November 2002
posts
Regarding the title (Angel 4.7 spoilers -- Tyreseus,
20:41:36 11/18/02 Mon
This just in on the Associated Press: Los Angeles, CA --
The Governor of California has declared a state of emergency
due to the recent indications that it is indeed, the end of
the world. Aethesists and Agnostics flock to churches,
synagogues and mosques, confessing their sins. Paranormal
skeptics believe the Los Angeles water supply may have been
corrupted by a hallucinagenic drug. Meanwhile, reports
continue to filter in about strange and bizarre occurances
that seem to indicate a very Biblical Apocalypse is at
hand.
We now return to your regularly scheduled analysis of
fictional television programming. Okay, so I'm a bit
confused. They were calling this episode "Apocalypse,
Nowish" until very recently they switched it to "Rain of
Fire." Annoying.
Anyway, the reference in the original series title is to the
Francis Ford Coppola flick, Apocalypse, Now which is,
itself, the story of Joseph Conrad's novella Heart of
Darkness only updated and set in Vietnam. Admitteddly,
it's been (censored) years since I studied Heart of
Darkness in high school, but it seems to me that the
themes of the book, subsequent movie, and current AtS series
have some commonalities.
In Heart of Darkness, several existential themes of
mankind are pondered. Characters wonder if they have purpose
on this planet, will they make any lasting or tangible
contribution to the world (for better or worse), and the
fear of being disconnected beings. In the novella, the
principal character Marlow sums it up with, "We live, as we
dreamalone"
In the story, we find the central character of Kurtz (Marlon
Brando in the film), who has abandoned civilization and
turned to cannabalism. When at last, Kurtz faces his moment
of death, he looks into the afterlife (or lack thereof) and
mutters, "The horror, the horror." The book/movie seems to
put forth the concept that if man is removed from the checks
and prejudices of "civilization," he may resort to his
darkest desires.
A Place in the Universe
Most of the characters in this episode face a sort of
existential dillema. Cordelia has been grappling with her
destiny and lack of direction. Connor relates to her when he
admits to wondering why he's here and what his purpose is.
Gunn's outbust to Wesley (AtS 4.6) revealed his insecurities
about his role in the A.I. team. Fred's insecurities about
her future with Gunn and her pulling away from the team
highlight the disconnected feeling she's coping with.
Meanwhile, other characters have shaken off the existential
ennui and taken action. No time to ponder the big mysteries
with Angel leading the charge. Wesley has found a role with
A.I. as "Hidden Guns Everywhere Action Figure Wesley."
Lorne has shaken himself loose of "the horror, the horror"
of reading Cordelia by becoming "phone answering action
figure Lorne with attachable crossbow (large arrows not
included)" with some of the best one-liners.
The darkness of the heart?
Cordelia's offered explanation to Connor: "If this is the
end, I want you to have one thing that is real" parallels
the idea that all the checks and balances of society have
been removed and they can indulge in whatever wanton acts
they desire.
Meanwhile, Angel finds himself in an angst-ridden place of
extreme doubt and uncertainty. In the movie Apocalypse,
Now, Colonel Walter E. Kurtz says "I watched a snail
crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream.
That's my nightmare. Crawling, swiftly, along the edge of a
straight... razor... and surviving." I think that about sums
up almost all of Angel's existence. He strives to be happy,
but true happiness will turn him evil again. But has he
finally witnesses something that will take him to a place of
evil on his own accord? We saw hints last seasons that Angel
can be very "shades of gray," and immediately after Cordelia
rejects him because of his past as Angelus, we see a scene
where he jokes that he wasn't able to torture Gavin to his
liking. In the name of expediency, the overall good, and his
own ego, Dark Angel can almost be more frightening that
Angelus.
I'll be anxiously awaiting the next episode to see how the
rest of L.A. deals with the events of AtS 4.7 Seeing as how
it's L.A., I expect looting, rioting, and wide-spread
mayhem. Ooh, I can barely wait for the next ep (which is at
least 3 weeks away where I'm at. Haven't heard if it's
nationwide yet, but next week Angel is being pre-empted for
"The Wizard of Oz" and will be followed with a repeat of the
season premier the following week. Finally, an episode of
AtS that has me hungry for more and I'll have to wait
until my appetite cools.)
Okay, that may be my longest post to date, and I think I'll
re-read Heart of Darkness as soon as I finish the
entirely less "heavy" Harry Potter and the Goblet of
Fire.
[> Really? -- Masq, 22:18:42 11/18/02 Mon
"Haven't heard if it's nationwide yet, but next week Angel
is being pre-empted for "The Wizard of Oz" and will be
followed with a repeat of the season premier the following
week. Finally, an episode of AtS that has me hungry for more
and I'll have to wait until my appetite cools."
I know about the Wizard of Oz thing, they advertised in on
my WB station and at the official site. I'm still hearing,
though, that the series won't come back with new eps until
January.
Oh, I hope you're right!
[> Rain of Fire/Apocolypse Nowish -- Amber,
22:31:27 11/18/02 Mon
From the info I've gathered it seems that "Rain of Fire" is
just a title the WB gave this ep. They gave silly titles to
all their shows for sweeps week and used them in the promo
commercials for the shows.
Joss and Co. seem to be in no way affiliated with the "Rain
of Fire" title and are sticking by their "Apocolpyse Nowish"
title, which they refer to in interviews, etc.
I have no idea why the WB felt it was necessary to make show
titles, when nearly every series has titles for each of its
episodes. I don't watch all the WB shows, but maybe if you
put the titles together there's some sort of theme, (though
how they would make a theme that stretches from things like
Everwood and 7th Heaven all the way to Birds of Prey, Angel
and Smallville is beyond me.)
[> [> It was probably b/c in commercials "Rain of
Fire" sounds more dramatic than "Apocalype, Nowish"... -
- Rob, 23:28:54 11/18/02 Mon
As for which was a better title, it's obviously ME's. The WB
thinks that their audience can't deal with a show that can
by turns be sweepingly mythic, and then silly. They made
that huge advertisement filled with fire and brimstone,
along with their deep-voiced, serious narrator guy. There
was no way he was gonna say, "Apocalypse Nowish".
Rob
[> [> Where did you get this info? -- Masq,
09:44:13 11/19/02 Tue
"Joss and Co. seem to be in no way affiliated with the "Rain
of Fire" title and are sticking by their "Apocolpyse Nowish"
title, which they refer to in interviews, etc."
Gosh, where are the shooting scripts this season? Then we
could see what title it says on the final script.
How evil works -- Eugene, 20:54:18 11/18/02
Mon
I was wondering if anyone saw "Conversations with Dead
People" as a study of how evil works to influence human
beings, much in the way Wormwood works on human beings in
C.S. Lewis' The Screwtape Letters. The evil attempted to use
each chasracter's hopes and desires against him/her.
Eugene
[> Re: How evil works -- Rufus, 01:38:06
11/19/02 Tue
I've never read "The Screwtape Letters" but it has been
mentioned here. And you are right, the First Evil or
whateveritis, attempts to use fear, hope, longing to get the
one they target to forget about the big picture. The whole
divide and conquer thing starts in the mind and that is what
the FE is going for. Willow was buying it at first because
of her love and longing for Tara, but as evil frequently
does, it senses victory and goes that extra inch that makes
the person pause long enough to figure out they have been
had. Willow may now have gotten that bit stronger an
opponent because of the overconfidence of evil.
[> [> Re: How evil works...side note -- Mackenzie
, 07:25:18 11/19/02 Tue
Don't politicians also work that way. They know the hopes,
fears, desires, etc. of their constituants and they play on
those.
So what does that mean....
[> And how evil fails -- MaeveRigan, 09:15:36
11/19/02 Tue
Evil works by using people's hopes, desires, and fears, and
by twisting the truth: deception, lies.
It fails the same way, by deceiving itself. Because the Big
Lie is that, in the long run, Evil wins. Nope. But because
Evil believes that it can, sooner or later, it always
overreaches and foils its own plans, like NotCassie.
Article........Now it's Buffy the Thesis from age.com
spoilers to season 6 -- Rufus, 21:08:25 11/18/02
Mon
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/11/18/1037
599359618.html
Now, it's Buffy the Thesis
November 19 2002
By Anne Crawford
Two months ago, Melbourne University's head of cinema
studies, Dr Angela Ndalianis, e-mailed postgraduates calling
for papers for an in-house symposium.
The subject: Buffy the Vampire Slayer. That's Buffy the
television series, the show that began with a teenager
fighting vampires lurking around her Californian high
school.
Within two days, e-mails were flooding in - many from
interstate academics. Word kept spreading. Soon afterwards,
international academics were e-mailing Ndalianis regretting
they couldn't attend and offering her copies of papers
they'd presented elsewhere. A mention in The Age Green Guide
elicited 250 e-mails in one day.
Ndalianis, aware of the global following of the cult series,
was stunned at the academic interest. Now she's busy
ordering fangs.
Buffy, for the uninitiated, is Buffy Summers (Sarah Michelle
Gellar), "chosen" and empowered to slay supernatural
enemies, mostly vampires. "Chosen to fight, trained to
maim", goes the show.
Early on, she's a somewhat flaky teen going to Sunnydale
High School, fretting about boys and bad hair. By night, she
patrols the streets, crucifix around her neck, stakes
concealed in a bag, destroying demons and kicking butt. "I'm
Buffy and you're history!"
In the early seasons, Buffy is nurtured and schooled in the
occult by her "watcher", an English librarian called Giles.
She's surrounded by a group of misfit friends, including the
shy and studious Willow, and Xander, (geeky but fast with
the one-liners). "The Scooby Gang", as they call themselves,
join her in her fight - "You're the Slayer and we're, like,
the Slayerettes".
Buffy has had an on-off relationship with Angel, a reformed
but sometimes lapsing vampire burdened with a soul, then for
a time went out with Riley, a mortal.
Academics make much of its use of myth, magic and allegory,
and its play on pop culture.She battles an assortment of
underworld figures ("the fang gang") that has included a
Billy Idol-esque vampire called Spike, who became an ally
and a lover.
The unconventional United States series, approaching its
eagerly awaited seventh - and final - season on Channel
Seven in Australia, is the creation of writer-director Joss
Whedon who persevered with the unlikely concept after it
flopped as a movie in 1992.
Ndalianis says the show appeals to a broad demographic and
has a strong cult status. The faithful range from 12-to-60-
year-olds - teens, adults, whole families, psychiatrists and
people from banks, she says. Natasha Stott Despoja is a
known fan. One website notes "a disproportionately large
number of theologians" holding a fascination for Buffy.
Aficionados, who ring each other to revel in a plot twist or
debate a philosophical point, advocate it with a fervour and
devotion usually associated with born-again Christians (or
Star Trek fans), and are just as keen to convert. You're
either a convert or you don't get it at all. Critics love
it. Academics are invariably fans too.
Buffy accounts for an extraordinary amount of cyberspace.
