gaping holes in my understanding
of Buffy's motivations overall. I suspect this has been done deliberately
too. Grrr. LOL.
- Aquitaine, the ever-curious:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> How did it end? -- verdantheart, 09:32:16 11/14/01
Wed
I've been wanting to bring this up too, but I've been posting
an awful lot anyway lately. I'm really curious as to how these
two passionate embraces end. I'm sure Spike hasn't broken it off,
given the rising ... music. Can we assume that Buffy ran away
as she did after jumping out of the grave she fell into with Spike?
Additionally, it was interesting that Spike was the one to say
"We need to talk" in yet another gender-role switch.
Will we be exploring a "fear of commitment" issue with
her in the coming episodes?
I hope that they will, indeed, explore Angel's reaction to these
developing events. It screams cross-over, but if that is verboten,
I wonder how they will handle it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What will Angel say? -- Kimberly, 06:34:51
11/15/01 Thu
Frankly, I suspect that there were only two reasons for that meeting:
1. It was established that Angel knew Buffy was dead; it had to
be established that he knew she was alive again. If I were him,
I'd want to see her in person, too.
2. Red herring. To make all of us crazy.
Joss is evil! :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What will Angel say? -- Annie, 09:00:20 11/14/01
Wed
It seems as though Buffy and Angel are walking along parellel
paths. Just as Angel turned to Darla in desperation, Buffy turns
to Spike in the same manner. Angel was desperate to escape his
hell (aka the world). Sound familiar? Buffy will come out of this
stronger, just as Angel has. In the meantime, she'll alienate
her friends and feel bad about herself...I just hope she doesn't
get pregnant!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What will Angel say? -- Karen, 09:24:27
11/14/01 Wed
I agree -- that was what I was thinking when I drew the analogy.
If both Buffy and Angel were just looking for ways to come in
from the cold, at least Buffy has chosen (if you can call it that)
a vamp who has shown *some* capacity for selflessness...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What will Angel say? -- Umbriel, 17:13:56
11/14/01 Wed
Yikes! A Buffy/Spike miracle child? Maybe they could have the
two miracle children (conveniently aged to 25 by the time traveling
demon) do battle in a great big apocalyptic season-ending Buffy/Angel
crossover.
Or maybe not!
I definitely agree that Buffy has got the better end of the current
deal. Spike shows much more possibility than Darla. The love he
has for Buffy seems much stronger than anything that exists between
Angel and Darla.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: What will Angel say? (Mild Spoiler
next ep.) -- Hauptman, 12:43:20 11/15/01 Thu
Uh, I would say that Spike is getting the short end of the stick
here. He's saved Buffy's neck twice now only to be rewarded with
a couple of furtive/teasing kisses and what looks like a vigorous
and thorough ass-kicking next ep. I think Buffy is the "Darla"
in Spike life. Poor vamp boys.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who We Were, Who We Are, Who We
Ever Shall Be? (Sp. for 6.8) -- Aquitaine, 08:51:15 11/14/01 Wed
Last night during chat, it occurred to me just how much chatters
were using similar methods of identifying, themselves to others
and with others as were the Scoobies in "Tabula Rasa":
'You have similar opinions to mine, you must be female/male, I
must be less/more than you regarding x, y, z'. When in doubt,
the SG *chose* to label and classify themselves based on tangible
evidence at hand.
The anonymity of the internet also provides us with a proverbial
clean slate where identity can be chosen, cleaned up, amplified,
rejected, recreated, obscured... Under all the, cough, window
dressing:), however, there remains an essence, a voice, a personality
that is irreducible. It struck me that it would be hard (not to
mention exhausting) to maintain a persona while chatting for 4
hours.
This exhaustion by-product got me to thinking about depressive,
addictive, self-destructive and erratic behaviour in the Scoobies.
Each suffers beneath the mask he or she chooses to wear.
Finally, very late into the night, I wondered what precisely we
had learned about the characters' identities will under the spell.
Seems to me, they were more - or less - the same despite the different
window-dressing. How did you guys interpret the melting away and
refounding of identities in "Tabula Rasa"?
-Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Now you understand why I called our chatroom game yesterday
-- Liq, 09:13:29 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Who we want to be (spoilers TR) -- Traveler, 09:37:58 11/14/01
Wed
We didn't just see the innate personalities of the scoobies without
their masks. We also see how they WANTED to see themselves. Spike
and Buffy are the best examples of this. Buffy quickly assumed
that she was a super hero, and was very pleased with this role.
I would argue that a Vampire Slayer and a Super Hero are two very
different creatures. I think this shows us that Buffy longs for
an uncomplicated world where she is the good guy and she kills
the bad guys, and that's all there is to it. Also, I should add
that Buffy calls herself Joan, which immediately brings to mind
Joan of Arc. I'll let those with more knowledge of history make
those ties. What amazed me is that Spike immediately assumed that
he was also a super hero and maintained that belief even when
he discovered he was a vampire. IMHO, this shows that Spike clearly
wants redemption, whether he is capable of it or not.
Did anybody besides me get the strange feeling when Spike went
vampire that it just didn't fit somehow? He looked like a vampire,
but he didn't act like one. It was as if he were just wearing
a mask. The man underneath hadn't changed. Buffy, however, was
horrified. If I had to describe the look she gave him, I would
call it BETRAYAL. Buffy thought that he was good, but vampires
can't be good, right? Suddenly, the world was more complicated
than before, and she ran away. Also, I thought those were some
very telling words that Buffy said to Spike after she threw him
on the ground and straddled him. (Btw, did anybody else notice
that she didn't seem in any hurry to get off him?) She exclaimed,
"You don't know what you are!?" When Spike explains
that he must be a good vampire, Buffy seems to calm down, although
she is still confused. This point is raised again by sharkface
soon after, when he asks Spike why he stood by the slayer to kill
his own kind. Spike is supposed to be a vampire, so why doesn't
he act like one?
Really, the characterization in this episode amazes me. I've seen
it twice, and I'm still trying to sort out what it all means.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Who we want to be (spoilers TR) -- Shiver, 10:05:07
11/14/01 Wed
>>Did anybody besides me get the strange feeling when Spike
went vampire that it just didn't fit somehow? <<
I think it was the suit :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Who we want to be (spoilers TR) -- Aquitaine,
10:26:05 11/14/01 Wed
***Did anybody besides me get the strange feeling when Spike went
vampire that it just didn't fit somehow?***
I was really uncomfortable with the fact that he stayed in vamp
face while calmly chatting and being rational. I was squirming
in my chair a bit, in fact. His was clearly not typical vamp behaviour.
He seemed even more human than ever.
I was just wondering what Angel would have been like under the
Lethe's Bramble forgetting spell. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't
have thought he was a 'chipped vampire' with a taste for spicy
buffalo wings. LOL.
- Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Who We Were, Who We Are, Who We Ever Shall Be? (Sp.
for 6.8) -- Deeva, 10:05:42 11/14/01 Wed
'Seems to me, they were more - or less - the same despite the
different window-dressing. How did you guys interpret the melting
away and refounding of identities in "Tabula Rasa"?'
It was kind of deep. Despite being "wiped clean" each
person became more or less what they once were minus a little
"emotional baggage". What does that say about conditioning?
You know, the ever popular/controversial question " Are we
the sum of all our experiences or are we destined to be who we
are from day 1? The nurture vs. nature thing. I tend to be very
much straight down the middle of this topic. We are a little of
both. It's not always about the environment you were brought up
in and yet it's not just the way you are "wired" either.
I like to use my siblings and I (there are 5 of us, 2 girls & 3
boys, in that order) as an example. Brought up in the same household,
same schools and such. We can all be described as resourceful
in our own ways and have somewhat similar likes and dislikes (we'll
all try something at least once & we're very good at b.s.-ing
just about any topic there is). But beyond that we split off into
different paths. Okay, I've seem to have lost my train of thought
here. So, I'll stop talking about that.
What I'm really trying to say is that it seems to me that if they
had to do it all over again, some how, some way the end result
would be the same. Fate, destiny, kismet. Call it what you will
but I find that to be scary and yet, comforting at the same time.
While we apparently do have the "free will" to choose
what we do and where we go, the implication that everything happens
for reason, makes me feel as if there is a force in life guiding
us through to where we should be.
This also just occurred to me, I'm not even sure that this event
relates but humor me, a friend of mine is taking a class on statistics.
Fascinating subject actually. Things seem so random when they
are just thrown at you but in that randomness, a pattern of sorts
rises. Not a truly reliable one but one that makes you think.
I love talking to her after she's been to class.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Who We Were, Who We Are, Who We Ever Shall Be?
(Sp. for 6.8) -- Shaglio, 12:03:04 11/14/01 Wed
See! I knew it! Many, many moons ago I suggested that this site
be renamed "All Things Mathimatical on Buffy the Vampire
Slayer," but nobody backed me up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Ugh! Math & I are like oil and water. No matter
how you shake it, it still doesn't stick. -- Deeva, 12:23:36 11/14/01
Wed
I only made through Geometry, barely. After that, my aspiraions
on anything medical were shot down.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theories on Joan? (spoilers for
TR) -- Rob, 08:56:11 11/14/01 Wed
Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to any possible symbolic
meaning in Buffy having chosen "Joan" as her name in
"Tabula Rasa"?
I was thinking perhaps there was a Joan of Arc connection...or
perhaps the name "Joan" means something else? Anyone
feel like researching the name?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Not just you; I immediately thought Joan of Arc -- Traveler,
09:06:15 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Not just you; I immediately thought Joan of Arc
-- verdantheart, 09:18:33 11/14/01 Wed
Considering the flame connection, Joan of Arc is particularly
apt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I thought that, too. -- Deeva, 10:08:16 11/14/01
Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- Kimberly, 09:08:22
11/14/01 Wed
I found it interesting that, when Joan realized she had "superpowers",
she thought it was cool and exciting. If Buffy can carry that
memory with her, it may help her come back to life for real.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Oops, I forgot (spoilers for TR) -- Kimberly, 09:09:54 11/14/01
Wed
I forgot to mention: I thought more appropriate names would have
been Anne or Betty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- RabidHarpy, 09:26:31
11/14/01 Wed
"Joan of Arc" was my immediate thought as well - especially
since Buffy actually begins at one point to say, "I'm Joan
of -" and then her memory is restored or she is cut off...
(can't remember which, exactly).
Interesting - Joan thought that she specifically had been called
by a Higher Power to irradicate the English from France, just
as Buffy has been specifically "called" to exterminate
demons from the earth, or in this case, Sunnydale.
The whole idea of the human/vampire conflict is based on a difference
of *lifestyle/morality. If humans, (as the ones in Pylea), accepted
their subservient status to the vampires, would the vampires be
as blatantly cruel to them? Or is the fact that they are pushed
by "regular society" into the fringes of existence partly
to blame for their hostility?
Similarly, if the livestock we feed off of were to fight back
and had the "free will" or ability to challenge us,
(ie. start some sort of war against us, or enforce their lifestyles
on us), would we not see them as the ultimate evil in need of
some sort of confinement?
Sorry, back to Joan...
My only hope is that if the vampires represent the "English"
and the Scoobies/Society represent the "French", our
little Joan of Sunnydale doesn't find both sides turning against
her (as her predecessor did) - YIKES! I know Buffy wanted to "feel
the fire", but I'm pretty sure that she didn't mean it in
the "Joan-of-Arc-burned-as-a-heretic/witch" way!!!
*(See discussion below about the Jossverse and Terrorism.)
(By the way, if you are interested in "Joan of Arc",
director Luc Besson's version, "Messanger", is simply
breath-taking! I just love his films - "Fifth Element"
is my all-time favourite!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- cat, 09:40:30
11/14/01 Wed
"Joan of Arc" was my immediate thought as well
Mine too, especially since I recently watched the episode where
she, Amy and Willow were nearly burned at the stake by the parents
of Sunnydale.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- Traveler,
09:44:34 11/14/01 Wed
Minor correction: Buffy/Joan starts to say, "I am Joan the
Vampire Slayer!" And then her memories hit her.
In away, Buffy's friends have already turned against her. Giles
and Tara have left, and I don't think Willow and Dawn will be
much support now. And Spike... well, how much abuse will he take
from Buffy before he leaves too?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- Deeva
*g*, 10:34:09 11/14/01 Wed
"And Spike... well, how much abuse will he take from Buffy
before he leaves too?"
*LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA* Covering my ears, squeezing
my eyes shut and yelling at the top of my lungs! I'm not hearing
that! Nooooooooooo!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Calm down Deeva! It was speculation not
a spoiler :P -- Traveler, 10:44:14 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I know it was spec but I'm still
not hearing it. lalalalalala! ;o) -- Deeva, 11:19:44 11/14/01
Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR) -- mereh2o,
10:26:22 11/14/01 Wed
>My only hope is that if the vampires represent >the "English"
and the Scoobies/Society represent >the "French",
our little Joan of Sunnydale doesn't find >both sides turning
against her (as her predecessor did)
You are on to something here... :) but I don't think that the
vampires are the English. Only Giles and Spike were members of
the nancy-tribe and they seem to be the ones who have the greatest
potential to burn her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Joan Collin's 'tude -- Ryuei, 10:36:31 11/14/01 Wed
And didn't Cordelia upbraid Buffy for her "Joan Collins 'tude"
at the beginning of season 2?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I thought "Joan Wilder" after OnM's Romacing the
Stone review :) -- Shiver, 10:07:11 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Theories on Joan? (spoilers for TR and OMWF) -- Talia,
16:42:58 11/14/01 Wed
I thought Joan of Arc too. Here are some Joan of Arc/Buffy associations:
*Joan died by fire, as Buffy was prepared to do in OMWF (this
is the most striking one to me).