The Lycos search engine alone lists nearly a million
references to sites devoted to, or drawing on the popularity
of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Scholarly Buffyphiles prefer the Online International
Journal of Buffy Studies (www.slayage.tv), a website
governed by an editorial board with academic contributors
examining notions such as Buffy as "transgressive woman
warrior", or Buffy "and the pedagogy of fear". Intellectuals
around the globe are deconstructing, dissecting and
extrapolating from Buffy, across disciplines, in journals
and at conferences too. The Melbourne University Symposium,
which Ndalianis is claiming as Australia's first, follows
fast on the heels of a two-day international Buffyfest at
the University of East Anglia,Norwich, UK.
So why is a TV series with a ridiculous title, preposterous
premise and a young woman wielding pointy sticks taken so
seriously? The short answer is that Buffy gives its viewers
a lot to sink their teeth into.
The program, which speaks to a media-literate audience, is
witty, sardonic, complex and stylishly self-conscious. It
works on many levels.
It's a take on the horror genre, a soapie about teenage and
young adult angst, a bang-kapow action drama with plenty of
fast-and-furious martial arts, and an exploration of modern
and traditional storytelling.
Academics make much of its use of myth, magic and allegory,
and its play on pop culture. "They love anything that's self-
reflective!" says Ndalianis. Feminist scholars hold Buffy -
strong, sexy and smart - as a post-modern heroine overcoming
patriarchal oppression.
Ndalianis says the series raises themes vital to young
people: family issues, parenting, youth culture, peer
pressure, conformity, self-image, trust, responsibility,
loyalty, good and evil, ethics, power and knowledge,
sexuality, love and death.
"These sorts of shows are what help people work out their
collective fears and anxieties. They're really important for
youth sorting out conflicts, their demons, relationships
with their contemporaries and older people, and problems
with their parents." Relationships are realistically rough-
edged. The "normal happy relationship" is questioned as a
concept. Families are askew.
The script is inventive and the plot unpredictable, full of
sharp turns. Like other television, Buffy has played on the
URST (Unresolved Sexual Tension) between its heroine and the
tall, dark and broodingly handsome Angel. But even this had
a twist: if Angel slept with Buffy, he lost his soul and
regressed to being a vampire, turning from valiant protector
and lover to snarling arch-enemy. Angel, played by David
Boreanaz, has his own spin-off series.
The show is praised for its idiosyncratic dialogue, its
"Buffyspeak" -the slick one-liners, the play on teen-speak
and in-jokes. (Not to be confused with "Buffyverse" which
refers to the mythic universe the show creates.) Whedon
plays with his genres. One episode, "Once More with
Feeling", was an all-singing, all-dancing musical. Another,
set in Angel's ancient Italian past, starts with subtitles.
"The Body", about the death of Buffy's mother, was devoid of
music and sound effects, giving its grief a stark reality.
"Hush" had no words.
Whedon happily adds and subtracts characters. Buffy
inexplicably gains a little sister and, is killed off
herself, then brought back to earth. He allows his
characters to change over time, to move on to university and
jobs.
"Buffy's a demi-god but at the same time she's working in a
burger place," says Ndalianis. She begins as "classic Valley
girl", obsessed with how she looks, and evolves into a
complex character, grappling with moral decisions. Later,
she's revealed as having a darker side and sado-masochistic
tendencies. Willow gains confidence, is recast as a wicca,
and comes out as a lesbian.
Adelaide University academic, Dr Catherine Driscoll, keynote
speaker at the symposium, will touch on topics in a book she
has written on Buffy, out next year. (A draft index lists
chapters on "Marxist Buffy" and "psychoanalytic Buffy".)
There are 15 other speakers, but it's not all about
intellectualising or "academic waffle", says Ndalianis.
There'll be Buffy look-alike competitions, screenings, a
Buffy board game, fan fiction-writing, door prizes, an
"installation piece" and a free set of fangs on
registration.
Ndalianis has found herself handling mass bookings for fans.
"It's a huge event without it meaning to become one," she
says. But it's only a warm-up. She's planning a big
international conference after the series finale at the end
of next year to have "closure" on Buffy. Well, until the
repeats.
The Buffyverse: A Symposium on Buffy the Vampire Slayer is
on November 21, 9.30am to 6pm, Prince Phillip Theatre,
Architecture Building, Melbourne University. Registration at
8.30am or contact Felicity Coleman at
fcoleman@unimelb.edu.au.
[> Re: Article........Now it's Buffy the Thesis from
age.com spoilers to season 6 -- Purple Tulip,
22:24:52 11/18/02 Mon
Angel is Italian??? Who knew??? J/K
[> Why in the Commonwealth but not the US? --
Darby, 09:11:56 11/19/02 Tue
Have there been any such academic conferences in Buffy's
country of origin? Land of the freaks, home of the hey-we-
could-make-money-on-this-es?
[> [> Re: Why in the Commonwealth but not the
US? -- MaeveRigan, 09:21:18 11/19/02 Tue
An academic conference on BtVS/AtS is in the works for 2004
in Tennesee:
www.slayage.tv/news.shtml
It was announced at the University of East Anglia "Blood,
Text, and Fears" conference.
Connor: Messiah? (spoilers for "Slouching" &
"Rain of Fire" & some vague metaphorical
speculation) -- Masq, who's metaphor girl now,
22:14:20 11/18/02 Mon
I was looking back over my previous episode analyses for
this season and came across that Yeats quote that
accompanied my analysis of "Slouching towards
Bethlehem":
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"
In the analysis, I noted an interpretation of Yeat's poem,
"The Second Coming" in which Yeats is likening the coming of
an anti-Christ to the coming of the original Christ. The
original Christ is born in Bethlehem and ushers in a two-
thousand year era (gyre) of cycle of history, the era of
Christianity. In the twentieth century, however, Yeats
hypothesizes, a "second" coming will occur, the birth of a
totalitarian "beast" that will usher in a new era of
history.
This takes me back to the scene in this week's episode in
which the beast is "born" into our world in the same spot as
Connor was born one year previously. What if Connor is
supposed to be like the "Christ" in the poem, while the
"beast" is, well, the "rough beast". The beast in the poem
is depicted as being born in the same spot Christ was
born.
Of course, in our AtS scenario, the two "comings" are only a
year apart, not two thousand years, and the apocolypse that
would overthrow "Christianity" for "totalitarianism" will
occur over the course of the fourth season of the show, but
hey, it's a thought.
[>
Oooh! Symbolic goodness! -- Rob, 00:32:41
11/19/02 Tue
Just thought of an addition to your Connor-as-Messiah idea.
Although his wasn't exactly a virgin birth, it was an
unnatural one, since neither of his parents had the
capability to have children. If it is TPTB that made that
possible, it would be similar to God making it possible for
a virgin woman to have a baby.
Tell me if I got any of that right. What do I know about
this stuff really? I'm Jewish!
Rob
[> [>
well, there are cases... -- anom, 00:43:24
11/19/02 Tue
...of God's causing barren women to bear children. The
Bible's full of 'em: Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, Hannah....
And who's more barren in the Buffyverse than a vampire? So
I'd say you're onto something after all, Rob. Although I
don't know if it supports the messiah concept. On the other
hand, I don't think that necessarily requires virgin birth.
Not the Jewish messiah concept, anyway.
[> [>
Or... -- Darby, 09:02:42 11/19/02 Tue
How do we know that Connor is Angel's son?
Okay, broody and sneaky. Great warrior, apparently more
than human. But so was Holtz (anybody else think that
Vincent Kartheiser is doing a Keith Szarabajka-as-Holtz
vocal impression?), so it could be nurture rather than
nature.
Wouldn't it be a kick in the fangs if, after reconciliation
and such, it turns out that Connor is
Lindsay's son? Did Darla give Lindsay some
lovin' when she was human and he had the hots for her?
This begs the question, what happens when a pregnant woman
is vamped?
[> [> [>
That's some evil spec! I love it! -- Rob,
11:35:14 11/19/02 Tue
[>
Lots of questions, no answers (same disclaimer) --
Arethusa, 04:37:37 11/19/02 Tue
I've been having similar thoughts, since it can't be a
coincidence that Connor and the beast are born at the same
spot. The prophecy regarding the Tro-Clan in the Nyazian
Scrolls said, "the arrival or arising of the Tro-clan, the
person or being that brings about the ruination [or
purification] of mankind." (Offspring) That was supposed
to take place last year, at Connor's birth. Could the beast
have been gestating for a year beneath LA? Are it and
Connor in fact connected somehow, as some suggest-
doppleganger, metaphysical hitchhiker, or Lex Luthor to
Connor's Superman? Is Connor the Tro-Clan, sent to purify
humans from the infection of vampirism, helping rid Earth of
demons for all time, or will the beast finally rid the world
of humans?
[> [>
Re: More questions (same disclaimer, future
speculation but I am spoiler-free) -- Arethusa,
08:20:52 11/19/02 Tue
Why didn't the beast kill Connor and Cordy? Why were its
only words about Cordy and Connor? Why did Cordy dream the
beast turned into Connor? Why have there been so many
prophecies about births, and references to the coming of an
anti-Christ-like figure? Was Cordy sent back for a reason,
and if so, is that reason good or evil? Is the beast a red
herring-was the real beast just conceived?
[> [> [>
These are all questions that... -- Masq,
09:22:22 11/19/02 Tue
...show that the connection between Connor and the beast is,
in fact, quite textual, and not subtextual at all. The open
question is really more--is the connection for good or for
evil? Was Connor born to help destroy the beast, or did his
birth somehow bring about the arrival of the beast (some
some sort of supernatural side-effect?)
The tough question is why the beast didn't just kill him if
the former possibility is the correct. Connor could have a
fuzzy destiny like Angel does--will he be on the side of
good or evil during the apocalypse? Or, it could be that
Connor is meant to destroy the beast, but the beast is
hoping to use Connor for his own benefit.
As for the Tro-clon, it isn't a person, but a confluence of
events. Starting with Darla's pregnancy, Connor's birth, the
arrival of Holtz, Holtz taking Connor into Quortoth, Connor
aging at a rapid pace relative to Earth time, which means
Connor is old enough to fight the beast when he emgerges on
Earth a mere year later. The battle this season may well be
the "purification or ruination of mankind" that the Nyazian
prophecies talked about, with Connor, and Angel, as central
figures.
I believe Cordelia was sent back for a reason, that she was
given knowledge of what is to come by the PTB's and sent
back, but that the beast is trying to thwart Cordelia's
ability to fight. The beast, interestingly enough, doesn't
try to kill Connor, Cordelia, or Angel. He attacks them on a
personal level instead. It is quite possible that when he
grabbed Cordelia in the alley he was somehow corrupting her
mind, so that she sleeps with Connor against all good
judgement. Then the beast sends Angel to witness this.
He doesn't want to kill his enemies, he wants to divide
them, divide their strength, corrupt them into serving his
own ends.
[> [> [> [>
Future-spoiler-free speculation above! (up to AtS 4.7
only) -- Masq, 09:24:36 11/19/02 Tue
[>
Metaphor Girl? What did you do with the real
philosophically literal Masq?! -- Dedalus, 11:28:28
11/19/02 Tue
[> [>
She's working on her "Apoc,
Nowish"/"Rain of Fire"/whatever-it's-called
analysis -- Metaphor girl, 12:00:27 11/19/02 Tue
[> [>
Re: Metaphor Girl? What did you do with the real
philosophically literal Masq?! -- aliera, 17:29:04
11/19/02 Tue
NEUMAN: This is an interesting piece, Mr. Ipkiss; looks
like fourth or fifth century Scandinavian; possibly a
representation of one of the Norsenight gods, maybe
Loki.
STANLEY: Loki? Who's Loki?
NEUMAN: The Norse god of mischief. Supposedly he caused so
much trouble that Odin banished him from Valhalla
forever.
STANLEY: Then he could have banished him into that
masq.
NEUMAN: I'm talking about mythology, Mr. Ipkiss.
STANLEY: But your book...
[STANLEY crosses the room and hands the book to Dr.
NEUMAN.]
NEUMAN: My book is about masqs as a metaphor, Mr. Ipkiss, a
metaphor, not to be taken literally. You're suffering from
a mild delusion.
Bwahahaha
Have you seen the first evil? (season 7) -- luvthistle1,
22:44:01 11/18/02 Mon
Have you seen the first evil?
In the last couple of episodes we have witness the way the
first evil had divide the scoobies up,
turn them against each other, we haven't witness that
behavior since "the yoko factor. But have you seen the first
evil? I believe we had. We all had. There once was a time
when we could all discuss the entire episode rationally.
Compare note on what we saw and didn't see. Without getting
into a agreement But lately we have all, been divide, just
as the scoobies were in ³The Yoko factor" and he turn them
against one another like what is about to happen in this
season. We have been divide in two camps Spike vs. Xander
But it has always been that way, but lately it seem to
become worst, just as Spike and Xander relationship on
screen have, Have you notice the comparison? It was done
that way on purpose. By doing so we can not openly discuss 3
to 4 episode from last season without going into a Xander
vs. Spike or Buffy-vs. Spike , he did or he didn't debate. I
came to realize (or rather it's my theory)
That season 4 thru 7 not only have an arc, but a running
theme.
-Season 4 "speak no evil". People were not really saying
what they truly felt. Willow was bother by people not taking
her serious, Giles felt like he wasn't needed, Xander felt
useless, Spike was lonely etc.
But none of them were saying how they truly felt. Everyone
was "Restless" [Hush]
-Season 5 Hear no evil². No one was listening to what was
being said. The knight tells Buffy, that the key is too
dangerous to be allowed to exist in any form. Tara tells
Willow she was using too much magic. Dru tell Spike that the
chip doesn't work, Anya told Xander of her need to get
marry, Riley told Buffy she keep shutting him out. Spike
tell Buffy she keep letting him in, (into her house, that
is) Riley tells everyone he wants to lock Xander in the room
and experiment on him. But no one hears him or anyone for
that matter.
-Season 6 "See no evil² We do not see anything, we never saw
Xander summons the demon ³Sweet². We never "saw" Spike
getting the demon eggs, we never "saw" Buffy actually being
pull from heaven. We never "Saw" how Spike got to Africa. We
never saw what the nerds did with the diamond. We never saw
Anya becoming a vengeance demon again. (Note: we never saw
her amulet in 6) We never saw Spike go into Buffy house
before the incident, nor did we see him leave after the
incident. We never saw what Dawn was up to, when Spike
couldn't find her. We never saw anything, and what we did
see, we turn away from.
You see the first evil has got to us too, made us turn away,
made us doubt what we know about the character on the show
and there back story. The first evil made us turn on each
other. There are a couple of episodes we need to watch over
again ignoring the offending parts (the AR incident, eggs
etc) and examine what else is going on.
The episodes in question are as follow:
As you were
Hell's Hells
Normal Again
Entropy
Seeing red
These five episode need to be watch and re- watch over and
over again. because I think this season we will hear it,
they will Speak it and we will see it all. If anyone ask
you, have you seen the first evil, remember your reaction to
the episode above, and how you started to hate certain
characters.. just think about it.
How have it affect you?
Planning the Apocalypse (spoiler AtS 4.7) --
Tyreseus, 22:58:26 11/18/02 Mon
Just a question I haven't seen brought up here yet. Why does
it matter the method of the Apocalypse? Why does is matter
to Wolfram & Hart which Apocalypse this is?
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of
English)
apocalypse: [noun] 1. a very serious event resulting
in great destruction and change.
2. The Apocalypse is a religious idea of the total
destruction of the world.
If we operate off of definition #1, W&H are planning a
particular form of apocalypse that will simultaneously cause
great devastation and change and will also launch them
(senior parnters?) into some sort of super cosmic power.
If we operate off of definition #2, it seems that W&H ought
to be grateful that there's an apocalypse happening at all.
Complete world destruction - it's been the primary objective
- so let's see if we can't help this surprise apocalypse
along.
In addition to the lack of clarity about what kind of
apocalypse this is (I'm beginning to think that word is over-
used and has lost it's clear meaning), it also means that
evil isn't necessarily all connected to the same master
plan. In "Conversations with Dead People," Holden says he
feels "connected to a powerful all-consuming evil that's
gonna suck the world into a fiery oblivion." But I'm
beginning to have serious doubts that there's only one
source of all that evil.
The "connectedness" just isn't adding up. On AtS, Wolfram &
Hart senior partners have always been the ultimate say on
evil in L.A. (and seemingly in Pylia -- Wolf, Ram and Hart).
Now, we've got another evil BBW on BtVS, and "the beast" on
AtS, and no solid proof that these baddies are connected to
each other. Come to think of it, even Glory (a god from a
hell-dimension) was acting purely on her own self-interest
as far as we can tell, and not as part of some grand master
plan.
The more I think about it, the Lilah and Angel truce is the
weirdest part of "Apocalypse, Nowish" to me. Especially
since the senior partners have made it clear that Angel is
supposed to be a "major player" in their coming apocalypse.
When he convinces Lilah to help hih with his win/win
argument, it wouldn't really be a win for Lilah, would it?
The senior partners seem to want Angel to be alive and
"gray," so when Angel says, "I fight this thing and lose,
well... the only way that's going to happen is if I'm dead,
you win." It's not the sound logic I was hoping for to
convince Lilah to throw in with the A.I. team. She is a
lawyer, after all, and should know what a real win/win is.
Unless the senior partners do have something to gain
by this temporary alliance.
[>
Re: Planning the Apocalypse (spoiler AtS 4.7) --
anom, 23:50:51 11/18/02 Mon
"When he convinces Lilah to help hih with his win/win
argument, it wouldn't really be a win for Lilah, would it?
The senior partners seem to want Angel to be alive and
"gray," so when Angel says, 'I fight this thing and lose,
well... the only way that's going to happen is if I'm dead,
you win.' It's not the sound logic I was hoping for to
convince Lilah to throw in with the A.I. team."
We've seen before that Lilah personally wants Angel dead,
even though it's not what the firm wants. Remember when she
told Holtz ('cause the office was bugged) she couldn't help
him kill Angel because it was against company policy but
wrote "I'm in" (or something like that) on her legal pad &
showed it to him? I think Angel's aware of her feelings. If
Lilah gives him the info & he wins, she gets points from the
firm for furthering their agenda. If he loses, she gets the
satisfaction of his death. Not that she'd live to enjoy it
for long, but at least while it lasted....
[>
"A"pocalypse vs. "a"pocalypse -
- Masq, 10:14:19 11/19/02 Tue
I think your first definition is the key to the answer. In
Season 2 when Angel had the conversation with the dead
Holland Manners in the elevator that was plummeting down to
(he thought) hell, Holland was very blase about Wolfram and
Hart's apocalyptic plans. He made it clear they have an
apocalypse with a small "a" planned:
Holland: "Now let me see, there was something - in a sacred
prophecy, some oblique reference to you. Something you're
supposed to prevent. Now what was that?"
Angel: "The apocalypse."
Holland: "Yes, the apocalypse, of course. - Another one of
those. Well, it's true. We do have one scheduled. And I
imagine if you were to prevent it you would save a great
many people. Well, you should do that then. Absolutely. I
wasn't thinking. - Of course all those people you save from
that apocalypse would then have the next one to look forward
to, but, hey, it's always something, isn't it?"
Angel: "You're not gonna win."
Holland: "Well - *no*. Of course we aren't. We have no
intention of doing anything so prosaic as 'winning.'"
Angel: "Then why?"
Holland: "Hmm? I'm sorry? Why what?"
Angel: "Why fight?"
Holland: "That's really the question you should be asking
yourself, isn't it? See, for us, there is no fight. Which
is why winning doesn't enter into it. We - go on - no
matter what. Our firm has always been here. In one form or
another. The Inquisition. The Khmer Rouge. We were there
when the very first cave man clubbed his neighbor. See,
we're in the hearts and minds of every single living being.
And *that* - friend - is what's making things so difficult
for you. - See, the world doesn't work in spite of evil,
Angel. - It works with us. - It works because of us."
At this point, they arrive at the "Home Office", and it's
just L.A., with its morally ambiguous human beings walking
the streets.
Wolfram and Hart have plans for the apocalypse, but it is
something they want to use to consolidate their own
power.
The reason behind the apocalypse makes all the difference.
Glory just wanted to get back home. Wolfram and Hart just
want power. The beast seems to want the destruction of all
mankind, the "Apocalypse"--big "A"--including all the little
human beings at Wolfram and Hart.
So yeah, W&H is gonna fight this. It's a no-brainer.
And I don't think this is the "apocalypse" Angel is destined
to prevent coming up this season. I think this is the
"Apocalypse" Connor is destined to prevent. But that's just
my speculationy opinion.
[> [>
Remember the white room -- KdS, 10:43:32
11/19/02 Tue
The little girl in the White Room (whoever the hell she was,
but apparently one of the entities behind W&H or a
spokesentity for them) said something along the lines of "I
like trouble. But I hate chaos"
As Masq says:
Wolfram & Hart's apocalypse - Evil takes over the world -
evil as order
Beastie's apocalypse - World goes boom - evil as chaos.
Evil isn't a monolithic force in the Buffyverse - there's a
whole lot of factions that fight each other as much as the
forces of light. There seems to be a fairly clear divide
between the order-and-method types and the blood-and-
slaughter boys.
Possibly there's a direct or second hand Michael Moorcock
influence here. His early books seemed to regard Evil and
Chaos as synonymous, but fairly quickly he started viewing
them as styles of thinking that can be used for good or
evil. The Buffyverse usually seems to regard Chaos as
essentially evil (Ethan Rayne, for example) but there are
odd flashes that suggest otherwise.