*Both were warriors for the people
*Joan of Arc's visions made her a supernatural hero, like Buffy
*Both were (or at least felt they were) called to fight for the
forces of Light
Can anyone with more history training than I have offer more?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Both Buffy and Joan... -- WillowFan, 17:26:26 11/14/01
Wed
Both Buffy and Joan of Arc died young, and died defending Righteousness.
Buffy was resurrected by Magick, and Joan by mythology. Both were
petite young women who were much stronger than anyone imagined.
Both were relatively humble, probably because neither asked for
her respective "mission" in life. Both had to sacrifice
themselves to serve a higher calling. Blah blah blah. I see a
lot of connections. "Joan of Arc" was my first thought
when Buffy said "Joan." I also thought that Buffy chose
"Joan" because it's such a *different* name from "Buffy,"
much more serious and grown-up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> St. Buffy? (spoilers for TR and OMWF) -- Whisper2AScream,
07:36:06 11/15/01 Thu
This whole season has been full of Christian overtones, with Buffy's
messianic return (3 months vs. 3 days), the earlier discussion
on the inclusion of the picture of St. Teresa of Avila, and now
references to St. Jeanne d'Arc. Yes, as soon as I heard her calling
herself Joan, was contemplating that. I had forgotten the earlier
references to her nearly being burned on the stake in Gingerbread,
but her attraction to fire this season has definitely been a red
flag.
Here is an excellent article from the Catholic Encyclopedia on
St. Joan: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409c.htm
There's some further points.
St. Joan had a sword that she would use, and we've seen several
instances where Buffy is wielding a sword.
The Watchers Council can be comparable with the Inquisitors who
questioned Joan. A Slayer who works with others, has a Watcher
for a father figure, and ignores the Council would seem very much
the heretic to the Council. If she wasn't needed so much, they
might have felt compelled to burn Buffy or kill her.
Joan's mission was to help her country in ending the English siege
of France, and aid King Charles VII in the restoration of his
throne. Buffy's mission has been to drive out vampires and demons,
but is there a King figure as well? Maybe Xander will eventually
be Mayor of the town or something? After all, dunno who's in charge
since Wilkins died at Graduation.
And speaking of Graduation, she and Xander had lead troops in
battle like St. Joan in the Battle of Orleans. St. Joan first
recieved her visions at the age of thirteen, and I believe Buffy
first learned of her destiny around this time, or was it closer
to 15? Though, both became aware of their destinies when they
were young. Both died at a young age. St. Joan was considered
to bear a grave nature beyond her years, and extremely compassionate
toward others, rather like Buffy.
Also, Joan knew that she would be wounded by a shaft in battle,
but would not die from it. Now this didn't happen to Buffy, but
a similiar incident did occur to Cordelia, whose demeanor is comparable
to Buffy. (Though, that last is a bit stretch I know.)
But all in all, it makes one wonder, perhaps in the Buffyverse,
St. Joan was a Slayer? Or perhaps Buffy brought someone back from
heaven with her?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: St. Buffy? (spoilers for TR and OMWF) --
Kimberly, 07:56:48 11/15/01 Thu
Another possible parallel if you're into alternate/speculative
history: There are some who think that there was a shadow organization
behind Joan of Arc. That sounds a lot like the Watchers' Council
to me. (Even with Giles around, we don't know that much about
them, except they're on a power trip.) It wouldn't even contradict
their parallel with the Inquisitors.
Cool post.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Thanks! :) -- Whisper2AScream, 08:16:57
11/15/01 Thu
Haven't heard of a shadow organization with St. Joan, but good
point there. Though such allusions don't bode well to Buffy ultimately.
Perhaps in the series finale, she'll burn?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The 7-3-0 for season 6 - what went through my addled brain...
-- penjorgensen, 18:32:05 11/14/01 Wed
Hmm, when Buffy said she felt as if she were a Joan, I kept wondering
if maybe it was a bollixing up of Anne, i.e. Joanne.
My other immediate thought (and it is a weak conjecture) is that
she was fusing Joyce, her mother whose role she has been thrust
into, and Anne, her alter-ego who ran away from duty, into some
melange of her current identity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I expected self-referential game -- Cleanthes, 10:35:05
11/15/01 Thu
When Buffy hesitated thinking what to call herself, I expected
her to call herself "Sarah". I think I have THIS forum
to thank for that particular expectation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Season Six and Jumping the Shark
-- Dedalus, 09:40:11 11/14/01 Wed
I loved tabula rasa. So many great moments. Giles and Spike hugging.
Xander remembering King Ralph. Buffy running a hand through Dawn's
hair even when they didn't know who they were. Willow seeming
to be genuinely sorry about taking Buffy from heaven and accepting
responsibility for it despite her status as a raging magiaholic.
Spike helping the helpless. All the allusions to Xander's dream
in Restless that everyone here just seems to ignore.
And this is of course coming on the heels of the masterpiece of
masterpieces, Once More With Feeling. I, like most fans, am still
singing the damn songs. Most shows would have slacked off after
something like that, but the sweeps just keep on coming.
The strange thing is, this is just the beginning of the season.
Usually those eps are the weakest ones before the season arc gets
going. Well, weak for Buffy anyway. But like OnM pointed out in
his marvelous review of OMWF, this whole season has been really,
really good. Bargaining 1 and 2 was like a movie, After Life was
a stunning revelation, Flooded we got the Trio, Life Serial we
got more laughs, All the Way we got another cool Halloween episode
... not an Incan Mummy Girl or Beer Bad anywhere in sight. Though
even those were not that bad. The drama is still dramatic, the
horror is still horrific, and the humor is still humorous.
And this is the sixth season. It should suck by now. Whedon is
not hands on anymore. Buffy died at the end of last season. The
show should be jumping the shark all over the place. Instead,
it is just bursting with creativity. Which for me begs the question,
is it possible that Buffy will ever jump the shark? They all say
this show could go on until the characters are 80, and I can almost
believe them. I mean, burn-out will come, but I see no signs of
it now. I don't know what this show would have to do to jump the
shark and pass the point of no return on the suckdom scale. It
would have to simply take a nose dive, and even that would take
at least half a season of unendurably bad episodes where the writers
were trying - literally - to screw everything up. And even then,
all Whedon would have to do is step in and write and direct a
Becoming or a Hush or a Restless or a Body or a Gift and all would
be well again.
I really do continue to be amazed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark (Spoilers TR) -- RH,
09:46:12 11/14/01 Wed
I agree with you 100% - I had expected OMTWF to be the big highlight
of this half of the season, but TR was FABULOUS! I don't think
I've laughed so hard in quite some time, (that whole spiel between
Giles and Spike, and Anya and Giles was HILARIOUS!) The shows
just keep getting better and better - each episode gives more
"meat" for the next episode - KUDOS to the cast and
crew! I can hardly wait for next week!
:D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The only shark Buffy (almost) jumped was the one that
was on the show last night! -- Rob, 09:57:39 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark (Spoilers TR)
-- AD, 10:01:26 11/14/01 Wed
I wonder if the writers were commenting on this very issue by
including an actual shark(-headed demon)in the show. Too bad neither
Joan or Randy ever actually jumped it. Or maybe that was a comment,
too!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark (Spoilers
TR) -- mundusmundi, 13:08:19 11/14/01 Wed
I wonder if the writers were commenting on this very issue by
including an actual shark(-headed demon)in the show.
I thought the same thing. Coming right on the heels of the marvelous
musical, which Joss a few months ago jokingly said "just
might suck," seemed hilariously apropos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I never even thought about that! :-)
-- Dedalus, 15:13:12 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Me neither (spoilers) -- Kimberly,
06:15:52 11/15/01 Thu
Yeah, I had heard him referred to as a "demon loan shark"
and thought THAT was the pun. :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark -- Deeva, 10:20:10
11/14/01 Wed
"All the allusions to Xander's dream in Restless that everyone
here just seems to ignore."
We're not ignoring it, I'm still trying to digest it. On another
post, from yesterday, I mentioned that while watching "Tabula
Rasa", "Restless" kept playing through my head.
Everytime I think about how far out they plot these story lines
and how they hint at what's to come, it floors me! My puny brain
quivers at the greatness before me!
I loved this episode! The whole scene in the Magic Box where everyone
istrying to figure out who they all are is just plain hilarious.
A great way for all the characters to poke fun at themselves and
then come to the realization that it is them that they are laughing
at. Genius!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Please explain... -- Jennifer, 10:36:10 11/14/01 Wed
I hope I don't sound ignorant, but could you explain "All
the allusions to Xander's dream in Restless that everyone here
just seems to ignore." I didn't mean to "ignore",
I just don't get it. Please explain!!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Please explain... -- tornado, 10:47:14 11/14/01
Wed
See below in http://www.voy.com/14567/21832.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I for one am excited about those allusions
-- Dedalus, 15:15:02 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark -- Aquitaine, 10:46:10
11/14/01 Wed
You gotta love ME for actual writing in a shark-headed figure.
LOL. Talk about thumbing your nose at the naysayers:)
Re: Restless - Remember how Buffy said that when the floods rolled
back she'd be a fireman? Well, I'm watching OMwF now and seeing
the fire hydrant and fire engines and... could it be that Buffy
actually, literally, gets a job as a fireman? I know, it sounds
way too pat but Buffy does need a job. ME could actually pull
it off:)
- Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark -- Solitude1056,
13:41:35 11/14/01 Wed
Fireman... I was thinking less literally on that one. But it does
seem odd, that she wants the fire, and earlier she wanted to be
the one who ends the fire...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark -- Aquitaine,
14:29:57 11/14/01 Wed
I'm not usually no literal but Joss has me all paranoid ever since
he had Buffy utter that joke about a brain aneurysm in S4 and
then having it occur in S5 for real! Sometimes, TTM can bite you
in the butt:)
As for the question of 'what does Buffy want - to be immolated
by fire or to douse the fire - I don't know. Buffy's capacity
for love was 'brighter than the fire' but now she touches the
fire and it freezes her. Sweet was a flamey devil and we know
he was bad; Spike is carrying a torch and it is eating away at
him (though it also makes him seem human). Lethe is the river
of forgetfulness so water = peace but lack of knowledge. Water
also = flooded basement and real world dampening of spirit. Biblically,
after the flood receded, life began anew.
But why would Buffy want to be a fireman after the flood. Confusing
imagery. Does she want to tame love and passion or control it?
Besides, fire, pretty;)
I guess the point is to strike a balance between being close to
the fire and walking through it...
-Aqui.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark --
Dedalus, 15:17:26 11/14/01 Wed
Not to mention the whole Graduation Day "Fire bad, tree pretty"
getting turned into "Fire pretty."
Sounds like a transvaluation of values to me!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: So long as they don't do, "Buffy:
Fire Walk with Me" -- mm, 16:09:27 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Season Six and Jumping the Shark -- gds, 19:07:04
11/14/01 Wed
To me the point was that the shark was a LOAN SHARK. I never heard
of "jumping the shark" till I read it on this board.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sweet as a Cartoon Character (Spoilers
for OMWF) -- Brian, 10:55:33 11/14/01
In mulling over the scene with Sweet and Dawm, it occurs to me
that he is really a "loony tunes" cartoon character
or another demon version of "The Mask." He is able to
pull objects out of thin air, and they appear tangible before
evaporating away.
This appears to lend support to my idea that he is from the imagination
of each person involved in his web. He knows their inner secrets
and sets up a situation where they will reveal what they are hiding
from the world.
This also accounts for why he was so thrown by Dawn's confesssion
of where she got the amulet. She didn't summon him, therefore,
he couldn't probe her secret(s) and have her expose them. Since
he built his dooming of the town on her as the source, he had
no other choice but to leave with the chaos not complete.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I was thinking the genie from Aladdin -- Shiver, 11:11:14
11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Memory & Relationships -- Ryuei,
11:25:07 11/14/01 Wed
I found it interesting how Tabula Rasa pointed out how dependent
relationships are on memories and how this is reinforced or otherwise
altered by instinct.
For instance, it seemed to me that Anya is someone who needs to
latch on to someone for support, and is not too discriminating
about who that someone is. So this neediness that Xander sung
about about is not necessarily a need for him but just for someone,
anyone, to be with. On the other hand, I do not discount her love
for Xander because it seems to me that while the instinct to latch
onto the first available human male was what drove her into a
relationship with Xander, it was their history together which
has really created a viable relationship out of that first impulse.
Remember how she sung about Xander as her "knight in shining
armor." She was singing her true feelings about him, and
those feelings arose from being around him and their history together.
In fact, oddly enough, I would say that it is encouraging that
Xander and Anya were not drawn to one another instinctively or
through sexual attraction once their memories faded. I think this
shows that the feelings they sung about in OMWF were not just
impulsive empotions but based on mutual caring and adoration and
commitment which was built up over the time that they have spend
with one another and based on all they have done for one another.