[> [> [>
Ooooh, great thoughts. -- Masq, 10:52:59
11/19/02 Tue
Can I borrow some of this for my "Apoc, Nowish/Rain of Fire"
analysis?
Also, an example of good as
chaos
AtS has dealt with this more than once. In a world where
evil is the order of things, good can come from creating
chaos. This is the goal of the "freedom fighter" who uses
terrorist-style techniques to fight their fight. From the
perspective of the status quo, it seems like chaos. Jiera of
Oden Tal is an example, as were the human rebels in Pylea,
especially after Wesley started leading them. Lorne's mother
becries how her world is falling apart because of the rebel
uprising, the order that once ruled Pylea is
disintegrating.
[> [> [> [>
Wow... -- KdS, 11:07:44 11/19/02 Tue
Quoted on ATPOBTVS for the first time. Is there some "rite
of passage"?
Oh, and I was aware of Jhiera, but I left her out because
there are still serious questions about her morals
(willingness to let innocent bystansders get
slaughtered).
Plus the fact it's a very unpopular episode. I'd be more
forgiving of it if they hadn't dressed the feminist avenger
as if she'd just escaped from a Skin Two photoshoot :-
>
[> [> [> [>
Good from chaos/theological perspective --
alcibiades, 12:55:43 11/19/02 Tue
AtS has dealt with this more than once. In a world where
evil is the order of things, good can come from creating
chaos.
Interesting.
In the Jewish messianic tradition, as opposed to the
Christian one, it is understood as important that the
bloodline of the messiah is chaotic -- iow, a breaking of
really serious commandments is twice inherent in his
bloodline -- Judah sinning with Tamar, his daughter in law
eventually to produce David, and David having Bathsheba's
husband Uriah murdered in war so he could marry her.
It is the fact that these biblical heroes truly sinned --
crossed strict lines, created chaos by acting against laws
which establish God's order -- but then truly repented of
their deeds -- that enable them to have the spiritual
wherewithal to produce the messiah. Imperfection and chaos
is part of the seed that produces great goodness.
Which also seems to leave a certain hope for Angel as hero,
doesn't it?
[> [> [> [> [>
I can see I need to start work on my "good as
chaos" section! -- Masq, 13:09:09 11/19/02
Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Good from chaos/theological perspective --
Ysabel84, 13:15:07 11/19/02 Tue
In the Jewish messianic tradition, as opposed to the
Christian one, it is understood as important that the
bloodline of the messiah is chaotic...
This interpretation is not opposed to the Christian
messianic tradition, or perhaps Jewish messianic tradition
has influenced Christian thought (not too surprising) in the
past twenty or thirty years. I've heard at least two or
three sermons on the genealogy of Jesus that took this
line.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Good to know. Thanks -- alcibiades, 16:15:21
11/19/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
not how i've heard it -- anom, 22:21:30 11/19/02
Tue
"In the Jewish messianic tradition, as opposed to the
Christian one, it is understood as important that the
bloodline of the messiah is chaotic -- iow, a breaking of
really serious commandments is twice inherent in his
bloodline -- Judah sinning with Tamar, his daughter in law
eventually to produce David, and David having Bathsheba's
husband Uriah murdered in war so he could marry her."
This sounds way more Xtian than Jewish to me. For one thing,
in Jewish tradition, Judah sinned against Tamar, not with
her, & not by having sex w/her but by refusing to give his
youngest son, Shelah, to her after his 2 older sons had died
while married to her. The Torah requires a brother to marry
the widow of his brother's if he died childless & "raise
seed unto him" so the dead man's name & portion (in their
inheritance & in the land) will not be lost. (He can refuse,
but it's a source of shame if he does.) Tamar, posing as a
prostitute, actually tricked Judah into doing what was
considered the right thing--not a sin--among his people,
although letting Shelah marry her would have been
preferable. When Judah found out about Tamar's deception, he
said, "She is more righteous than I am." This is repentance
not for having slept w/her but for keeping his last son from
her.
Discussions in Jewish contexts about the lineage of David--&
therefore of the messiah who is supposed to descend from him-
-focus on Tamar because she wasn't a Hebrew/Israelite. And
this is what happens twice in David's bloodline: Ruth the
Moabite, perhaps the most famous convert to Judaism, is also
a direct ancestor of David.
I've never heard in these discussions that David's sin
against Uriah was--or would be--instrumental in producing
the messiah. This may be partly because the messiah is
referred to as "Moshiach ben David"--son of David, not of
Solomon. Since the Jewish belief is that the messiah hasn't
arrived yet, his ancestry can't be traced back. And here's
where my knowledge runs out: I don't know if any other
bloodlines stemming from David survived. But I've never
heard that the messiah could only be born to a descendant of
Solomon. If the line of descent can be different, there's no
need for it to derive from David's sin that led to Solomon's
birth.
I've also never heard "chaotic" used in regard to sin in
Judaism. It's used to describe the state of the universe
before God's act(s) of Creation (depending how you interpret
what's usually translated as "unformed & void"), but I don't
know of its use in any other context. Of course, this could
just be an indication of the limits of my knowledge.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Oral traditions differ of course but I understood this
as fairly standard -- alcibiades, 00:42:00 11/20/02
Wed
This sounds way more Xtian than Jewish to me.
Having been taught it in Yeshivah by an extremely learned
teacher, I feel quite confident that it is a Jewish
interpretation of Messianism.
Agree with your more detailed description about Judah/Tamar
-- in my defense, I was shooting off a quick post and
skimming on details. And also in my defense, er, thinking
quick, while Judah's sin against Tamar was in not letting
her marry his third son, technically, in Jewish law, since
she was promised to the third son, he was committing
adultery by sleeping with her even though she sought him
out. That, of course, is ex post facto, since the law was
not yet given at the time of the story of Judah and Tamar,
but it is also the way midrashic (rabbinic interpretations
of the bible) texts tend to interpret the bible. Okay.
Worked myself out of that quagmire. Phew. Note to self:
next time don't skimp on the facts.
Hmm. I just reread what I originally wrote and I WAS
actually writing shorthand. Thank God. Otherwise, kind of
embarrassing. By Judah's sin with Tamar I was referring,
(obliquely no doubt) to the whole mess with the sons, just
not spelling it out. Note to self: next time reread what I
wrote before I spend time rescuing mysef from a hole I'm not
in.
Discussions in Jewish contexts about the lineage of
David--& therefore of the messiah who is supposed to descend
from him--focus on Tamar because she wasn't a
Hebrew/Israelite. And this is what happens twice in David's
bloodline: Ruth the Moabite, perhaps the most famous
convert
to Judaism, is also a direct ancestor of David.
That is one focus but not the only one. There is also a
focus on the continuity of repentance in the characters of
Judah and David. Because that principle is considered to be
crucial to the notion of messianism in Judaism. Can't have
a messianic age in Judaism without a heck of a lot of
repentance taking place beforehand. You need a spiritual
leader with the greatness of soul to lead in that direction
as well.
Oh look, here is a handy quote from Gershom Scholem that
backs me up:
Judaism in all its forms and and manifestations, has
always maintained a concept of redemption as an event which
takes place publicly, on the stage of history and within the
community. It is an occurrence which takes place in the
visible world and which cannot be conceived apart from such
a visible appearance.
Where these two foci, the one I mentioned on repentance and
the one you mentioned on bloodline, merge is in what I have
termed the "chaos" principle. By this, I mean that
imperfection is inherent in the nature of the messiah. So,
the Jewish messiah by blood is descended from outsiders like
Ruth and Tamar, and not from a purely Jewish bloodline. And
the bloodline also goes through the line of leaders who were
sinners that repented publically of their acts. Because it
is imperfection that has to be redeemed by the messiah,
raising the sparks from the broken vessels and all that. So
he has to be a physical symbol of someone who has the power
to transform imperfections.
Re David, it is not the sin against Uriah that is
instrumental -- it is the fact that David sinned, covered it
up before his fellow men (but not before God), and then,
once Natan accuses him with a parable, David admits to
everything before God and man and repents from the depths of
his soul. As you mentioned, Judah also admits to everything
publically and does the right thing from that point on.
That is the quality that Jewish sources also anticipate will
exist in the Messiah.
I don't know if any other bloodlines stemming
from David survived.
Yep. They certainly existed in the geonic age. Some of the
exilarchs in Babylonia were of Davidic descent (although
there is some question about whether some of them made this
up.). AFAIK, there are still people with geneologies that
can be traced back that far. I am fairly sure there are
still known people whose geneologies go back that far. I
should check on it to be sure. I have a friend who wrote a
thesis on this stuff.
This may be partly because the messiah is referred to
as "Moshiach ben David"--son of David, not of Solomon. Since
the Jewish belief is that the messiah hasn't arrived yet,
his ancestry can't be traced back. And here's where my
knowledge runs out: I don't know if any other bloodlines
stemming
from David survived. But I've never heard that the messiah
could only be born to a descendant of Solomon. If the line
of descent can be different, there's no need for it to
derive from David's sin that led to Solomon's birth.
Well it's a mystery. Who knows? And Messiansim, after all,
only dates from the apocalyptic age anyway, 3rd c - 1st c
BCE, which doesn't make it precisely gospel within Judaism
the way that it is, oh say, in Christianity. Ahem.
But be that as it may, the point, I believe, is not that
David's sin led eventually, after his repentance to the
birth of another son who was Solomon, so that the line has
to follow from Solomon. The point is the sin and the
magnitude of the repentance itself in David.
Now I am seeing hope for Spike as a hero too. Goody.
Goody. Goody. Lots of magnificent repentance tonight.
May all vampires with souls be redeemed.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Ooooh, great thoughts. -- ELR, 13:35:39
11/19/02 Tue
This may also be related to the whole Yeats' "Second Coming"
"things fall apart" theme, too. Most people have focused on
the obvious Biblical allusions, but it seems likely that
Yeats was thinking more of William Blake, who was very big
on disorder as an antidote to stifling order: "The cistern
contains; the fountain overflows" (Marriage of Heaven and
Hell Plate 8). (Blake was a favorite with the Beats--
Kerouac, Allan Ginsberg, Ken Kesey and the Merry
Pranksters.)
I got your apocalypse right here:
"[...] the whole creation will be consumed, and appear
infinite and holy, whereas it now appears finite and
corrupt. [...] If the doors of perception were cleansed
every thing would appear to man as it is, infinite." (Blake,
Marriage of Heaven and Hell Plate 14). (This line was
the source for The Doors, BTW--Jim Morrison also a big fan
of Blake.)
In Yeats's system of history as recurring spirals (gyres),
the apocalyptic chaos prepares the world for the new
"order": "all hatred driven hence, / The soul recovers
radical innocence" ("A Prayer for My Daughter" 65-66).
[> [> [> [>
A little speculation on character alignment (one widely-
circulated confirmed casting spoiler) -- KdS,
08:42:35 11/20/02 Wed
If we are heading for a Moorcock style Order vs Chaos,
rather than Good vs Evil, ruck, here's how I'd pick the
teams.
Choice is on the basis of general personality, and in the
case of the evil types, what type of apocalypse they were
trying to create.
The Straight Arrows (followers of Law)
Buffy
Giles (zeal of the convert)
Angel (pre-Reprise)
The Master
Snyder
Richard Wilkins I-III
Quentin Travers
Oz (OK, he's a werewolf and a musician, but he's also self-
denial guy sexually, and his repressive response to his
animal side was definitely the reaction of a Straight Arrow
- a follower of Chaos would have tried to integrate it)
Riley
Maggie Walsh (Quentin and Maggie are probably the closest
characters in the Buffyverse to Moorcock's recurring style
of Law-identifying villain)
Anya
Tara (natural law girl)
Adam (OK he tried to create mayhem, but only to provide raw
materials to remake the world according to his master
plan)
Wesley
Doyle
Everyone at W&H
Groo
Daniel Holtz
The Eight-Pointed Arrows (followers of Chaos)
Xander
Willow
Angel (post-Epiphany, after he realised that Law gave
him the excuse to hypocritically indulge his worst
instincts)
Cordelia
Ethan Rayne (natch)
Darla
Jenny
Spike (unsouled)
Dru
Angelus
Faith
Glory
Warren
Andrew
Jonathon
Gunn
Lorne
Fred (OK she's a scientist, but frontier science is all
about trying to improve yourself by your own efforts,
instead of being satisfied with what you have)
Sahjahn
Connor
Few interesting notes from the team lists:
Most of the happier and more stable relationships (X/Anya,
W/T, W/O, X/C, G/J) seem to involve one person from each
group.
It's now obvious why Wes ended up the outsider in AI post-S2
- with Angel's defection he was the only Straight Arrow in a
crew of Chaos-followers. :-)
Only one person, IMO, has seriously made the move from one
to another - Angel. Willow may go the other way, though,
now she seems to have realised that her conscience is
insufficiently robust to keep her on the side of good
without some external rules. Likewise Faith, although I
really wouldn't like to predict her post-jail personality
and outlook on life.
Despite the general anti-Chaos bias of ME I've previously
mentioned, the division between Good and Evil is fairly
equal, although most of the more sympathetic followers of
Chaos come from AtS rather than BtVS.
[> [>
There are at least two different ways that the world
can end. -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:11:02 11/19/02 Tue
The best examples probably come from Season 2 of BtVS:
In "Surprise/Innocence", a demon called the Judge is
unleashed, who can destroy any creature with humanity in it
at will. It hoped to use this power to wipe out the human
race one by one.
Meanwhile, in "Becoming I & II", Angelus tried to destroy
the world by opening the mouth of Acathla, which would suck
the world into a Hell dimension where everyone would suffer
eternal torment.
Both are examples of destroying the world (or at least the
human part of it) and thus apocalypses, but they go about it
in very different ways. The first form of apocalypse would
kill everyone on the planet, leaving the earth to demonkind.
The second form of apocalypse not only wouldn't kill
humanity, but would preserve people's lives infinitely so
they could suffer forever. A person intent on a certain
form of apocalypse would be greatly displeased if one of a
different form took place first. So, if Angel's new Big Bad
is trying to simply wipe out humanity, but Wolfram & Hart is
pushing for turning earth into a Hell Dimension, you can see
how they would have a conflict of interests.
One last thing to consider: while Wolfram & Hart is intent
on world destruction, it is still staffed by human beings.
Given that Holland Manners ghost/spirit/whatever remained
after death to serve the firm, the Senior Partners probably
have a plan where their lawyer disciples will be spared from
the apocalypse they intend to bring about (possibly
transforming the highest ranking firm members into demons,
much like the Powers did for Cordelia). But, if a different
apocalypse occurs first, Wolfram & Hart may not be safe, and
so they'll try to stop it until the Senior Partners can
bring in their own end of the world scenario that won't
destroy lawyers along with everybody else.
Not sure if mentioned.. RIPPER NEWS -- neaux,
05:22:02 11/19/02 Tue
Found this article on chud.com
http://www.chud.com/news/nov02/nov18ripper.php3
Link
Link to ChiefSeattle Review (Yeats mentioned) of ATS
"Slouching Towards Bethlehem" -- Rufus, 07:11:05
11/19/02 Tue
For those interested in the Yeats reference in both shows
may want to go here to have a look. It's the Trollop Group so
those of you pure folk just don't stray....;) Not that I'd
stop you.
Masquerade - help please -- Mackenzie
, 08:21:04 11/19/02 Tue
I want to send my answers to the 10 questions to be a board
poster. I can't get the email link to work for me and I
can't find her address. Can she or someone please give that
to me. I really appreciate the help!
Thanks
[> Masq's e-mail -- Tchaikovsky, 08:52:35
11/19/02 Tue
Is:
masqthephlsphr@yahoo.com
This worked for me
TCH
[> Re: Masquerade - help please -- Masq,
09:05:08 11/19/02 Tue
You don't need to submit the ten questions to be a board
poster, all you have to do is post! But it helps if you have
a profile so other folks can get to know you better.
: )
[> [> Re: Masquerade - help please -- Mackenzie
, 09:14:51 11/19/02 Tue
Oh duh! x-)
I just love this board so much I want to do it all
correctly.
Thanks for making such a great place for BtVS and AtS lovers
to talk!
hope they don't end another episode that way
(spoilers) -- 110v3w1110w, 11:58:05 11/19/02 Tue
what a shitty way to end as episode i need to know RIGHT NOW
if giles is still alive how. dare they torture me this way.
also STOP THE WILLOW SUFFERAGE damn you if its not demons
eating her alive its demons taunting her about her dead
girlfriend. they need a proper good by scene for willow and
tara
[> Spoiler for BtVS 7.8 above (and a swear word! hide
your blushing eyes ;) -- ponygirl, 12:03:28 11/19/02
Tue
Was it really...? (Spoilers for Buffy 7.7) --
monsieurxander, 12:30:42 11/19/02 Tue
Everyone seems to automatically think that the Warren
manifestation is not him, that it is the First Evil. It
seemed to me that "Warren" had way too many Warren-like
attributes... where as Cassie seemed to have a complete
personality reversal. Would the First Evil *really* be that
hokey? Would it want Andrew to feel stupid? If I were some
almighty evil trying to manipulate Andrew, I would want to
make myself the ideal Warren (as in someone who is openly in
love with Andrew), as well as make Andrew feel better about
himself.
So, perhaps, this could be the real Warren? Maybe all of the
events in "Conversations" were completely unrelated.
Warren's yoda face and Joyce's forlorn face seemed very much
in character for them. Neither of them sugar-coated their
conversation-ees.
Hey, it could happen.
[>
Re: Was it really...? (Spoilers for Buffy 7.7) --
Liv, 12:51:15 11/19/02 Tue
Interesting. The inherent Warrenness of the Warren
apparition had me wondering too... he can be pretty damn
creepy, I'll give him that.
What I was thinking about, though, were the events that went
down at casa Summers. There seemed (to me, at least) to be
TWO distinct forces at work there. I got the impression that
what seemed to be the malevolent force (the one that Dawn
cast out) was actually trying to protect Dawn by silencing
"Joyce" and scaring Dawn out of the house by using classic
horror movie tactics.
Its my personal theory that the "evil" force (i.e the
shadowy figure that strangling Joyce) might have actually
been the real Joyce.
Consider the following:
"Mom, is that you?": One knock for yes.
"Are you okay?"" Two knocks for no.
"Are you alone?": Two knocks for no.
Also, once Dawn cast out the "evil" force, "Joyce" was free
to deliver her message. ...Wouldn't it be an awesome twist
if the First Evil had tricked Dawn into expelling the ACTUAL
spirit of her mother in favor an evil manifestation of
her?
Finally, if in fact the manifestations of Warren and Joyce
were actually the work of the First Evil, can we safely
assumne that the First evil is a Star Wars fan? ;)
Heehee.
Just a few random thoughts bouncing around my head as I
avoid cramming for my final in a couple of hours...
[> [>
Re: Was it really...? (Spoilers for Buffy 7.7) --
leslie,
13:21:39 11/19/02 Tue
"Finally, if in fact the manifestations of Warren and Joyce
were actually the work of the First Evil, can we safely
assumne that the First evil is a Star Wars fan?"
If you were a First Evil, wouldn't you be?
About "Warren's" behavior, though, I guess it depends on how
cunning the FE is. Andrew, after all, fell in love with the
real, creepy Warren, who seemed to have little problem in
getting him to do his will. It would seem to have been the
hope that some time in the future, Warren would love him,
that incited Andrew to do things he knew were wrong. (His
initial reaction to Katrina's death showed that he *did*
know it was wrong, or he wouldn't have been so scared of the
consequences.) So, thinks the FE, here's a good modus
operandi with this one: Give him just enough hope, but never
deliver; that way he'll keep on forever. And I have to say
that the real Warren had a certain amount of impatience with
the degree of Andrew's Star Wars besottedness.
[>
I don't think so (spoilers to 7.7 and unspoiled
speculation) -- Malathustra, 15:50:50 11/19/02
Tue
I know we haven't firmly established that "Spike's
Hallucinations" from the first episode and the Big Morphy
Bad are the same being, but I believe they are.
If this is the case, the BBW is more or less all-knowing
when it comes to evil-types. He knew about Drusilla's
kookiness. He knew about the Mayor's goofiness and that
Spike was Hostile 17 at the Initiative. Is the BBW a
collection of the essences of every villian on earth? If so,
it'd be pretty easy to just step into whatever role was most
convenient.
Cassie, though, wasn't a villian as far as we know (Joyce
certainly wasn't -- and I'd also speculated a few pages back
that Dawn had actually killed/expelled a positive influence
from the house for the same reasons listed above), and I
felt like the BBW did a pretty good job of impersonating
her. Still, it's confusing. Cassie and Tara seem to be
kindred in the good-girl sense, but the BBW tipped its hand
by not knowing Tara well enough (or Willow well enough) to
know that the whole suicide game wouldn't work. It also did
a piss-poor job of impersonating Joyce, if you ask me, but
Dawn is too teen-angsty and hormonal to question the message
or the messenger.
The way I see it, if the BBW were manifesting as Warren and
couldn't act enough like Warren to convince Andrew, there'd
be no point. A loving or homoerotic Warren would be a happy
phantom for Andrew, but might ultimately tip its hand too
much. Frankly, I think BBW!Warren IS being "more than
friendsy" enough with Andrew to string him along, in the
sense that he has once again concocted a plan that will
bring the two closer together and make Andrew feel like "the
special one."
But, you're right. The accuracy is indeed impressive,
because (just like the plan before Warren's death) it's
ultimately not going to benefit Andrew at all and will only
feed on his fears and fantasies.