I think that is what makes for a healthy relationship - not mere
physical attraction. And if it was an initial neediness that got
things started - so what? You have to start somewhere - but then
you have to move past the starting point and I think Anya and
Xander have definately done that. They have already shown the
capacity to stick by one another through thick and thin (whether
apacolypses or personal differences).
As for Giles, while it was odd to see him kissing Anya, it does
make sense that he would be flattered to believe that he was engaged
to a young beautiful woman. But one could already see that they
would eventually have grown very annoyed with one another. The
incompatibility was there right from the start - even though Giles
no longer remembered that she was once Anyanka and that they had
once been adversaries.
I was also caught off gaurd when Giles used the word "dissapointed"
with Spike. Where did that come from? I was sure he was going
to say "contempt." But "disappointed?" Disappointement
implies expectations, and why should Giles have any instinctive
expectations regarding Spike? And what would they be?
And then there is Willow and Xander. Interesting that she was
not instinctively attracted to him (or at least not as much as
she was to Tara). This seems to show that the attraction she had
for him in the first three seasons was more about their growing
up together than anything else. So once again, a relationship
or attraction is shown to be based as much or more on history
and memories as on instinct or emotion.
In thinking this through, it would seem as though Tabula Rasa
was pointing out that while instinct can spark a relationship,
reinforce a relationship, or otherwise modify it, the actual living
contours of a relationship or even attraction or developed (and
not merely rounded out) by the actual histories between people.
Another thing to note, from a Buddhist point of view, is how instincts,
needs, and projections, can set things in motion even without
memories to back them up. This, of course, is how people can feel
affinites for one another for better or for worse from lifetime
to lifetime even though no memories carry over. So for instance,
Buffy and Dawn felt that they were sisters. And Buffy got drawn
into a mini-repeat/parody of her relationship with Angel. It was
as though her relationships were no mere accidents of circumstance
but deeply planted seeds of events that would come into fruition
in her life whether or not she could remember why. But this does
not take away from her free will. Or does it? I don't think it
does. My thinking is that until one resolves certain issues and/or
relationships one will continually try to find the circumstances
within which one can resolve them whether or not one is aware
that this is what one is doing. But once in those circumstances
one must consciously choose how to deal with them. So Buffy freely
chose, again, to be protective of her sister, and again is faced
with a vampire as an ally who she, again, choses not to stake.
So again I am thinking out loud, it seems as though our instincts/impulses
lead us into situations but what we freely choose to do will allow
the situation to develop one way or the other. Memory in a sense
is the history of our choices and outcomes, so it is not as though
only the instinctual relationships are the really deep and lasting
ones. That only indicates a potential, and maybe just a potential
complication. Rather, I think it is the free choices that determine
the reality of the relationships.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Wonderful post! Thanks! -- Nina, 11:45:35 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Memory & Relationships (Giles/Spike) -- Deeva, 12:37:36
11/14/01 Wed
Maybe, Giles is disappointed in Spike because when it was first
discovered that Spike was chipped, Giles suggested to Spike that
they (the Scoobs) could use his help (an Angel replacement, if
you will). Spike flat out refused, no thought about it, no nothing.
Just "No!" right as soon as the words left Giles' mouth.
Giles, at that point, felt that Spike's helping them was an option
on the table. Which was surprising to me when I first saw that
episode (sorry, can't think of which one it might be right now).
Even though now we see, that in his own way, Spike does help the
gang out, it took a while for him to reach that road. The trust
isn't there when I think that he has earned it a little. I'm not
saying that Spike isn't evil but he's not evil the way he was
when we first saw him 4 years(?) ago. Giles' opinion of Spike
sometimes seems very ambivalent to me. In some eps he's got a
very clear mistrust and dislike of him and in others he occasionally
defers to Spike.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Memory & Relationships (Giles/Spike) -- Dedalus,
15:24:58 11/14/01 Wed
I think the episode was Goodbye Iowa. It was in the middle of
season four, in any case. And I thought of it immediately, proud
to say.
Giles suggests that Spike may have a "higher purpose"
but he instantly dismisses it and goes back to counting the money
that Giles paid him for helping him in A New Man. Or maybe it
was A New Man ... drat, I haven't seen season four in too long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Memory & Relationships (Giles/Spike) --
Rufus, 20:19:32 11/14/01 Wed
I think the dissapointment comes from a place of hope. In The
Wish, Giles in the alternate reality crushed the power center
of Anyanka, hoping and betting that anything was better than the
life in Bizzaroland. All this was based upon what Cordy had the
time to tell him before she was killed. Giles is old enough to
have experience and the wisdom to be able to hope that the fight
between good and evil is complex enough that an anomoly like Spike
could exist for a "higher purpose". In season four,
Spike was so worried about his "Big Bad" that he was
only concerned with himself. But season two shows that when it
comes to the crunch, Spike does want this world of happy meals
on legs to go on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for
TR and Season 6) LONG -- Tillow, 11:30:58 11/14/01 Wed
I've wanted to post this for a couple of weeks now. I just can't
wait any longer... The discussion of Willow's behavior being the
result of an addiction... hubris... completely out of character
for her... is just too compelling!
There have been many discussions on the boards about this so I
will quote some in this post. Most recently...
The dressing and second spell were clear betrayals. Also, people
are using the term "addiction"-its more than just addiction
here, that would be adequate to describe it if say Willow just
couldn't resist using the dressing spells, etc.-someone being
addicted to cigarettes is different than someone smoking to much
and grinding a cigarette out in someone's face, for example.~breseis
I've known many many addicts in my life, mostly in my own family.
The above mentioned behavior ties together. Not being able to
resist something goes hand in hand with hurting those an addict
loves most. A heroin addict will beg, cheat, and steal from his/her
grandmother and then kick her on the way out if it means he/she
will get the money for the next fix. It's about the level of addiction.
Cigarette's may not bring this behavior out. Heroin will. I think
the level of Willow's hurtful behavior towards Tara, the person
she loves the most (as evidence by her fury at Glory for mistreating
her and subsequent reclaiming of Tara's mental facilities) only
proves the intensity of her addiction and the powerful feelings
these magicks give her.
Control has been a big issue on the board, also. Willow has attempted
to control Tara. To deny Tara the free will that comes with being
able to make her own decisions based on her own interpretation
of events. The events she can't remember if Willow has blocked
her memories.
This control is the same sort that many men and women, but unfortunately
mainly women, face in abusive relationships every day. Many times
this abuse is the result of an addiction like Willow seems to
be facing. ~darrenK
This is so true. In alcoholic families there is a whole cycle
of relationships that are in place to control the environment.
Each member "plays their part" in order to cope with
the main abuser (the alcoholic) and also divert attention away
from other members of the family so as to protect each other.
It's a twisted Web. Some of you probably know about this but for
those of you who don't, here is what I know. I won't give sources..
this comes from experience.
The alcoholic is the main abuser.
The spouse is the main enabler (by validating because he she stays)
and is simultaneously a victim (often gets the brunt of the controlling
behavior) and also a secondary abuser (by failure to protect and
stop what is going on).
There are four coping strategies the children can choose from.
The hero. The clown. The scape goat/problem child. The lost child.
The Hero is the voice of reason/the angel. Does everything right
and keeps the confidence of the abusers so as to be able to manipulate
the abuser when he/she is angry or annoyed/ or drunk. The Clown
is the comic relief. The clown detracts the attention from the
other children by dissipating the tension in tense situations
and in essence saying "Look at me!~ Keep your attention on
me." The Scape Goat acts in a similar fashion, but instead
detracts attention from the other members of the family by providing
the abuser with an outlet for the brunt of the abuse. A female
scape goat may be promiscuous. A male scape goat may commit crimes
and get caught or do drugs. There are many other behaviors. These
are just examples. The Lost Child is forgotten. The abuser will
usually not validate the lost child's presence; consistently interrupt
or ignore him/her; disregard opinions, etc. The personalities
around seem to be too strong for the person who adopts this role.
It's a form of retreat; also of not making waves. The really horrifying
part is that the lost child is statistically proven to die the
youngest. The person who takes this role on in the family has
such utterly low self-esteem, it's as if they just disappear.
Not all the roles are taken in a family, sometimes they shift,
and sometimes they duplicate. What I fear we will see in the coming
season is the growing up process from these roles and let me tell
you, it's a bitch. The roles become so ingrained and people who
are acting them out don't realize that they are doing it to help
each other and survive an addictive personality that is acting
out against them. It's hard to evolve from, it's harder still
to forgive each other and oneself. The Hero feels like he/she
has helped the abuser in all the attempts of controlling. The
Scape Goat is angry at the world and may feel beyond redemption
(I've done so many horrible things). The Clown is really not laughing
on the inside. All are angry at the other for taking whatever
little attention was to be had (even though it was negative attention).
The Lost Child, in my estimation is the scariest. Because often
when the other's begin to heal, the lost child is still ignored
and left out of the process-so used to not being heard, why start
now?
Now, here is how I think this may apply to Buffy. I think obviously
Willow is the addict. She has used magic to stop going through
the pain beginning in Something Blue when Oz left.
At the Bronze...
Willow: No! Why should I? I've got pain, here - big-time legitimate
pain.
Xander: We all have pain, Will.
Willow: Oh, like what? "Oh, poor me.. I live in a basement."
Yeah, that's dire.
(Xander, offended, just shakes his head and walks back to the
table. Buffy stands and takes Willow's arm)
Buffy: Okay, you know what? That's it - I'm taking you home.
Willow: (Pulls her arm away) No, I don't want to.
Buffy: Well, you'll thank me when you still have a friend in the
morning.
Willow: I just can't stand feeling this way. I want it to be over.
Buffy: It will. I promise. But it's gonna take time.
Willow: Well, that's not good enough.
Buffy: I know. It's just how it is. You have to go through the
pain.
Willow: Well, isn't there someway I can just make it go away?
Just 'cause I say so? Can't I just make it go 'poof'?
I don't have to continue to give examples... we've all watched
in horror (and laughter as in TR) as Willow has continued to try
to right the wrongs in her world with spells. And as Tara told
her last night, (not a direct quote~at work~It may have started
out with good intentions but now it's to make the world the way
Willow wants it." I've never been addicted to anything besides
Buffy or chocolate but I've *heard* that it's very much about
making one's world right again. Things don't seem/feel right without
that fix. After a while it's not about feeling good, it's about
feeling normal.
Now here's where my theory gets a bit stretchy. I think that Buffy
is taking the role of the spouse/enabler. Buffy has not yet questioned
Willow and her use of magick. She has, in fact, protected her
from the consequences by not telling Willow how unhappy she is
to be hack on Earth/Hell. This was also the case with Angelus
and the soul spell and if I weren't at work I might be able to
think of others. She's enabling because she doesn't want to hurt
Willow. But she's not realizing that by standing idly by she is
letting Willow hurt herself and others. Part of what Giles song
was about. "You don't hear the cries around you." At
the end of that song Tara and Giles are saying they are going
to leave and they are watching Buffy and Willow talking light
heartedly. That scene gives me chills. And now, with Tara moving
out, Willow and Buffy are sharing the house together with Dawn.
Willow is the more powerful presence in Dawn's life right now
as we have discussed on the board. Buffy has barely spoken to
her since she's been back but I believe that will change. (more
on that another time)
These two personalities are the big two. In Restless, both tell
xander, "Way ahead of you." Out of the original four,
Giles is now in England and Xander has receded (hopefully temporarily)
to a secondary character. This is why I would say Buffy takes
on the spousal enabler role and not Tara. Until recently, Tara
was the Hero. She may have questioned Willow's use of magick always
(remember that spell where Tara broke away and blew the ingredients
under the bed) but she always smiled prettily and kept her doubts
to herself. Keeping the role of trusted friend and lover, and
mediator for the rest of the group. Xander, always has been and
always will be the clown. Anya and Dawn I'm not too clear on.
I'd like to wait and see more. I'd like to say that Dawn is clearly
the Lost Child because she has been totally ignored by Buffy all
season. :( However, her theft and her Halloween excursion hint
of Scape Goat. Though a Scape Goat is usually more blatant. I
think Anya may have been taking on this role. It was strange in
the beginning that she was acting so utterly inappropriate when
she seemed to be making great strides toward 'humanity' at the
end of last season. Perhaps Dawn is getting sick of being the
lost child and her acting out will get worse, moving her into
the scape goat role. Or perhaps I'm wrong and Anya is already
the lost child, with xander not wanting to validate their relationship.
(What was the deal with what he said to her at the beginning of
TA anyway about being a beautiful woman when she was talking about
Buffy's experience in Heaven. Sorry OT)
I think Dawn will develop late in the season, I'll hold my judgement
until then.
Vandalia said... That thinks that Willow getting up close and
personal with Glory's brain at the end of S5 to get Tara back
has affected her somehow? Who was the last obscenely powerful
and self-absorbed person on the show? Glory. Who did Willow face
off with twice, once sticking her hands in Glory's brain much
as Glory did to her victims? I'm wondering if perhaps there isn't
some residual...contamination to explain Willow's flirting to
outright commitment to the 'Dark Side.'
Interesting theory, vandalia. IMHO, I think that won't be the
way the writer's take this. I think that might be an easy out.
This story line seems to be very real and very long and painful.
This season is about growing up. For Willow, I think that is about
facing truths, dealing with pain she has long suppressed.
I think she pull through. There have been several characters who
have not bought into the roles.
Spike: Listen. I've figured it out. Maybe you haven't, but I have.
Willow knew there was a chance she'd come back wrong. So wrong
that you'd have to-- that she'd have to get rid of what came back.
And she knew I wouldn't let her. If any part of it was Buffy,
I wouldn't let her. That's why she shut me out.
XANDER What are you talking about? Willow couldn't do that!
SPIKE That right? ... The thing about magic? There's always consequences.
Always.
Spike immediately withdraws from the group dynamic that he's been
part of all summer. The conversation between Giles and Willow
in the kitchen (I don't think it even needs repeating :) is another.
And now Tara has broken away. One of these three may be able to
get through to Tara and I have a feeling it might be Spike. Simply
because he has always been the one to cut through the bullshit
and Willow will be very defensive against anything Tara or Giles
has to say as we have already said.
I hate to see what will happen between Buffy and Willow. This
season hurts. I have no real place to conclude. This plot screams
of addiction metaphor to me and addictions can be overcome. But
the process leaves a bloody wake and I don't wanna watch. But
then again, I can't stop!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season 6) LONG
-- vandalia, 11:53:57 11/14/01 Wed
Very interesting interpretation, Tillow. And I think you're right
about me being wrong. I just think it might've been the straw,
though as you've pointed out, there have been so many hints at
this coming from Willow (even as far back as Lover's Walk in S3
when she tried to do the de-lusting spell on her and Xander without
telling Xander about it). Her spells have always had something
go wrong with them, and I think this might be because she's approaching
magic with the wrong attitude. Perhaps her flubs with her spells
are magic's way of telling her 'no, your reasons are not sound
for this and until they are none of your spells will ever go right.'
It'd be interesting to see a catalogue of Willow's spells, why
she was doing them, and how they turned out (if they came out
good when she had good intentions and bad when she had selfish
ones). Anyone?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> This season IS painful (spoilers S6) -- Traveler, 12:00:11
11/14/01 Wed
"I hate to see what will happen between Buffy and Willow.
This season hurts. I have no real place to conclude. This plot
screams of addiction metaphor to me and addictions can be overcome.
But the process leaves a bloody wake and I don't wanna watch.
But then again, I can't stop!"
Besides addiction metaphores, we also see the loss of innocence
(Buffy and Dawn) and a brutal love/hate relationship between Buffy
and Spike. All of the characters, with the possible exception
of Xander and Anya, are really being put through the ringer, and
it's hard for anybody who cares about them to watch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season 6) LONG
-- robert, 12:37:34 11/14/01 Wed
"I've wanted to post this for a couple of weeks now. I just
can't wait any longer... The discussion of Willow's behavior being
the result of an addiction... hubris... completely out of character
for her... is just too compelling! "
I too see the addiction scenario this season. My wife and I have
had to deal with abusive relationships, thus making the metaphor
rather painful. I do not agree however that this is out of character
for Willow. I submit that if you go all the way back to "Welcome
to the Hellmouth" you will see that Willow has always utilized
amoral methods to problem solving. Five years ago, it was hacking
into the computers of the city administration. Now it is hacking
into her friend's memories. What happens next week? I wait with
horrified anticipation.
This is also a great metaphor for seduction, such as that used
for luring individuals into spying. Once you commit the smallest
sin (thus compromising your own ethics and morals), it becomes
easier to commit bigger sins later. Between last season and this
season, Willow changed the relationship with all her friends.
It seemed such a small change (and such a small sin), but it was
a huge change. Her friends are no longer her equals. They are
now her instruments. How long will Buffy put up with that???
More importantly, Willow is becoming increasingly desparate. Both
BtVS and Angel are all about redemption. I believe that Willow
will hit "rock bottom" and start the back on the road
of redemption. But what will "rock bottom" be? Who will
die in the process?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season
6) LONG -- Becky74, 13:15:03 11/14/01 Wed
The scary thing is, what can Buffy really do to stop her? If she
has the power to make someone forget as simply as she did to Tara,
how can Buffy or the rest of the Scoobies possibly counter that?
And if she was able to hurt Glory, how is Buffy any match for
her?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season
6) LONG -- Dedalus, 15:32:43 11/14/01 Wed
Excellent post Tillow.
It seems to me Willow is also something of a gambler. Instead
of just one more bet, it's like one more spell. ALl she needs
is one more spell to make everything right, and then that'll be
it.
And yes, this season does hurt, but in a good way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Thanks :) -- Tillow, 16:13:18 11/14/01
Wed
I like the gambling tie in. I'll have to think about that more.
Glad to know I'm not the only one out there in *pain* over this
season. How 'bout the trailer for next week? Ugh! It left me with
such a feeling of despair. I hope it was just the editing.
I need a support group. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I hope you realize... -- anom, 21:38:53
11/15/01 Thu
"I need a support group."
...you've got it. Right here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season
6) LONG -- robert, 16:50:09 11/14/01 Wed
"The scary thing is, what can Buffy really do to stop her?"
No one cannot stop her.
If we continue the metaphor, no one can stop an alcoholic, short
of killing him. Only the alcoholic can stop himself. Friends and
family can execute an intervention, which hopefully will provide
the alcoholic sufficient motive to seek help.
In this case, neither Buffy nor any other of Willow's friends
will be able to stop her. I am guessing that Willow performs some
spell that seriously hurts or kills someone close to her. That
coupled with an intervention might give her motivation to step
on the path of redemption.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season
6) LONG -- Tillow, 16:22:48 11/14/01 Wed
I agree about the rock bottom thing. Hoping that no one will die
in the process. Everytime I ask myself what will happen in the
future I take it from two angles, "What should the writers
do, logically?" Logically, I don't think any major characters
will die. Amy, maybe. Maybe they'll bring Oz back for 2 eps or
something and he'll die. Which would be horrible. But I can't
see any of the major players dying as part of Willow's process.
Then my second approach. I throw logic out the window and say
"What will Joss do?" And the answer is, I have not got
a clue. I'm usually floored. He can and will do whatever he wants
and it will be great. Even if I hate Willow in the process. :(
(which I don't, BTW, not yet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> ABOVE MESSAGE IS IN RESPONSE TO ROBERT ABOVE
(got lost??) -- Tillow, 16:24:38 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's Addiction Spoilers For OMWF and 'Tabula Rasa'
-- Age, 07:59:51 11/15/01 Thu
As a symbolic reinforcement of your idea about addiction, the
scene in the Magic Shop at the beginning of OMWF is meant to show
the pattern of it.
While investigating, working through the problem, as it were,
Tara comes out with an almost incoherent babble as the subterfuge
to get herself and Willow back home begins. This babbling is a
deliberate echo of the time last year when she was under Glory's
influence, and is meant to describe Willow's influence over Tara.
The enmeshing of identity is also suggested by the fact that it
is Tara who begins the subterfuge under Willow's influence. Subterfuge
is part of the pattern of addiction. And the desire to be out
on a sunny afternoon and to be back home making love is something
that Willow and Tara couldn't resist.
Instead of working through the problem, the two women then stroll
outside in the bright sunshine. The weather in Sunnydale is a
metaphor for a certain way of dealing with problems: don't deal
with them at all: repress them into the subconscious(the dale)
and put on a happy, Sunny face and pretend that everything's alright.
It's little wonder that the basic imagery of this series is from
the horror genre: this is suburban America's horror story: the
way it won't or can't deal with emotions. Instead of working through
the problem, of investigating what is the matter, distractions
and pleasure are used to mask the pain. This is exactly what Willow
and Tara do: they go home to have sexual pleasure. Nothing against
sex or pleasure, but in this context, it is used to describe an
avoidance of working through a problem. What I'm suggesting is
the scene of leaving the shop, strolling and going home to make
love is a general symbolic depiction as it applies to Willow(and
Tara.)
The bright sunshine allows Tara also to describe how she was brought
out of the shadows, and there's a sense of Willow being the parental
figure, helping Tara to grow. But if she is, then she's a child/dysfunctional
parental figure who is now asserting her will over her 'child'
and threatening to take away her identity completely as the events
in 'Tabula Rasa' were meant to signify; and which Tara's comments
in 'OMWF' about seeing in her only Willow attest to. This parental
role parallels Buffy's relationship to Dawn: both she and Willow
may be portrayed as child/dysfunctional parents unable to let
go themselves of relying on external sources of strength, rather
than their own empowerment as persons: in Willow's case, the use
of magic; and in Buffy's case enmeshment with her own parental
figure, Giles, symbolically portrayed as a kind of emotional incest,
or the possibility of that happening, in the Anya/Giles scene
in 'Tabula Rasa.'
Both Giles and Tara realize that they have to leave. One to allow
his daughter figure to gain her own identity; the other to save
herself from having her identity destroyed.
This is one of the reasons why the garden of Eden allusion has
been made this season: to stress the need for separation and facing
personal responsibility and realizing that there is suffering
in life.
As my emphasis is more on metaphor, hopefully this has added to
the discussion contained in this thread. It's an important topic.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow's Addiction Spoilers For OMWF and 'Tabula
Rasa' -- Dedalus, 08:29:55 11/15/01 Thu
Wow, yet again. "Suburban America's horror story." Such
a good (and original) point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Symbolism to Add to the Parallel: Spoilers for
OMWF -- Age, 09:51:43 11/15/01 Thu
Writing the above, I realized that the scene between Giles and
Buffy when she's training is also a symbolic representation of
his attempting to get through to her and her not listening to
him. She doesn't hear the song, but that's passive. I hadn't realized
that the knives that Giles throws at Buffy in the training session
were the points of his argument he was trying to get through to
Buffy. And, she was easily rebuffing them. She was actively defending
herself against his wisdom; just as Willow has been actively 'defending'
herself against the advice of others. So, just as Giles has to
leave Buffy in order to allow her to work through her problems,
Tara must do the same thing because they are shielding themselves
from what they need. The points, like the knives, just can't get
through.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> 'New Heav'ns, new Earth' (spoilers S6 up to
TR) -- Rahael, 11:00:37 11/15/01 Thu
Thank you Age, for yet another perceptive post. Great points about
the rural idyll that Willow and Tara lose themsleves in. (There
is a whole tradition of ancient, and early modern literature which
portrays the rural idyll as moral irresponsiblity - such as Sidney's
'Old Arcadia) I've just watched the musical, so feel able to comment
at last.
Working on the compelling Eden motif you stressed in this post,
and in others below, I agree that it is the departure from childhood,
and the entrance into adulthood which relates to the Buffy story,
a theme which has been running since Season 4. No wonder Restless
is still pivotal to Season 6.
The snake imagery has been constant, the most significant of course,
the one in Bargaining. Here the temptation, the seduction of power
and knowledge are brought out. Here we have both the literal descent
from Heaven to hell, as well as the more subtle process of growing
up that you have detailed. Adam and Eve gain knowledge by eating
the apple; in the Musical ep, Buffy reveals a devastating truth
to the Scoobys, that changes their lives. Sweet functions as the
Serpent/Angel in the episode, telling them that he comes from
'imagination' (i.e myth), and promises them 'see you in hell'.
The knowledge gained is so terrible that Willow gives into temptation
yet again, and tries to cast out the disturbing truth.
Buffy sees herself as already living in hell, 'expelled from heaven'.
But going to the Eden myth through the Miltonic expression of
it offers a new perspective. Milton creates a compelling, charismatic
Satan, with forceful and convincing arguments:
"Knowledge forbidd'n? Suspicous, reasonless. Why should their
Lord Envy them that? can it be sin to know, Can it be death? and
do they only stand By Ignorance, is that their happy state?"
Thus Buffy's happiness in her amnesia is illusory and hollow,
just as Adam and Eve in ignorance were. Milton's sympathies lie
with Satan here. He believed that the way to God was through reason,
learning and knowledge. Therefore, eating of the apple of knowledge
was the first, most important step on the way back to a 'new heav'n'.
Fittingly, his Adam and Eve only shed a few tears after their
expulsion.
"Some natural tears they dropped, but wiped them soon; The
World was all before them, where to choose Their place of rest,
and Providence their guide; They hand in hand with wandring steps
and slow, Through Eden took their solitary way"
(This reminds me of the 'Fire' song, where the Scooby's realise
that they walk together, but are alone in fear). And here we have
the fire imagery again - the way back is guarded by an Angel wielding
a flaming sword. The angel promises them: 'a paradise within thee,
happier far'.
So, in this seminal interpretation of the Eden myth, we have an
Adam and Eve who are resigned, ready to grow up, deal with the
consequence of their mistakes, and take up life together. Willow's
transgressions are like Eve's - necessary in propelling the Scooby's
onward in their journey. Giles's departure may seem harsh, like
the actions of the God of Paradise Lost - but ultimately, also
necessary. Is there a link here with Giles' ownership of the Magic
Box? the source for Willow's spells? and the echo of another myth
about temptation and fatal knowledge, Pandora's Box?
btw, excellent point about Giles and the knives.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: 'New Heav'ns, new Earth' (spoilers
S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Age, 14:49:20 11/15/01 Thu
Thanks for fleshing out the Eden myth. That's what makes this
message board so great, and the posters on it: an idea is posted
by one person and then given more meaning by another. It's the
kind of connection that increases our enjoyment of this excellent
series.