I dunno what I'm really getting to here, except that I think
the Warren that we and Andrew (and poor Jonathon, before
kicking the bucket) saw was BBW!Warren and not
Actual!Warren, just as Cassie and Joyce and perhaps Spike
and who knows who else?
As far as we know, though, the BBW has only impersonated
dead people (including the twice-dead Buffy)...
...or has it?
Mal, who can hardly watch a scene anymore without screaming
"Are you real???" at the characters on screen.
[>
don't think so either -- anom, 22:49:20 11/19/02
Tue
"It seemed to me that 'Warren' had way too many Warren-like
attributes... where as Cassie seemed to have a complete
personality reversal."
I thought "Cassie" seemed very much like the
original...until her cover was blown. And if "Warren" isn't
the Mighty Morpher, how did he come back from the yucky
death we saw Willow inflict on him? The assumption that it's
the MM fits in w/the fact that we've seen the MM impersonate
other dead people, as well as Warren himself. And "Warren's"
use of "Adam's" earlier line ("all specs are within
parameters") sounds like a big juicy clue that it's not
really Warren.
Oh man, I can't believe I didn't catch this hint before
(spoilers up to Ats 4.7)!!!! -- I_of_lurking,
13:20:08 11/19/02 Tue
check out this thought. When Wes asks Angel how he plans to
stop this "beast" Angel says,
"If it's alive, we kill it. If it's dead, we bury it."
Seems innocent enough, and totally off the cuff at the time.
But link it to a few other facts.
1) The "beast" emerged from the ground, it had to claw its
way up in more than just a metaphoric sense.
2) The beast emerged in the place where Connor was born,
suggesting it somehow associates with him.
3) In Cordy's dream/vision/daymare, Connor became the beast,
perehaps a warning from her (not so blocked) subconscious
mind, about something she knew as a higher power.
4) Connor gets injured by the "beast", of which he notes
"I've never been broken, not even in Quortoth, I didn't
think I could be."
5) (and this a biggy) the "beasts" symbol, is the ancient
alchemic symbol for "destruction", and Connor's handle in
the Big Q--The Destroyer.
6) Angel dreams about killing Connor, during...
7) Angel's brief stint as a bed of lichen.
8) The beast's penchant for complete sentences, when he
finally does talk.
8)That nagging, echo that never leaves us, even though we
"know" it was all made up, "the father will kill the
son."
I think what it all boils down to is this:, Angel is going
to realize sooner or later that Conner and the "beast" are
one and the same (though, I suspect Wes will see it first,
or Gunn). He will naturally be "torn between" wanting his
son to have a happy life, and wanting to end the beast's
reign of terror. He will try to kill Conner, but Conner,
like Angel will turn out to be "not exactly living" and
since he is not exactly a vampire either, the old standby's
won't get the job done.
That is when Angel will decide that he has to bury Conner,
perhaps in a mystical stasis. There will be a lot of irony
here, deliberately, especially after his "what you did to me
is unbelievable" speech in DD.
Oh, but it get's better.
Think misdirection, who have we not seen since EP 1? Who is
primed to pop back into the story? Our old buddy, Justine.
The way I figure it Justine has been "keeping a lo pro" and
lurking in the shadows, a bit player that ME would want us
to forget about. I suspect we will see Justine at the
beast's side very soon.
And, isn't it interesting by the way that the beast happened
to stab Angel in his throat, with a sharp pointy object,
something resembling, say...an ice pick?
hmmm...
Anyway, long to story short: Angel is going to figure out he
has no choice but to bury Conner deep in the earth. But with
Justine's help, and his own demon nature, somehow Connor
manages to come back in time (perhaps with the aid of
Sajean, the time-shifting-demon who was last genie-in-the-
bottled by, hmmm, was that Justine?)
Conner/the beast now has his shingle out, and his revenge
thang on, and Angel is trapped in a causal loop of events
that he can never escape. He sires Conner, looses Conner to
Holz, gets him back, only to have his heart broken, his
strength tested to its limits, and finally to bury his own
son alive, and suffer the consequences.
"How many times will this our lofty scene be acted
over...?"
[>
Very plausible -- Darby, 06:21:35 11/20/02
Wed
So plausible, in fact, that this may be why there haven't
been any responses - I don't have anything substantive to
add, but wanted to tell you that this is a great theory,
hard to argue with even if it turns out to be wrong, and I
suspect that's why no one's posted to this thread.
While my head tells me that there are lots of ways that this
could be true, my gut is saying that it isn't going to be -
but you may not be far off.
Buffy's fear (re:Nightmares1.10; Fear, Itself4.4;
CwDP7.7) -- fearshade,
13:30:40 11/19/02 Tue
Strange how the psych vamp Holden from CwDP brought all of
Buffy's fear's into focus. Take a look at a few
conversations from Nightmares and Fear, Itself.
(Nightmares)
Joyce: ...I spoke with your father.
Buffy: He's coming, right?
Joyce: You're on for this weekend.
Buffy: Good.
Willow: So, do you see your dad a lot?
Buffy: Not a whole lot.
Buffy: He's still in L.A. He, like, comes down for weekends
sometimes.
Willow: When did they get divorced?
Buffy: Well, it wasn't finalized till last year, but they
were separated before that.
Willow: Musta been harsh.
Buffy: Yeah, that's the word you're looking for.I mean,
they were really good about it around me, anyway,
but still...
Willow: My parents don't even bicker. Sometimes they glare.
Do you know why your folks split up?
Buffy: I didn't ask. They just stopped getting along. I'm
sure I was a really big help, though, with all the slaying
and everything. I was in so much trouble. I was a big
mess.
Willow: Well, I'm sure that didn't have anything to do with
him leaving.
Buffy: No.
Willow: And he still comes down on weekends.
Buffy: Sometimes.
Joyce: You're awfully quiet this morning.
Buffy: I didn't sleep well.
Joyce: I'll say. I came in to check on you twice. You were
yelling in your sleep. Do you know what you were
dreaming?
Buffy: Not really. Oh, no, my bag! I-I packed it for
the weekend and I forgot it!
Joyce: You and your dad can swing by the house and get your
bag. It's not an international crisis.
Buffy: Okay. Yeah, I just, uh, had meant to bring it. H-
he's picking me up here, right? A-at 3:30?
Joyce: Honey, a-are you worried your father isn't gonna
show?
Buffy: No! N-not really. Should I be?
Joyce: Well, of course, not! I-I-I just, I-I know it's a
hard situation. You just have to remember that your father
adores you. No more than I do, by the way.
Hank: I came early because there's something I've needed to
tell you. About your mother and me. Why we split up.
Buffy: Well, you always told me it was because...
Hank: Uh, I know we always said it was because we'd just
grown too far apart.
Buffy: Yeah, isn't that true?
Hank: Well, c'mon, honey, let's, let's sit down. You're old
enough now to know the truth.
Buffy: Is there someone else?
Hank: No. No, it was nothing like that.
Buffy: Then what was it?
Hank: It was you.
Buffy: Me?
Hank: Having you. Raising you. Seeing you everyday. I mean,
do you have any idea what that's like?
Buffy: What?
Hank: Gosh, you don't even see what's right in front of
your face, do you? Well, big surprise there, all you ever
think about is yourself. You get in trouble. You embarrass
us with all the crazy stunts you pull, and do I have to go
on?
Buffy: No. Please don't.
Hank: You're sullen and... rude and... you're not nearly as
bright as I thought you were going to be... Hey, Buffy,
let's be honest. Could you stand to live in the same house
with a daughter like that?
Buffy: Why are you saying all these things?
Hank: Because they're true. I think that's the least we owe
one another.
Hank: You know, I don't think it's very mature, getting
blubbery when I'm just trying to be honest. Speaking of
which, I don't really get anything out of these weekends
with you. So, what do you say we just don't do them
anymore?
Hank: I sure thought you'd turn out differently.
(Fear, Itself)
Joyce laughs: ³Your father *loved* to take you out.²
Buffy: ³He was such a pain! 12 years old and I can¹t go
trick-or-treating by myself?²
Joyce: ³He just wanted to keep you safe.²
Buffy: ³No, he wanted the candy. I was just the beard.²
Joyce: ³Oh, that¹s not true actually. The candy was for
me. - Your father loved spending time with you.²
Buffy looks down: ³Not enough, I guess.²
Joyce: ³Buffy.²
Buffy: ³Oh, that just paved right over memory lane, huh?²
Joyce: ³Our divorce had nothing to do with you.²
Buffy swallows: ³I don¹t know. I¹m starting to feel like
there is a pattern here. Open your heart to someone, and
he bails on you. Maybe it¹s easier to just not let anyone
in.²
Joyce gets up: ³I thought it might be easier. You must
have noticed that I am not exactly the social butterfly I
was when I was with your dad. I don¹t think I made a single
new friend the year we moved to Sunnydale.²
Buffy: ³Why not?²
Joyce: ³Fear. I didn¹t believe I could trust anyone again.
It¹s taken time and a lot of effort, but I¹ve got a nice
circle of friends now. - I mean, don¹t get me wrong. I
I¹m still a little gun shy. It certainly didn¹t help that
my last boyfriend turned out to be a homicidal robot. I will
*always* be here for you. And you got Mr. Giles and your
friends. Believe me, there is nothing to be afraid of.²
Buffy hears Willow yell for help and spins around. She
tries to follow Willow¹s voice.
Buffy: ³Willow.²
She comes up to a locked door and bust it open. There is no
floor in the room behind it and she falls down into the
basement.
We see her laying on the floor on her back, looking up as
the door swings slowly shut.
Buffy: ³Basement. - I must be in the basement.²
Hollow voice: ³All alone.²
Buffy pushes herself up: ³Who said - that?²
The guy that fell down the steps walks around a corner with
his head tilted at an unnatural angle.
Broken Neck Guy: ³They all ran away from you. They always
will. Open your heart to someone and (Smiles at her) But
don¹t fret, little girl, you¹re not alone (Buffy screams as
arms burst up through the floor to grab at her) anymore.²
Broken neck guy: ³No matter how hard you fight, you just
end up in the same place. (Buffy crawls along the floor on
all fours, kicking at the guys following her) I don¹t see
why you bother.²
Gachnar: ³They¹re all going to abandon you, you know.²
[>
Re: One fear Holden left until last... (Spoilers CwDP
7.7) -- Just George, 14:37:50 11/19/02 Tue
I think the Vamp Holden left one fear out until last. Buffy
is afraid that she will have to "Slay" her friends; that her
job as the Slayer will force her too choose between
friendship and duty. Think about it:
* Willow has tried to destroy the world. She still might.
Would Buffy have to "go all the way" this time if Willow
goes all "black eyed"?
* Anya killed many and Buffy had to try and kill Anya to
stop her. Anya got her demon powers back once. Will she
again? Will Buffy have to use something bigger than a sword
this time?
* Dawn, as the key, has the power to destroy the world by
tearing down all of the walls between dimensions. Buffy
didn't kill her last time because she found a way to save
both the world and Dawn. If Buffy can't find a way to save
both, would she have to kill Dawn to save the world?
* Spike seems to be killing again. Will Buffy have to spike
"Spike"?
* Xander and Giles don't have rap sheets full of bodies or
the intrinsic power to destroy the world like the others.
But they have both caused others to die by misusing magic.
If they emerged as a threat, would Buffy have to kill
them?
* Anyone Buffy has ever known can be turned into a vampire
and then Buffy will have a duty to kill them. Why didn't she
ever slay Harmony? The same reason that Cordelia didn't. The
same reason that Willow couldn't stake Vamp Willow. And the
same reason that Xander couldn't stake Vamp Jessie on his
own. Because they all "knew these people when". And it was
just too hard to kill someone you knew so well.
When Buffy told Holden that "You're not a stranger" at the
end of CwDP, I think she was at least partially commenting
on the fact that Buffy has a relationship with all vampires.
Most of her relationships are just "argh" - "stake" -
"dust". But all include the shared experience of the night
and the fight. Some include conversations. A few occur in
the privacy of dreams. Two have been physically intimate. At
least one (or maybe two) have included love. Never mind the
fact that at least two of these have souls and seem like
they might be redeemable. Shared experience. Conversation.
Intimacy. Love. These are the elements that bind people into
communities. For Buffy, they bind her to her "mortal
enemies".
I think Buffy is getting tired of killing things that walk
and talk and act like intelligent beings. Things that act
like they are or could have been friends. Too many killers
hide behind human faces.
Buffy got to the point that she could see past Angel's Vamp-
Face to see the person beneath. She saw past Spike's Vamp-
Face enough to sleep with him. She saw past Anya's demon
face enough to call her friend once again. Perhaps, after
seven years, she is getting too good at seeing the human
face beneath the forehead bumps.
Remember that every vampire that rises in Sunnydale can be
seen as a failure on Buffy's part. I'll bet she sees them
that way. It doesn't matter if Buffy knew them or not. They
died on her watch, from the enemy she has dedicated her life
to stopping. All she can do is stake them, like a man
putting down his own rabid dog.
"How many of my kind have you done?" asked Spike in FFL.
Viewers know the number is pretty darned high. What if Buffy
has come to regard every one of those as a failure and not
as a success? If so, it would be easy to see why she doesn't
feel go good about her "calling". And it would make sense
that Buffy is afraid that her "calling" will force her to
fail the same way with her friends if they ever become
threats again.
-JG
[> [>
Wow...that was really good stuff :) -- MayaPapaya9,
22:23:48 11/19/02 Tue
[> [>
Excellent post, JG!! -- Rahael, 10:54:41
11/20/02 Wed
Jumble of thoughts (spoliers to a minor extent from 4.22,
5.12, 7.1-8) -- Clen,
15:43:24 11/19/02 Tue
I was also thinking in labeling this thread salmagundi, or
perhaps pastiche, but instead I think I will not be so
pretentious. This is just a few reflections on Season 7
that I have gathered thus far while I found the rocks to
actually post on the board.
I am basing my reflections on certain lines in Lessons that
seem as if they do not fit into the dialogue quite as
effortlessly as the others, and so could be there for a
reason, as dialogue with us, the viewers. I may be wrong,
but they seem like obvious enough audience road-signs. I
apologize if this stuff has already been discussed before, I
have no time to pore through the threads, but this is only a
sign of my business and carelessness, not any comment on
what I think about the value of other peoples¹ thoughts.
Aren¹t I polite?
A. In Lessons, Buffy says, ³It¹s about who has the power²
This reminds me very much of Checkpoint. Are there any
ingredients from that episode that we can use as clues to
Lessons, or S7 in general?
- even the title Checkpoint has significance. The most
appropriate definition for that S5 episode is a point of
testing and evaluation; but there is another sense of a
point at which there is a pause or a break in the
progression. This is consistent with the statement that
Season 7 would not be like the dark Season 6, and more like
earlier Buffy: Season 7 will be a break in the progression
of Season 6 (or, alternately, Season 6 is conceded to be a
pause or break from the actual progression of the
series).
- the presence of the Watchers¹ Council and the Knights of
the Byzantium. These are humans who have their own strategy
for fighting evil and otherworldliness. The most likely
connection to Lessons would be Principal Wood. He could be
a Watcher, now that Giles is away, or he could by a
Byzantium type, who is prepping for the Big Bad, and the
Slayer will only be in his way. The latter would provide a
convenient reason for his office being on top of the
Hellmouth (other than dumb luck) and maybe his name is a
play on words (opposing the Slayer robbing her of her
wood) though that would be such a dumb play on words, that
it almost seems like something intentionally left out there
to lead us astray. My guess? I think he¹s a ³swerve². We
must be conscious that the writers are conscious of us, so
they throw in things that only we give meaning, the best
example being the cheese slice guy in Restless. It¹s not
that he has no meaning, there is a certain economy of
thought in writing for a TV show. He has a meaning, his
meaning is to have NO meaning. He only concerns the
audience, so he is a swerve something to occupy us. I
think Principal Wood is a swerve. But he¹s a reoccurring
character, so I think it¹s up to us. He is flexible enough
so far (unless some of you have seen ahead, I haven¹t) that
he could be a loose thread for the writers to use as they
see fit. If the general opinion out there in audienceland
is that he is a bad guy, they could make him turn out to be
a good guy, if we think he¹s good, he gets to be bad. It
may even be that if we are sure he has a lot of meaning,
they may just let him have no meaning. He is right at the
center of it all (literally) so he could be anything without
pulling anything else off track. This theory is kind of out
there, but hey, that¹s what makes it fun.
- in Checkpoint, Buffy finds out (right at the end) that the
Big Bad is a little out of her league. Perhaps this is a
hint about this Season, not that the Big Bad is another god
necessarily, but something that Buffy at first blush would
feel to be out of her league.
- I¹m sure there are other things in Checkpoint, feel free
to toss them as in as you come up with them. Nothing more
fun than coming up with wild speculation through drawing
patterns.
B. Giles says something to the effect that no matter how
much we try to change, we end up being who we really are.
Similarly, the Big Bad at the end mentions something to the
effect of going back to the beginning, and we will all learn
something about ourselves. I think that these two
statements are related to a certain theme. I think that, in
the spirit of returning to the less-dark Buffy, that people
will seem to return to certain attributes they thought they
had gotten past. Not in the sense of regression, I don¹t
think Joss would be so cheap, simply that they still have
certain attributes they cannot shake. My guesses on those?
I base this around how they have changed from their first
appearance on the show. This of course gets a little
muddled when you consider some of these people have had
³flashbacks² where we see their background does this mean
THAT is their beginning? Hard to be sure. But if it is a
theme within the series itself, it would be more fitting for
it to be based around their first actual appearance, and
disregard the strictly chronological timeline, though I
guess it¹s just as easy to go the other way.
Spike as we see, even though he has not been much of a
vampire in the past few years, we have recently seen that he
IS still a vampire.
Giles even though he is no longer a Watcher, in Lessons he
was still watching.
Willow back to being ³plain old Willow²: unsure, geeky,
scholarly. She still has magic of course, but we see more
images this season of computers and her love of them
(mentioning Doggie Howser fansites in Help) and general
scholarliness like passing time in the library in
Conversations With Dead People, and the general theme of
being unsure of her magic.
Xander back to being girlfriendless. Also back to being
Zeppo? Or was Zeppo something only really established in
S3? I suppose both Willow and Xander were equally useful
(or -less) at the start. But still, back to the loser with
no date.
Anya she was back to being a vengeance demon, but now she
is back to being Aud: still clinging to things, despite her
best efforts. I guess this would fit better with the strict
chronological perspective, dammit.
Dawn even though she is no longer ³the² Key, I think she
might still end up being a key, whether
literally/mystically, or figuratively.
Buffy this is a toughie. My guess though is that she
might find herself back again as the ³child². Recently she
has been forced to assume the mantle of adult. But this
season she is right back in high school, albeit in a
different capacity. Plus in Conversations With Dead People,
she is reminded she¹s only 21 still. Personally, I think
the best way to drive the child thing home would be for Mr.
Summers to make an appearance.
Also, I think it would be a prime occasion to bring back Oz,
what a fine example of someone who tried to be something
other than he really was, and failed.
NOW, for the fun part. To tie this in to the Big Bad, this
is my guess. Since we¹re going back to the beginning, who
was the first villain? Of course, the Master. But I think
the actual first villain of Buffy was the Hellmouth itself.
It has remained ever-present throughout the whole series,
either the Big Bad was there because of it, or was
influenced by it. It has been stated countless times that
it makes everything go wonky, the first real crisis of the
show was the Master trying to open it. So, the Hellmouth in
a way is the first Big Bad, the raison d¹etre of Sunnydale.
Willow makes statements in Lessons that she ³saw its teeth²
and ³it¹s going to swallow us all². This is different from
the Hellmouth being ³opened², this seems to attribute the
mouth with sentience, not as merely a tool. So that¹s my
guess for this season. Perhaps it was trying to work its
influence all along, and is now ³tired of the whole
good/evil balance thing², OR maybe it was just passively
attracting evil, and after all this time all these baddies
were not only strengthened by it, but were strengthening it
in return, and now the mouth is ready to make its move.
I had this theory that it was only appearing as people who
died in its area (which works with the strengthening
perspective), but then it imitated Spike, so screw that part
of my theory
Note that this is all a handy way for Dawn to be the Key
once again.
Ok, my jumble is out of steam. Any feedback?
[>
Re: Jumble of thoughts (spoliers to a minor extent from
4.22, 5.12, 7.1-8) -- Alvin, 17:20:41 11/19/02
Tue
Something that I've been kicking around from S5 is where
Glory's minions think they've found the key as Spike. She
tells that Spike can't be because he's a vampire and impure
while the key is pure. Now what if the key became a
vampire? If the key became corrupt, would the boundaries
between universes become corrupt too? And all the universes
bleed together? Wouldn't the balance between good and evil
become useless if everything is mixed together? And
wouldn't this destroy the mortal coil? And wouldn't this be
a big finish?
One of my pet theories about lessons is that the three
zombies are forshadowing Xander, Willow, and Giles in a
fight against Buffy. And in Lessons the zombie that
corresponds to Xander tries to stab Dawn in the chest with a
pencil. She then falls to the ground almost as if she's
playacting being killed. If Dawn became a vamp and the
Scoobies tried to stake her, on whose side would Buffy be?
Her sister as in S5, or as Joyce tells Dawn: She won't
choose you.
[> [>
Re: Dawn and more jumbalaya (stuff from 7.2, 7.4, 7.7,
loads of useless musings) -- Clen,
17:36:45 11/19/02 Tue
does Dawn even have a soul? if she became a vampire, would
she become evil if she has no soul to lose? she might have
Buffy's blood, but did the monks give her a soul? no
beastie has really remarked on it yet (like Anya did with
Spike), so if she has a soul, where from?
furthermore, if the Scoobies can bring people back from the
dead, why no big hunt for a vampire cure?
oh man, if Jonathan's blood flowed into the Hellmouth, could
Jonathan become the avatar for the Big Bad? And when JW
mentioned that Britney Spears will make an appearance this
season, will it be as more than a musical guest? That would
be worse than a recurring role for the kid from Home
Improvement!