I'd like to add something about the parallel between Buffy and
Willow as mother figures: Tara's song does imply that Willow has
brought her up in the sense of bringing her into the light. In
the park scene the writers even play with the idea of Tara now
being of age to leave the nest and go have a relationship with
young men, ie leave home.(They do it in such a way as to avoid
any criticism of homosexuality by having Tara play with/refute
the idea that it's a disease.)
But, what I forgot is that we were already set up to see Willow
as the mother figure from late last year as she looked after Tara.
There was a parallel made between Buffy looking after Dawn, and
Willow looking after Tara. The echo of being under Glory's influence
in the babbling statement of 'OMWF' is meant probably to remind
us of this mother/daughter relationship from last year. Tara is
thus leaving home to escape the dysfunction of her addicted mother
figure who is threatening to overwhelm her identity. While Giles
is leaving his daughter figure who is enmeshing her identity as
parent with his. In fact as a parent Buffy's not functioning that
well at all(other threads below mentioned that she's depressed)
as when she comes into the Magic Shop at the beginning of 'OMWF'
she doesn't really know if Dawn got to school or not. And this
lack of care is reflected in Dawn's need to be caught stealing.
She needs boundaries to be set for her.
The posting that started this thread already described in detail
the effects of dysfunctional relationships and the roles that
children adopt in order to fit into the dysfunctional dynamic,
and boundary issues are indeed part of the problem.
In the Eden myth two former innocents are thrown out by God to
face the pain and suffering of life and death. In this interpretation
there is some dysfunction at the root of the myth in that the
two are thrust from one state, unknowing innocence, into another
based on knowledge without a process of learning. This is possibly
akin to Buffy's and Willow's lives as their parents, especially
Buffy's father, were not around to teach them, and in Buffy's
case, her mother died suddenly last year. There has been some
debate as to whether what's being described is a natural process
of growing up or not, and I'd have to suggest, as the Eden myth
implies, it is both: how can anything on a hellmouth, given the
basic metaphors and themes of the series and the upbringing that
the Scoobies have had, be simply natural? We have in Willow a
metaphor for addiction and in Buffy's walking zombie one for depression.
Yet, growing up and establishing ones own identity separate from
the parental figure is a natural step.
There's certainly a double edge to Buffy's return: on the one
hand she was happy, but on the other hand, she was dead. Life
isn't bliss; it isn't sitting around in the ultimate basement,
heaven; it's just living. Certainly, like Eve, as you suggested,
Willow's spell was necessary to get the next stage of the spiritual
journey, or the journey to adulthood, going: it is THE fall, the
fall from childhood as Willow defied the natural order with her
choice. But, you have to lose something to gain something. This
is why the Buddha figure is the central icon on the counter of
the Magic Shop; buddhists meditate by observation of breath: exhalation
and inhalation. If you hold onto your breath, you die because
it cannot nourish you. You have to let it go, to proceed. As has
been repeated this season, there'a a price to be paid. That price
is in part childhood.
Also, it's intriguing that you equate the rural setting with irresponsibility(my
analysis implied that it was part of an addiction) as it gets
to the heart of the debate: is Willow being an irresponsible child
or does she have an addiction problem? It's the same with Buffy:
is she depressed or just refusing to face her responsibilities?
Is it a matter of just growing up or of more troubling matters?
As I stated above, there seem to be elements of both in the sense
of depression and addiction being the cause of irresponsible behaviour.
I'm not clear on this.
I think you are right about the start of the change in perspective
beginning in season four: the opposition between good human and
bad demons started to blur as we gained pathos for the neutered
Spike and the more animal like demons experimented upon by the
Initiative. Also, 'Restless' is still relevant and may in part
explain Willow's addiction: self esteem problems(she is still
Willow, low will, unable to resist etc.) This seems to belie her
exerting her will over the natural world in the spell, but I think
that the two come together in that her will is bring bolstered
by her reliance on an external power, and not empowerment of herself.
The Pandora's box idea is a good one. I do not have enough knowledge
of it to analyze it further...perhaps another poster could add
his or her commentary about it.
What constantly amazes me is that Joss Whedon and his team of
writers had to come up with the material that we are analyzing.
They had to make the ideas and the plots and the emotions and
the characters and the metaphors work. I can analyze the two series
because the material is already there and I can read other people's
ideas about what's going on. But these men and women have to come
up with it first, refine it, write it and produce it.
I loved it when Sweet said he comes from the imagination because
we are being reminded of the metaphorical basis of this series.
This, and when Buffy turns to us and sings that we can sing along
too. This isn't a fantasy series about vampires and slayers, but
a metaphorical depiction of our lives. And this is why I wanted
to add to the postings in this thread. It's about how we live.
Thanks once again for your comments about the Eden myth.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara/Willow Daughter/Mother
(spoilers S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Tillow, 05:44:39 11/16/01 Fri
But, what I forgot is that we were already set up to see Willow
as the mother figure from late last year as she looked after Tara.
There was a parallel made between Buffy looking after Dawn, and
Willow looking after Tara. The echo of being under Glory's influence
in the babbling statement of 'OMWF' is meant probably to remind
us of this mother/daughter relationship from last year. Tara is
thus leaving home to escape the dysfunction of her addicted mother
figure who is threatening to overwhelm her identity. ~Age
A ha! This Eden myth discussion has helped me to understand something
I felt intuitively but couldn't bend my mind around. In my original
post I had mentioned that I would put Buffy with Willow as the
spouse/enabler relationship and Tara as one of the coping children.
Thanks for the insightful addition.
Question? Any feelings on the Lilith/Eve distinction and how it
may relate to characters on Buffy? Has this already been discussed
on the boards?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Pandora and Prometheus, plus
something on Lilith -- Rahael, 09:15:59 11/16/01 Fri
Pandora was a beautiful woman, created by a son of Zeus, who was
married off to Epimetheus, and given a gift by each of the Gods.
She was created to punish mankind, as a response to Prometheus
(ha! another Prometheus/fire link!). Aphrodite gave her beauty,
Athena, Skill, Hermes gave her a dog-like mind, and a thieving
nature (kleptomania!!).Zeus gave her curiosity as a gift, and
a box, which he told her never to open. Pandora was made out of
earth and water.
Eventually, Pandora gave into temptation and opened the box, thus
releasing all the horrors and evils of the world onto humanity.
But the very last thing to come out of the box was hope; hope
for humanity in a newly darkened world.
Pandora is linked inextricably with Prometheus, stealer of the
divine fire, creator of man from clay. I see here a rich imagery
that ties into the Buffyverse in numerous ways.
1) fire is everpresent in the Greek 'early humanity' story 2)
the image of challenging Gods, temptation and men and women risking
the ire of God are all here.
There is also the idea of a universe which punishes all actions,
good or bad present here too, and I think Joss Whedon has always
tried to show that to all actions there must be emotional consequences.
Anyway, these are just a series of random thoughts, rather than
a thesis.
I tend to see a better parallel between the urn of osiris and
Pandora's box, then the apple of knowledge. By bringing Buffy
back, and opening her grave, Willow brings out all manner of things
- the last of which is Buffy, who is hope.
Here is the Lilith myth:
From "Hebrew Myths" by Robert Graves and Raphael Patai:
Some say the God created man and woman in His own image on the
Sixth Day, giving them charge over the world, but that Eve did
not yet exist. Now, God had set Adam to name every beast, bird
and other living thing. When they passed before him in pairs,
male and female, Adam --being already like a twenty-year-old man--
felt jealous of their loves, and though he tried coupling with
each female creature in turn, found no satisfaction in the act.
He therefore cried: "Every creature but I has a proper mate!"
and prayed God would remedy this injustice. [1] God then formed
Lilith, the first woman, just as He had formed Adam, except that
he used filth and sediment instead of pure dust. From Adam's union
with this demoness, and with another like her named Naamah, Tubal
Cain's sister, sprang Asmodeus and innumerable demons that still
plague mankind. Many generations later, Lilith and Naamah came
to Solomon's judgement seat, disguised as harlots of Jerusalem.
Adam and Lilith never found peace together, for when he wished
to lie with her, she took offence at the recumbent position he
demanded. "Why must I lie beneath you?" she asked. "I
also was made from dust, and am therefore your equal." Because
Adam tried to compel her obedience by force, Lilith, in a rage,
uttered the magic name of God, rose into the air and left him.
Adam complained to God: "I have been deserted by my helpmeet."
God at once sent the angels Senoy, Sansenoy and Semangelof to
fetch Lilith back. They found her beside the Red Sea, a region
abounding in lascivious demons, to whom she bore 'lilim' at the
rate of more than one hundred a day. "Return to Adam without
delay," the angels said, "or we will drown you!"
Lilith asked: "How can I return to Adam and live like an
honest housewife, after my stay beside the Red Sea?" "It
will be death to refuse!" they answered. "How can I
die," Lilith asked again, "when God has ordered me to
take charge of all newborn children: boys up to the eighth day
of life, that of circumcision; girls up to the twentieth day.
None the less, if ever I see your three names or likenesses displayed
in an amulet above a newborn child, I promise to spare it."
To this they agreed; but God punished Lilith by making one hundred
of her demon children perish daily; [3] and if she could not destroy
a human infant, because of the angelic amulet, she would spitefully
turn against her own. Some say that Lilith ruled as queen in Zmargad,
and again in Sheba; and was the demoness who destroyed Job's sons.
Yet she escaped the curse of death which overtook Adam, since
they had parted long before the Fall. Lilith and Naamah not only
strangle infants but also seduce dreaming men, and one of whom,
sleeping alone, may become their victim.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara/Willow Daughter/Mother
(spoilers S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Age, 09:44:37 11/16/01 Fri
I know what you mean. You have a feeling about a certain subject,
and you know it, but then in reading another posting it becomes
clarified.
I'm glad that this discussion has been helpful. The subject of
this thread is important. Joss Whedon, like the rest of us, probably
lived through this suburban America horror story(I don't mean
to make light of it in any way by labelling it) and had the vision
to translate that into metaphorical imagery. As a society we need
this type of show and discussion. More than this, as human beings
we deserve this type of show and discussion.
A couple of things to add to the discussion: even in 'Tabula Rasa,'
Willow affectionately refers to Tara as 'Baby.' While it is a
common term of endearment, it does imply a certain relationship
structure between the two.
Also, the scene with Giles and Anya in 'TR' contains not only
Buffy's problem, but Willow's also. Anya's persistent use of magic,
any magic as the first book she comes to signifies, is a parallel
to Willow: the bunnies, as they relate specifically to Anya represent
the absolute horror that such practice can bring, with the bunny
image in a more general term showing how out of control the use
can become given how many bunnies were conjured and the fact that
bunnies in themselves are prolific in reproducing. Looking at
it another way, the bunnies are akin to Willow's view of magic:
harmless. They represent Willow's belief in the harmlessness of
the spells she does given the power she thinks she's acquired.
The scene underscores the movement towards chaos as Anya's good
intentions of helping with the spell turn from bunnies to vortex
clouds above and then to the skeleton from 'Jason and the Argonauts.'
It is a symbolic representation of the road to hell being paved
with good intentions.
This scene then condenses Willow and Buffy into one figure, Anya;
and to create symmetry, Tara and Giles in the other. This then
implies that Tara is a mother figure. I don't think we are meant
to see it in this way. I think that we are, through Giles, meant
to see why Tara has to leave: the enmeshment as symbolized by
the romance of Giles and Anya. We are also meant to see Tara as
an enabler, leaving Willow not only to save her own identity,
but to stop the pattern of dysfunction. The scene in the park
in 'OMWF' may imply that the mother/daughter relationship is coming
to an end: Tara sings that she's been brought out of the shadows,
and that she now has the confidence to leave as her mock departure
for the boys is meant to signify. What I'm getting at is that
if she stays with Willow she will lose herself, her identity:
the daughter has to leave home; but also, if she stays then she
will play the role of enabler, just as Giles would if he stayed
in Sunnydale.
One another thing, in re-watching 'TR' I noticed that Giles implies
that Buffy has everything inside her already: her mother taught
her about life. In this way, I'd like to alter slightly my analysis
in one of the other postings from Buffy's not learning to Buffy's
not having had time to assimilate everything that she's learned.
I still say that to a great extent parental absence has been involved
in the dysfunction, or moreover, is a part of the dysfunction,
but clearly the writers were referring to Joyce's and Giles' influence
as parents to Buffy as the basis for her having learned what she
needs to proceed. This interpretation jibes with the allusions
last year to Dorothy in 'The Wizard of Oz' and to the Buddha figure
on the Magic Shop counter which symbolizes the idea that we do
have in us already all that we need and don't need something external
to us, as Willow and Buffy both think they do.
You question about Lilith is an excellent one; unfortunately my
knowledge of Adam's other wife is very limited; in fact up until
recently I didn't know she existed. My understanding is that she's
been associated with the first Eve, and that she was thrown out
of the garden or returned to dust for several reasons, but, for
the purposes of 'Buffy' discussion because of her independence.
She has also been much demonized as well. Here's a bit from Lilithmag.com:
Lilith's character, then, is a maze of contradictions, interweaving
a variety of legends and traditions. If we isolate all the strands
of demonology, separating the various interpolations of Lilitu,
the wind spirit; Labartu, the child-slayer; Lamashtu, the Greek
Lamia; Lilith, the night -demon; we are left with the story of
the first Eve, who may or may not have claim to the name Lilith
in the first place.
Stripped of the overlay of medieval mysticism and demonology this
Lilith emerges as an independent spirit. Had she succeeded in
her battle with Adam for equal rights, Lilith might today represent
that spark of original creativity in whose image women could retrace
and recreate their history. Instead history plunged her into the
depths of demonhood. Only in the twentieth century, which has
no use for sheydim, may the Lilith, who has been obscured by the
mists of demonology these thousands of years, be revealed today
as the first woman on earth, equal to man and a free spirit.
In my opinion, 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' is a reaction against
and a representation of the emergence from such a society that
would demonize a Lilith. It is the restoration of the value of
the feminine in both women and men, with the attending interpenetration
of the masculine and feminine in men and women: in short, it is
the deconstruction of the kind of oppositional thinking that requires
men not to be women in any way at all, and women to be devalued
as the vilifed other. The series is not only a depiction of the
transition of adolescence in the characters themselves, but in
our society as a whole as we deconstruct the myths that we have
clinged to, and which aren't needed or wanted anymore. It is the
depiction of our society in its adolescence as it grows to face
the world as it is. The principle figure of this deconstruction
is the title character herself: the slayer of myth/deconstructor.
The Eve figure can be interpreted in several ways: as the excuse
for a patriarchally based society to remain so; as the feminine
principle beginning the necessary spiritual journey that recognition
of our condition as human beings engenders; as the depiction of
the female giving up control of her fertility to men.(Note, that
if you watch Joss Whedon's film 'Alien: Resurrection' the scene
in the gym with Ripley is a symbolic depiction of Eve not giving
up her fertility as symbolized by the ball she's carrying. She
is perhaps the restoration, the resurrection of Lilith, as Ripley,
leaves the gym and puts the apple/ball back in the tree(inside
herself) by dunking it as she leaves. While the film itself is
very violent, it is, like 'Buffy' a metaphorical treatment of
the themes we are discussing. Yes, Whedon has infused the film
from start to finish with metaphor.)
If we look at last year's 'Buffy' arc, we see Buffy coming to
terms with the implications of her own fertility,ie mortality,
as symbolized by Dawn. She refuses to give up Dawn, give up her
offspring. The arc is a year long depiction of childhood through
adolescence, parenthood and then death as the previous generation
makes way for the new. In doing so, unlike Eve, who does give
up her fertility to the male as the newer male dominated society
begins its attempt to domesticate the female rendering women powerless,
Buffy takes responsibility for hers and makes it her own. In other
words, it is the deconstruction of the myth that an independent
young woman, and this is similar to aspects of the demonized Lilith
myth, would be a child slayer, ie wouldn't become a mother. Women
are human females. Why would they not have children? It's just
that they would have them on their own terms, and as a result
of their choosing. The womb resides in the female body.
I hope this small discussion helps.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara/Willow Daughter/Mother
(spoilers S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Age, 10:14:28 11/16/01 Fri
Just a quick addition to show how meticulous the writers are in
assigning images: in the Giles/Anya scene of 'TR':
the bunnies lead to the vortex and then to the fighting skeleton.
The vortex represents the boundary issues of dysfunction; while
the skeleton represents the walking dead, but also, if this is
an allusion to 'Jason and the Argonauts' the quest, the journey
that Willow and Buffy must attempt.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Excellent thoughts --
Rahael, 11:06:41 11/16/01 Fri
Hard to add anything to such a well thought out and complex post...............
Just a little note on Tara - Tara has already shown before that
she can 'separate' herself from the destructive parent.
Also, she has lost her 'mother' before. We know from the Body
that her mother died when she was young.
And to echo Tillow, your examination of the parent/child dynamic
in the T/W relationship crystallised for me the emotional reaction
I had to Willow's caring attitude to the brain-sucked Tara. "I'll
always find you". I found that very moving, but at the same
time, the disturbing conflicts were already erupting between them.
Tara is brain sucked partly because of the fight she has with
Willow. And mark the hostility that the brain sucked Tara has
toward Willow - "Bitch! I'm supposed to work out the fractions!".
David Fury, writer of Helpless commented that Joss was fascinated
by the 'bad mother'. If Joyce is the 'best mother in the world'
(David Greenwalt), could Glory be the ultimate depiction of the
'bad' parent'? Her main role is to 'harm' the baby, the daughter,
Dawn. Buffy has to chose between being a 'child killer' like Glory,
or taking the self sacrificial route, which the parent always
has to chose. The much maligned but interesting episode WOTW explored
the ideas of sibling rivalry, family tension, and the idea of
infanticide.
The harmful parent idea has previously been explored in 'Helpless'
when Giles betrays his child, Buffy, under orders of his employers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Excellent
thoughts -- Age, 11:21:56 11/16/01 Fri
Until I did one of these current replies, I had not seen last
year's arc in the terms you state. But, the question about Lilith
and the reference to child slayer that I found put it in perspective.
Your posting makes it crystal clear. Thank you.
You make a good point about the circumstances surrounding the
brain sucking. It reminds me just how much thought has gone into
not only individual episodes, but season arcs.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Excellent
thoughts -- Tillow, 12:56:57 11/16/01 Fri
Rahael,
Interesting Glory/Bad mother theory. So Buffy has essentially
made her choice once sacrificing her life for her offspring. Yet
now she is back and is in a state of despair. She must make the
choice again to be a good or bad mother. Presently, she is pretty
self-involved. Maybe she is thinking, "What more can I do,
I've already died for you?" But as Dawn reminds her, using
her own words and knowledge to help her grow (hopefully-if she
can hear her)... "The hardest thing in this world is to live
in it." So she must make the choice to be selfless again,
this time moving through the pain. As she urged Willow to do in
Something Blue and Angel to do in the Christman Ep with the Snow.
These are things Buffy already knows. She's just tired. The point
is, if she is to be a good mother figure to Dawn, she can't indulge
her exhaustion and fall back into that peaceful death she craves.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara/Willow Daughter/Mother
(spoilers S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Age, 11:40:21 11/16/01 Fri
I don't want to suggest that the violence in Joss Whedon's 'Alien
Resurrection' is gratuitous; it isn't. But, it is a violent film.
Joss Whedon is using the alien imagery in a similar fashion to
the supernatural imagery of 'Buffy.'
In writing the above reply, the aim of last year's arc became
clearer: it was Buffy accepting her fertility and its implications,
setting her up, like Dorothy from Oz(several eps alluded to 'The
Wizard of Oz') to have everything already in herself. It was setting
her up to become an adult, but not yet be the adult as leaving
Dawn, the representation of Buffy, the child, signified at the
close of the arc. It is this year that she goes through the painful
transition from adolescence to adulthood.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara/Willow
Daughter/Mother (spoilers S4, S5, S6 up to TR) -- Age, 13:05:29
11/16/01 Fri
Also, the analogy of the mother/daughter in Willow's and Tara's
relationship only goes so far; after all their relationship is
romantic, not familial. Tara's song is about how she was alone
in the shadows, alone in the world of enchantment and magic which
is a metaphor for her lesbian love. She sings of Willow bringing
her out, not bringing her up. And the playfulness with the boys
is meant to reinforce the lesbian theme.
In this way, the scene in the park, as it relates to Willow, her
addiction, and the relationship, is how off track it has become,
where the magic of their lesbian love has become a power struggle,
the power of magic. In this way, Tara has to leave because what
defines their relationship has been altered to serve Willow's
ends.
In thematic terms, however, the mother/daughter relationship interpretation
still holds as part of the adolescent having to leave home and
establish her own identity aspect of the transition to adulthood
arc, or risk becoming emotionally enmeshed with the parental figure.
It is also an expression of the power imbalance between the two,
that at some point Willow has stopped the growth of Tara that
at first she promoted. The suggestion of emotional incest that
such a structure implies, as the Anya/Giles scene in 'TR' symbolizes,
has a metaphorical component and suggests just how sour, on Willow's
part, their relationship has become.
Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> It will help as soon
as... -- Tillow, 12:59:26 11/16/01 Fri
my head stops spinning and I can't put two thoughts together for
a coherent reply. :) Might take me a few hours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Willow's Addiction (Spoiler for TR and Season 6) LONG
-- Lunarchickk, 19:45:04 11/15/01 Thu
This is such a great theory... I think the image of Willow-as-addict
is more compelling than the idea that she will somehow just simply
"go evil." Instead, there are so many ways in which
Willow has been flirting with the dark side.
[...]we've all watched in horror (and laughter as in TR) as Willow
has continued to try to right the wrongs in her world with spells.
And the first wrong she decides to right is restoring Angel's
soul. From "Becoming, Part 1":
CORDELIA: Well, this is good, right? I mean, we can curse him
again. GILES: It's not that simple. This points the way, but the
ritual itself requires a rather more advanced knowledge of the
black arts than I can claim. WILLOW: Well, I. . . I've been going
through her files and reading up and. . . I've been sort of checking
out the black arts. Just for fun -- or, educational fun. I might
be able to work this. GILES: Willow, performing this kind of ritual,
channeling such potent majicks through yourself -- it will open
a door you may not be able to close.
Buffy wants to clear Angel -- return him to his old self, who
was not responsible for these actions; the man she loves. Willow
is her strongest champion in this respect, jumping at the chance
to return things to "normal." Xander, with backup from
Cordelia, has a different perspective.
XANDER: Way I see it you want to forget all about Ms Calendar's
murder so you can have your boyfriend back.
He sees no reason to try and change things from how they are --
he merely wants to deal with life as it has become, and kill Angel.
Willow, however, sees the spell as a chance to fix things -- to
forget about the horrors that have happened. Xander slings the
line above at Buffy -- but he fixes Willow with a painful "Am
I wrong?" which she cannot answer, cannot deny. Later, we
hear Buffy's half of a phone conversation with Willow, and we
don't hear what obscenity Willow calls Xander for his comments,
but it shocks Buffy. Willow is challenged and resists.
Later -- in "Becoming Part 2" -- we see Giles' dire
prediction about magick "opening doors" come to pass,
when Willow seems possessed by something or someone who can speak
Rumanian. Aha, we think. That's what he meant.
Or is it? More likely, this is the first taste of magick that
Giles and Willow actually refer to in the scene above as the "black
arts." This isn't the Wicca of the college group where Willow
meets Tara. This is bigger and darker, and Willow as early as
Season 2 has been investigating it "for fun."
Perhaps, looking back, we can see Willow's addictive personality
in her crush on Xander that predates Season 1. She clearly enjoys
her little world of controlled danger -- she can hack into any
number of government records on the computer; she fiercely defends
her unhealthy relationship with "Malcolm" who turns
out to be a demon trapped in the computer; she clearly revels
in her tiny bit of power to make Xander worlds of uncomfortable
when she mentions that Angel was in her bedroom in "Lie to
Me." ("Ours is a forbidden love.") At the time,
we saw a lonely, unpopular girl who was very intelligent and filled
with an unrequited crush.
Now, a few turns down the road, and Willow is still trying to
use magic to fix things -- especially people. She's still fiercely
defending her choices, even to the people closest to her, even
if they might be right. And she's still reveling in her power
over people, even if they're mostly the evil sorts of people,
like Glory. And now we can start to see her as an addict, and
her choices as those that have fueled her addictions -- to magic
and to power. "And maybe it's not such a good idea for you
to piss me off."
(A very long way of saying, Tillow, love your idea! :) )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! --
Rob, 12:02:56 11/14/01 Wed
Joss has, so far, created over a hundred and eight hours of great
television. Sure, some eps are better than others, but I have
not yet encountered one that I would refuse to sit through again.
"Buffy" is one of the few shows whose brilliant episodes
far outweigh its average or sub-average ones. But out of the multitudes
of brilliant episodes, a few stand out as beyond brilliant. These
include "Hush," "The Body," "Restless,"
and "Once More, With Feeling." All of these episodes
broke the rules and were experimental in the respect that they
tried things that had never been done before. The greatest thing
about Joss' experiments are that they are successful ones. I would
qualify this short list, and many other episodes, as flawless,
something that does not often happen when a show tries something
new.
So where's my point, you may be asking?
"Buffy" has had a silent episode, an episode that played
in "real-time" with no background music, a full-out
musical episode, a dream episode, and on and on. What are your
ideas for some other "experimental" concepts for episodes
ME can do in the future?
I was thinking very hard about this, and I came up with one idea
that I think could really turn out to be very interesting. My
idea is sort of lifted from the movie, "Pleasantville."
How about, everybody wakes up in Sunnydale to find everything
black and white, and they have to somehow bring the color back
into the world? This may sound a little goofy, but I think it
could work brilliantly, and they could play with the concept of
good and evil in the Buffyverse through the metaphor of not everything
being either black or white. Sometimes, as with Spike's case,
there is greying, or a blurring of the lines. I also thought of
the brilliant book, "The Giver" by Lois Lowry, about
a town that was black-and-white, where no one had ever even heard
of color, and one boy's quest to right that wrong.
Another idea I had was an episode that took place in one long
scene, perhaps in the Magic Box. That could lead to great writing,
character development, etc.
Any one else have any ideas?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> A View From the Gallery -- Vickie, 12:11:32 11/14/01 Wed
How about shifting the point of view? Introduce us to a couple
of average Sunnydale citizens and let us see our heroes through
their eyes.
This is not my idea; it is a direct steal from Babylon 5's episode
of the same name. But could be interesting. And there's no doubt
Joss could do it with more originality than I have expressed here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Time Code -- T-rex, 12:23:33 11/14/01 Wed
Time Code was filmed in real time in one afternoon, and split
into four different screens. The actors had background information
on the characters they were playing, and a general outline of
certain events that needed to take place, but the dialogue was
mostly ad lib.
Each of the four cameras followed a different actor as they went
through the day and their paths crossed in multiple unexpected
ways. The sound for each of the four screens would increase or
decrease in order to pull the audience's attention to certain
pivotal scenes.
It wasn't a great movie by any means, but it was an interesting
movie due to the concept. The whole time I watched it I felt I
was constantly missing something really interesting going on in
another corner of the screen.
Probably wouldn't work as well on a small TV screen as it did
on a movie screen. But it would make for an interesting episode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Time Code elaboration and more -- t-rex,
12:35:53 11/14/01 Wed
I should elaborate...
I doubt much if any of the dialogue would be ad lib in this case.
Too much future plot development rides on the lines spoken by
the Buffy characters, so you can't exactly just let each actor
run amok. Therefore, timing would have to be more precise in order
to keep it in real time(which would be difficult). Actually, commercial
breaks would ruin that idea anyway...oh well.
Oooh...thought of another idea, but this one is stolen as well.
There was a Farscape episode where the characters were "on
trial" for firing on an alien ship. Each character had to
recall a specific series of events, but in each case the character's
own prejudices for and against other characters would completely
change the flavor of the scene.
Seeing the same pivotal event through the eyes of each major character...Buffy,
Willow, Spike, etc. could be quite revealing and entertaining.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Time Code elaboration and more --
grifter, 04:52:07 11/15/01 Thu
Oooh...thought of another idea, but this one is stolen as well.
There was a Farscape episode where the characters were "on
trial" for firing on an alien ship. Each character had to
recall a specific series of events, but in each case the character's
own prejudices for and against other characters would completely
change the flavor of the scene."
I remember a "Due South" episode (brilliant series btw)where
something similar happened: there was a crime going on, three
of the characters saw it and everyone has a different theory on
what really happened...this could really be interesting with btvs...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> The ur-movie with this theme is
Akira Kurosawa's "Rashomon." -- d'Herblay, 21:34:55
11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Mad About BTVS -- Shaglio, 13:30:42 11/14/01
Wed
I remember an episode of "Mad About You" which was filmed
in one long shot. The Buckman's had just had a newborn girl and
she wouldn't stop crying. Jaime deaperately wanted to go into
the baby's room and lull her to sleep, but she read that if a
mother comforts a baby everytime it cries, it becomes dependent
on the mother. Therefore she spent the entire episode in the hall
outside the baby's door having an internal struggle not to go
in, while Paul was there comforting her. It was rather interesting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A View From the Gallery -- vampire hunter D, 18:27:36
11/14/01 Wed
Actually, Star Trek, the next Generation did this a few years
before Babylon 5. Still a good idea, but would have worked better
when they were still in High School (wwith the observers being
students)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Great ep by Harlan Ellison -- Whisper2AScream, 06:13:39
11/15/01 Thu
Ah, that was one of my favorite B5 episodes. Slightly impartial
since Ellison wrote it, but overall it was good, and a refreshing
look. I actually was thinking of them doing this a couple of seasons
ago on Buffy, (obviously can't be done now.) where we see Sunnydale
entirely from Jonathan's POV. I figured he was best since he best
represented the normal populace of the town, yet who occasionally
gets caught up in events.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> PoV episode -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym,
12:59:30 11/15/01 Thu
IIRC, the television show MASH did a very successful one from
the point of view of the average 4077th patient; so there are
other precedents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Neaux, 12:15:23 11/14/01
Wed
How bout an episode entitled... "The Fur Flies"
where the cast is all turned into animals.. like some evil petshop
owner or something along that line..
(with the special effects used in Cats Vs Dogs.. it could be a
very funny episode.. especially depending on what each character
turned into... ) ^_^
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Neaux, 12:46:17
11/14/01 Wed
ok... so maybe my above idea would be a rather expensive episode...
I just thought of something TOTALLY Brilliant...
How Bout a SOAP OPERA!!!!
Since it is one anyway... The episode could be shot on standard
Soap Opera Film and have all the Dramatic Pauses and all the bad
background music... Oh it would be hilarious!!! and the actors
would realize that its going on as well and be freaked out by
the music and their dramatic pauses..and therefore try to get
to the root of the problem.. and it would be an old lady who loves
the soaps who did some sort of mojo magik that created this madness!!!
Muwuahahaaaa!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Love the soap opera idea...Could be hilarious!
-- Rob, 13:18:54 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Ooooohhhhhh. Soap Opera. Gotta say that's sounding
mighty fine. The bad dramatic possibilities! *g* -- Deeva, 14:35:05
11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> One convention yet to be employed on BtVS--smell
the fart acting! -- A8, 19:05:57 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Yes, BtVS is sorely lacking in the
smell-the-fart-acting dept.! High time that's rectified, I think!
-- Rob, 12:35:52 11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> i dunno...they already did the amnesia
bit.... -- anom, 21:53:49 11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- vandalia, 13:45:27 11/14/01
Wed
I'd like to see them do a live episode. Like broadcast in real-time,
no editing. Might be kind of hard (no fx) but it would certainly
challenge the actors. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- vampire hunter
D, 18:30:24 11/14/01 Wed
but how would you do the special fx?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Kimberly, 14:18:35 11/14/01
Wed
This is a theft from a Quantum Leap episode they SAID they were
going to do, but never did: all the characters turn into cartoons.
(I didn't say it would be easy.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Edward, 17:07:17
11/14/01 Wed
This could actually happen, seeing it would give them a chance
to play before committing to the actual Buffy animated series
that they are talking about.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Tanker, 22:54:05 11/14/01
Wed
I've had several ideas along these lines:
1. Time travel. Every other bloody sci-fi/fantasy show does it.
The concept is ripe for a good Jossian skewering.
2. Black&white noir. I just saw "The Man Who Wasn't There."
I'm down with the noir. This might seem like a better match for
Angel, but I think it could be fun on Buffy. It would probably
require yet another reality-altering spell/demon, though, and
that schtick may be overworked at this point. Buffy could either
play the P.I. role or be The Blonde.
3. Traditional 3-camera sitcom, with live audience. This might
work best with Xander and Anya, using the opened-up apartment
set from OMWF. (note: a one-camera sitcom, like Malcolm in the
Middle, would be nearly indistinguishable from a normal funny
Buffy ep. It's already written like a sitcom at times)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- grifter, 04:59:43
11/15/01 Thu
The black&white-thingie sounds really interesting, but why
the reality-altering stuff? Just be bold and make a really good
b&w-ep! It´s not typical mainstream-material, but, hey,
we´re talking BtVS! If it were mainstream, we wouldn´t
be watching it anyway!
Also, could you explain what the differences between 1-camera
sitcoms and 3-camera sitcoms if you have the time? I´m not
familiar with your fancy Hollwood-Slang. :D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Rattletrap,
05:33:15 11/15/01 Thu
grifter,
The difference is exactly what it sounds like. Buffy and most
dramatic shows (nearly all movies) are filmed with a single camera.
When the characters are having a conversation, you usually see
it from over someone's shoulder looking at the person who is talking
with a close in (i.e. shoulders-up) shot. Three camera shows are
some (but not all) sitcoms. Home Improvement and Drew Carey come
to mind. When you see a conversation in those, it is usually a
long distance shot with all of the participating characters in
the same frame and shown from the waist up. This type of filming
is more similar to a stage play, it can be done a lot faster and
requires less editing, but it lacks the dramatic intensity and
the flexibility of the single camera approach. Joss & Co. occasionally
use multiple cameras, usually for big, epic battle scenes like
the one at the end of "Graduation Day," but the bulk
of the show is shot with just one.
Hope this helps
'trap
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Ahhhhh...thanks! -- grifter, 06:25:16
11/15/01 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- sl, 19:12:05 11/15/01
Thu
how bout the epsode going backwards like the movie "Momento"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Shaglio,
06:01:41 11/16/01 Fri
"how bout the epsode going backwards like the movie "Momento""
They also did that in an episode of Seinfeld. It was very cool
because of the way the show normally has all these loose thresds
tie in together in the end. It was like seeing the tied threads
unravel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun! -- Kimberly, 07:49:26 11/15/01
Thu
I just remembered a Star Trek fan fic (published in a book the
name of which I cannot remember) in which, due to a transporter
accident, the characters switched with the actors. Could a spell
do the same? (Ok, I know it's pretty silly, but Joss IS a genius.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Create-An-Event-Ep for fun -- danger -- Fred the obvious
pseudonym, 13:04:49 11/15/01 Thu
One problem here, sports fans --
In the current litigious atmosphere (especially including intellectual
property rights) Whedon & Co. must be very careful NOT to use
anything that appears in fanfic for fear of law suits.
So, mentioning all our nifty ideas here may be the best way to
ensure that BtVS NEVER does them.
Anyone know the laws on this point?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun -- danger --
Kimberly, 13:26:47 11/15/01 Thu
I don't know the law on this; however, the example I was thinking
of is a professionally published book (I think The New Voyages)
about Star Trek. I don't think that would be actionable; although
the initial idea may have come from the story, everything else
would be completely original and "There are no new ideas,
just variations on a theme".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Create-An-Event-Ep for fun -- danger
-- Rob, 10:29:17 11/16/01 Fri
I know that that is possible in fan fiction, but these are not
written-out fan fics. We're just throwing some ideas around, so
I don't think that it would be as actionable, or easy to prove.
Further, we are all using pseudonyms here, not our real names,
so we and they woudn't be able to prove who we are either way.
This forum doesn't require ID. For all we know, some of the posters
are from ME. And further I know I personally wouldn't sue if one
of my ideas wound up on BtVS...I'd think it was too amazingly
cool for words!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: You can't copyright an idea...at
least in Canada. -- Wisewoman, 18:47:02 11/17/01 Sat
I could write a story about human beings landing on a planet inhabited
by sentient apes. As long as my story was original, and didn't
contain scenes or dialogue from any other story (or film) I couldn't
be sued for simply using the idea.
Don't know about intellectual property rights in the States, but
I think it's similar.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You can't copyright an
idea...at least in Canada. -- Isabel, 07:43:21 11/18/01 Sun
I think it's the same in the states. My Dad used to tell me about
the Superman radio show where Lex Luthor tried to copyright the
alphabet and Superman foiled him by proving that you can't own
a general idea. You can't copyright titles either. I could write
a book and call it "Gone with the Wind" or "Star
Wars" and as long as the plot and characters were different
the Margaret Mitchell estate and George Lucas wouldn't be able
to sue me. (Which is why I was so mystified over the broo ha ha
over the GwtW parody that finally got published this year. The
author didn't call any of the characters the same and even called
the book "The Wind Done Gone."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> u.s. either -- anom,
14:37:14 11/18/01 Sun
I was at a meeting of the Editorial Freelancers Assn. last week,
& the speaker was a lawyer talking about "copyrights, trademarks,
& contracts." He said specifically that U.S. copyright law
doesn't protect ideas, although he was talking about making sure
your ideas aren't infringed rather than avoiding infringement
of other people's ideas. (Best way to protect an idea: Don't tell
anyone.) Anyway, as long as it's just an idea, we don't have to
worry.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Demon POV -- matching mole, 08:09:48 11/15/01 Thu
How about an episode shot from a demon point of view? Either the
viewpoint of an individual demon/monster of the week or some sort
of demon 'documentary'. As demon's are technophobes I wouldn't
except them to use cameras and tape recorders but you could show
one travelling around and interviewing other demons about their
interactions with the slayer, etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> The Secret Life of Demons LOL! -- Whisper2AScream,
08:56:57 11/15/01 Thu
I can totally see this now. Maybe a more modern oriented demon
will do this.
Modern demon: "Excuse me, we're doing a documentary. Do you
have any comments about the Slayer?"
A vampire comes up to the camera.
Vampire: "Comments? Oh yeah, I got some comments! That bitch
took out most of my crew the other night! I barely got away. I
mean, there we are, having a nice meal, hanging out, and she busts
up the party. What's the world coming to when you can't just have
a nice drink from some human, and relax with your buddies without
worry of being staked?"
LOL!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The Secret Life of Demons -- Kimberly, 09:05:34
11/15/01 Thu
OK guys, this would be a GREAT light-hearted, change-of-pace episode.
Wonder how many would drool over Anya. Or Xander?
ROFLMFAO!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Bridge of San Luis Rey -- Cleanthes, 12:45:13 11/15/01 Thu
Well, if the characters get separated enough, they could all meet
accidentally on a bridge over troubled water about to collapse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question (spoiler for TR) -- Humanitas,
14:09:28 11/14/01
OK, I know that Giles' swordfight with the skeleton was homage
to one of the landmarks of special-effects, but I can't remember
the film. Jason and the Argonauts, or something like that? Anybody
remember?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- sl, 14:19:46 11/14/01 Wed
it reminded me of the mummy!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Rendyl, 14:19:47 11/14/01
Wed
I think it is from 'Clash of the Titans'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Humanitas, 14:33:51
11/14/01 Wed
The film I'm thinking of is older than either of those. It was
around long before I was, and I saw both of those in the theaters.
I know the title was the hero's name, but I can't remember it.
Gahh! This is gonna drive me nuts, now. I could be wrong, but
I think the same film had footprints from an invisible monster.
Maybe one of the Sinbad movies? I know it's from that era.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Humanitas, 14:35:33
11/14/01 Wed
The film I'm thinking of is older than either of those. It was
around long before I was, and I saw both of those in the theaters
(assuming you mean the most recent version of "The Mummy"
;). I know the title was the hero's name, but I can't remember
it. Gahh! This is gonna drive me nuts, now. I could be wrong,
but I think the same film had footprints from an invisible monster.
Maybe one of the Sinbad movies? I know it's from that era.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- AD, 15:24:41
11/14/01 Wed
A reference I saw was to Sam Raimi's "Army of Darkness,"
where a skeleton army is raised (I believe) by the hero's botched
recitation of some kind of incantation. Make a magical mistake,
and apparently your have to fight animated skeletons. "Army
of Darkness" itself contains many homages to old Ray Harryhausen
fantasy films. That film strikes me as a potential influence on
"Buffy" and "Angel" more generally, especially
in the mix of supernatural action with wisecracking modern dialogue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Wolfhowl,
16:47:24 11/14/01 Wed
That is the movie it reminded me of too. You have Got to love
Bruce.
Wolfie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Methodica,
18:52:04 11/14/01 Wed
When I saw that scene i started howling. Its was Army of Darkness
all the way. Evil Dead 1 and 2 one of the best movies out there.(for
those that don't army of darkness is evil dead 3)
Hail to the king baby
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Shaglio, 06:27:14
11/15/01 Thu
"I could be wrong, but I think the same film had footprints
from an invisible monster."
The invisible footprints you're thinking of were probably from
Clash Of The Titans. But when I saw him fighting the skeleton,
the first thing I thought of was Sinbad (the movie, not the so-called
comedian), which is weird because I only saw bits and pieces of
Sinbad and it was so many years ago . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- MPN, 14:32:43 11/14/01
Wed
Actually, I'm pretty sure Humanitas is right, the swordfight with
the skeleton reminded me of the final climatic swordfight in "Jason
and the Argonauts" which is indeed considered to be a landmark
film in the special effects department given the time period it
was made. Check out the link here:
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0057197
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> That's it! -- Humanitas, 14:41:38 11/14/01 Wed
Thanks, MPN, and everyone else. Good ol' Harryhausen Special Effects.
Absolutely brilliant, and fitting for homage in a modern myth
like BtVS. Good. Now I'll be able to sleep tonight. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> You had it right the first time... :-) -- Moose, 18:07:19
11/14/01 Wed
It was an homage to "Jason and the Argonauts" and the
stop-motion genius of Ray Harryhausen.
Truly one of the best adventure films ever made. It's out on DVD
for those interested.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Ah, the dragon's teeth soldiers. -- A8, 18:57:58 11/14/01
Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- Solitude1056, 20:16:27
11/14/01 Wed
I was thinking Army of Darkness, but the skeleton wasn't wearing
a flight cap kind of helmet.
This is my BOOMSTICK!
*cough* sorry. I was overcome.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- JustAGuy, 21:23:31 11/14/01
Wed
The scene originally appeared in The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad,
Ray Harryhausen did the SFX. I think it was in 1975. Since then
numerous films have paid homage to it, Clash of the Titans, Army
of Darkness and The Mummy to name a few.
It really is a good film. The effects were amazing for 1975, and
actually not bad for today. I've certainly seen worse SFX in modern
movies. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Question (spoiler for TR) -- cat, 06:03:35 11/15/01
Thu
Sinbad! It was from Sinbad!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A look at their unknown desires
(spoilers for Tabularosa) -- Rochefort, 16:14:47 11/14/01 Wed
Clearly no one became a blank slate at all. But I think given
a chance to start at least a little fresh, each constructed an
identity for themselves that they WANTED to be.
While Anya becomes married to a stable mature man and shares in
a thriving business (at least Anya KNOWS what she wants without
having her memory erased)...
Xander goes back to having a playful relationship with a chick
he doesn't know when he wakes up. He gives her his coat, and ammuses
himself with the idea that maybe he's even fooling around with
his brothers girl. Oh oh. A bad sign for happy marriage land?
Spike gives himself a dad. Isn't that great? A dad who he even
hugs in a cliche sort of father son way, and gives his dad all
the cliche dad sort of qualities he'd like him to have. He takes
to it immediatly and seems incredibly pleased with being displeased
with it. While Giles says brother, it's Spike who insists that
he now has a father. In addition, check this out: Randy doesn't
goof around with any sort of romantic obsession over Buffy at
all. Some of the characters re-find their attractions, but Randy
is far more concerned with having a dad, with Buffy not running
off and leaving him unincluded, and with seeing himself as a hero
whose on a path to redemption who lives happily along side humans
who trust him. Yay Spike! Good signs for him, even when all this
"I love Buffy" junk ends.
Giles tries to give himself a brother, and gives himself a wife.
Ever since Jenny.... well poor Giles!! He MUST get lonely. Cup
of tea, cup of tea, almost got shagged, cup of tea. He's even
willing to accept ANYA as his wife though she filled the house
with Bunnies. I hope he finds someone TOTALLY cool in England.
Buffy well I'm not sure. Any thoughts? All I know is that being
"The Slayer" is NOT the problem (as I've said before)
as Joan is ENTIRELY pleased with being a slayer. Oh I've got it.
The very first thing BUFFY does is take on a guiding and comforting
figure for Dawn. Somewhere in her, under the depression, Buffy
DOES want this role with Dawn. Again, good sign.
Willow still wants to do magic. Addict. But... Tara and her just
want one another. :( poor kids.
Dawn gets her sister back for real.
Rochefort
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> she likes being a slayer. She doesn't like being Buffy.
: ( -- Rochefort, 16:17:09 11/14/01 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for Tabularosa)
-- Kerri, 17:12:15 11/14/01 Wed
" Oh I've got it. The very first thing BUFFY does is take
on a guiding and comforting figure for Dawn. Somewhere in her,
under the depression, Buffy DOES want this role with Dawn. Again,
good sign."
"Dawn gets her sister back for real."
I think Buffy really does want to be there for Dawn. She oviously
loves her sister more than anything. In the emotional state Buffy
is now its hard for her to reach out to anyonw else. I honestly
don't think she can hope to make sense of anyone else's life before
her own is a bit more on track. However, as we have seen before
instead of explaining this and how she feels to Dawn, Buffy keeps
her emotions to herself. I do think that in a little while Buffy
will connect to Dawn and she will be Buffy's key back to the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for Tabularosa)
-- Traveler, 19:23:17 11/14/01 Wed
"In addition, check this out: Randy doesn't goof around with
any sort of romantic obsession over Buffy at all. Some of the
characters re-find their attractions, but Randy is far more concerned
with having a dad, with Buffy not running off and leaving him
unincluded, and with seeing himself as a hero whose on a path
to redemption who lives happily along side humans who trust him."
Very interesting point! However, Spike did seem to be attracted
to Buffy. He just wasn't all angsty about it. Which is also an
interesting point. If Spike took Buffy (and his love for her)
less seriously, maybe they would have a better relationship.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for Tabularosa)
-- Solitude1056, 20:14:20 11/14/01 Wed
Willow still wants to do magic. Addict. But... Tara and her just
want one another.
Hm, I watched it again tonight and I didn't get that impression
at all. Seemed to me that when Willow figured out it was a magick
shop, she seemed confused and disinterested. Sort of like, "Oh.
Magick. Hunh." It was Tara who seemed shocked by the news,
and I noticed she added a certain emphasis to the line, "we're
in a real magick shop!" Of course, Giles followed this up
by declaring that magick is balderdash and poppycock. Perhaps
magick, like some relationships, is not an instinctive thing but
a learned one. Anya and Xander expressed no attraction for each
other, but in r/l they're very much in love. Willow expressed
no interest in magick but in r/l she's very much stuck on it.
It's a learned thing... and perhaps, in Willow's case, it might
be unlearned?
Speculation space...
Perhaps Joss gave Willow a magick-free space so that later, when
she needs the reality check, she could look back and remember
that it's possible to go through a space in time without considering
magick as the first option - or even at all?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for
Tabularosa) -- Rochefort, 20:42:48 11/14/01 Wed
Oh that no magic space is very interesting and so is Spike not
taking attraction to Buffy so obsessively. Maybe they're two addictions
that they were BOTH free from. Both having a space to remember
where they felt fine without their addictive substance. Still...solitude,
I did think Willow seemed very interested in the Magick book.
But even if she was, she certainly was free of her addiction,
true.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for
Tabularosa) -- Slayrunt, 03:25:00 11/15/01 Thu
Sol, you maybe on to something. Tara seems delighted that magic
is real, like she was drawn to it, enchanted. Willow and Giles
are disinterested and digusted.
Tara (except for the blindness spell) is carefull and nuturing
with magic. Born to it so to speak. Giles and Willow use or used
magic as a crutch or a drug. Not born to it.
Giles' experimentations led to death and sadness. Willow's experimentations
may led to death as well.
Lesson here? magic is not for the unenchanted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers
for Tabularosa) -- Aquitaine, 09:09:50 11/15/01 Thu
*** Lesson here? magic is not for the unenchanted ***
Or... Magic is not for the disenchanted with life;)
Tara *is* a 'natural'. She does not use magic to acquire or wield
power. Both Ripper and Grey!Willow have used magic to bolster
their own insecurities.
Very interesting...
- Aquitaine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for Tabularosa)
-- Andy, 07:00:30 11/15/01 Thu
I think Buffy's problem with being the Slayer is the mortality
of it. That "you're the Slayer and you will be until you're
dead and the bad guys will never stop until you're dead"
part of it. When her memory is gone and all she has is the power
of it, it's not surprising that it's so thrilling (I loved Sarah's
delivery of her lines. She had just a little youthful slant to
the way she spoke. "What did you do?" "I don't
know...but it was *coool*" :)).
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A look at their unknown desires (spoilers for
Tabularosa) -- Rattletrap, 11:27:08 11/15/01 Thu
I loved Sarah's delivery of her lines. She had just a little youthful
slant to the way she spoke. "What did you do?" "I
don't know...but it was *coool*"
Ditto. And in a really nice, subtle touch, her facial expression
when she kills that vamp is almost identical to the one in the
Becoming I flashback when she kills her first vamp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Names in TR, Instinctual Personality
Traits, and Relationships -- Kerri, 16:51:46 11/14/01 Wed
Assumed names:
-Everyone w/ the exception of Buffy, Dawn, and Spike have ID.
They are/allow themselves to be defined by their circumstances
and societal position.
-Dawn is given her name by Buffy. It is Buffy who made Dawn fully
alive and thus it seems appropriate that Buffy is the one to find
Dawn's name.
-Spike is named by who loves him as the jacket says, "with
care for Randy." He wants love and caters himself to be someone
for the person who loves him, thus assumes the name of Randy as
someone cares for him.
-Buffy names herself. She has never been the traditional slayer,
never taken her cue from the WC or any authority. She names herself
because no one else can, no one else knows what she is, and currently
neither does Buffy. Although it seems she has some clue with the
whole Joan of Arc allusion.
Instinctual Personality and Traits:
-Everyone seems to more or less retain their personality which
they have learned throughout live. In this sense they are not
really clear slates at all. They seem to retain personality and
some instinctual knowledge. More or less everyone acts like themselves
in the way they talk, act, interact with people (Buffy as the
leader)
-Spike is not evil so it seems less based on instincts (since
a vamp's nature is evil) and more on learned traits.
-However, Buffy's primal instincts seemed to kick in. She knew
how to slay. Both her inborn and learned, honed slayer skills
come through.
-Manurisms such as Buffy stroking Dawn's hair, Giles cleaning
his glasses are retained.
-Basically everyone seems to be who they are just without a memory.
No clean slate.
Relationships:
-Tara and Willow are attracked to each other. And Joan and Randy
seem to perhaps be attracked to each other as well. I'm not sure
if this is simply a testament to retaining persoanlity and thus
characters have the same inclinations, prefences.
-Dawn and Buffy know they are sisters. They act like sisters.
But is it more? Are these two instinctually drawn to each other?
This is different that the sexual attractions. There is love and
a learned relationship. But also perhaps some attractions because
of blood.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Great ideas :-) -- Dedalus, 08:32:53 11/15/01 Thu
Current board
| More November 2001