Hold me, I'm scared.....
[> [> [>
Re: Dawn and more jumbalaya (stuff from 7.2, 7.4, 7.7,
loads of useless musings) -- Alvin, 03:01:57 11/20/02
Wed
Britney's coming on the show??!! Well, Joyce did say bad
things were coming. I'm assuming Dawn has a soul.
Otherwise, she would have stood out since Doc (and I assume
Glory) could sense it. Would have made her a lot harder to
hide as a human.
[>
Interesting thoughts, Clen -- Rahael, 10:37:03
11/20/02 Wed
[>
Re: Jumble of thoughts (spoliers to a minor extent from
4.22, 5.12, 7.1-8) -- Arethusa, 12:29:49 11/20/02
Wed
Cool. A few more stray thoughts:
What is the Hellmouth, really? Is it a portal? We know
there's a creature in there because the Scoobies fought it
twice, and it grew much bigger in between battles. We also
know it gives off "vibrations" that attracts evil. And I
seem to remember an episode where the Scoobies say everying
is going to be sucked into the Hellmouth. In "The Zeppo,"
the Hellmouth is about to open and Giles goes to the Spirit
Guides:
The Spirit Guides appear in the
form of a bright cloud gathering in front of the mausoleum,
and Giles
speaks to them.
Giles: Noli me renuere, umbra ducens. Sapienta manium super
me
effundatur.
Translation: Do not deny me, Spirit Guide. Let the wisdom
of those who
have passed be showered upon me.
Spirit Guides: Illae res occultae sunt tempoti et locis
obscuris.
Enuntiare illas Chaos super orbem vivum terrarum ferat.
Translation: These secrets belong to time and the dark
regions. To
reveal them would bring Chaos down upon the living
Earth.
Giles: Belua propulsanda est! Invenire vitium suum noster
spes sola
est!
Translation: The Beast must be fought! Our only hope lies
in finding
its weakness!
A strong wind begins to blow.
Spirit Guides: (angrily) Noli petere! Perturba nos non
diutius!
Translation: (angrily) Seek not! Disturb us no longer!
quote by psyche
Giles also says at one point that they all must work
together to defeat the beast. Interestingly, Xander is not
part of the apocalyptic action in this episode, and now
seems out of the main action again. I'm not sure if it's
coincidence or continuity, though.
[> [>
Hellmouth ramble -- Clen, 15:16:27 11/20/02
Wed
yeah, I'm not fully sure either. I have always been under
the impression that it is a portal, and that the Audrey-
esque beastie that emerges merely happened to be wandering
around in that particular hell dimension when it got corked
in it from the other end. so, if the Hellmouth opens, that
thing is first in line. but, on the other hand, dimensional
apertures seem to be openable pretty much anywhere, Dawn
had/has the ability to open tears between all of them, and
so one could argue that the portals are potentially
everywhere, and yet none of them seem to be of such concern
that the Slayer would need to be posted there, and none seem
to have such an enhancing effect on "evil". But is it that
the Hellmouth is a permanent gate? Are we even clear that
it really did close after the Master failed? Maybe we
should change our definition of closed, since it has had
this wacky deus ex machina effect on Sunnydale the whole
time. I think at some point, whether this season or not, it
would behoove ME to really explore the subject of the
Hellmouth, although there is always the fear that BtVS would
need a new anchor for their existence if it became resolved,
though A:tS seems to render that fear moot. Why is that
spot between dimensions so thin? And why so much attraction
to open it? Certainly, other baddies have wanted to go to
other places.
eh, nevermind, too much rambling.
Buffy related learning breakthrough (OT) --
NightRepair, 16:14:48 11/19/02 Tue
I just went to chat but no one was there! I'm really excited
because one of the kids in my class (I teach grade 3 and 4)
gives me a lot of trouble and doesn't do much work. My
students had a writing assessment today and the topic was
"Who said there were no such things as...". He has written
about half a page so far (which is about half a page more
than he usually does) on the topic of "Who said there were
no such things as vampire slayers..." complete with diagrams
of stakes. It's pretty cool(for a ten year old!). He hasn't
finished yet. When it's done I'll post it for you all to
read!!! Sorry, I know this is really off topic, but it's
always so amazing when teachers have a breakthrough with a
difficult student....Thanks.
[>
Sweeeeet !! -- VR, 16:30:37 11/19/02 Tue
[>
Congratulations! -- Vickie, 17:55:27 11/19/02
Tue
sorry I missed you in chat.
[>
Yay!!! Score another one for our Slayer-in-
Training!!! -- LittleBit, 09:45:44 11/20/02 Wed
Song Spike was humming (SPOILER) -- Michael Van Hoek,
17:29:22 11/19/02 Tue
The Theme from the "Friendly Giant". A children's show that
used to be on in Canada.
[>
Re: Song Spike was humming (SPOILER) -- Michael Van
Hoek, 17:45:39 11/19/02 Tue
The lyrics are here:
http://www.kididdles.com/mouseum/f021.html
[>
Canada Freaks Out!! (SPOILER) -- ponygirl,
18:09:19 11/19/02 Tue
I never trusted that Giant! And proportionally speaking how
could a rooster and a giraffe be the same size and interact?
Obviously One Fine Morning is also a traditional English
song, but for several generations of Canadians that tune is
going to conjure up warm fuzzy memories, now forever blood-
stained. I love it.
[> [>
Re: Canada and America Freaks Out!! (SPOILER) --
aliera, 18:44:37 11/19/02 Tue
From:
Medieval Songs
Sue Hutchinson
Willow Bluffs Area Drama Trainer
Ontario Canada
EARLY ONE MORNING (copyright expired)
Early one morning, just as the sun was rising
I spied a fair young maiden in the garden down below
Oh don't deceive me, oh never leave me
How could you use a poor maiden so?"
"Oh gay are the garden, and fresh are the roses"
I heard the fair maid singing in the garden down below
(repeat chorus)
Thus sang the poor young maiden, her sorrows bewailing
Thus sang the poor young maiden in the garden down
below.
(repeat chorus)
Alternatively:
Early one morning, just as the sun was rising
I heard a maid sing in the valley below
"Oh don't deceive me, Oh never leave me,
How could you use, a poor maiden so?"
Remember the vows that you made to me truly
Remember how tenderly you nestled close to me
Gay is the garland, fresh are the roses
I've culled from the garden to bind over thee.
Here I now wander alone as I wonder
Why did you leave me to sigh and complain
I ask of the roses, why should I be forsaken,
Why must I here in sorrow remain?
Through yonder grove, by the spring that is running
There you and I have so merrily played,
Kissing and courting and gently sporting
Oh, my innocent heart you've betrayed
How could you slight so a pretty girl who loves you
A pretty girl who loves you so dearly and warm?
Though love's folly is surely but a fancy,
Still it should prove to me sweeter than your scorn.
Soon you will meet with another pretty maiden
Some pretty maiden, you'll court her for a while;
Thus ever ranging, turning and changing
Always seeking for a girl that is new.
Thus sang the maiden, her sorrows bewailing
Thus sang the poor maid in the valley below
"Oh don't deceive me, Oh never leave me,
How could you use, a poor maiden so?"
This showed up under a page on "Unfaithfulness" quotes also
which is interestingly odd. And OK here's a weird personal
note. On the same page is a song my dad used to sing to
me:
Cockles and Mussels
In Dublin's fair city, where the girls are so pretty
I first set my eyes on sweet Molly Malone
She wheeled her wheel-barrow,
through the broads and the narrow
Crying "Cockles and mussels" Alive, alive oh
Which for some reason I always associated with the plague
and a song about death and betrayal (very Buffyesque)
called..."Hang down your head Tom Dooley...hang down your
head and cry hang down your head Tom Dooley" um never
mind!
OK I'm really not going anywhere with this...I wonder
sometimes if the writers pick these things out and then sit
back and go...THAT will give them something to go crazy over
for next week. Bwahaha....oh how I love this show.
[> [> [>
Re: Canada and America Freaks Out!! (SPOILER) --
shadowkat, 19:52:11 11/19/02 Tue
Thanks for posting this. Ironically enough? I think my
mother used to sing me the English Folksong as a lullaby as
well as the Irish one. How much you want to bet that
William's mother did the same for him?
The hummming rung an immediate bell for me.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Canada and America Freaks Out!! (SPOILER) -- leslie,
09:18:01 11/20/02 Wed
You know, I'm somewhat less disturbed by this song showing
up in BtVS than I am by the thought that Canadians think
it's an appropriate song for a *children's* show???? Please
tell me it was a purely instrumental theme song.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Canada and America Freaks Out!! (SPOILER) --
ponygirl, 09:26:53 11/20/02 Wed
It was all instrumental. I didn't even know the song had
lyrics until last night. The Friendly Giant would play his
theme song on his recorder in his castle, and we children
would rise up and do the bidding of an unknown evil force.
It all seemed perfectly innocent until yesterday.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
LOL! It goes to show you... -- Scroll, 12:02:18
11/20/02 Wed
Don't expose your children to television at a young age, or
at least not without adequate parental supervision. You
never know when some presumably gentle-hearted giant will
begin doing a Pied Piper on your little ones. I should tell
my mom that I've been corrupted. I am a minion to his Giant
Evilness. Grr. Argh.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
We had "Romper Room" -- Arethusa,
12:38:54 11/20/02 Wed
with a kindergarden teacher-type who looked at the
"audience" with a large magnifying glass to see what they
were doing. I think that show must have had a big influence
on John Ashcroft....
[> [> [>
It had a different meaning for me... -- Isabel,
16:49:01 11/21/02 Thu
I had heard the tune before, but the lyrics I knew were
extremely different. A friend of mine, when she was in grad
school and extremely poor, would make mix tapes of filk
songs and other humorous tunes for her friends in lieu of
Christmas and Birthday presents. FYI- Filk songs are
recognizable established folk songs or any simple song that
can be put to a guitar that have the lyrics altered and are
often sung at Science Fiction conventions.
I can't check the lyrics since the tape was eaten last year,
sigh, but what I remembered was:
Early one evening,
Just as the pubs were opening,
I found myself wandring down,
a dark and windy street.
....
The song ends with the pub owner lamenting "We sure get some
funny customers in here."
Oddly enough, I felt the lyrics fit for a vampire. I was
confused by IT saying "How could you use a poor maiden so?"
when I realized that had to be from the original song and I
whapped myself in the head.
[> [> [> [>
Re: It had a different meaning for me... -- aliera,
17:59:16 11/21/02 Thu
I don't think your friend was alone in this...I did a more
thorough search on this last night looking for the source of
the tale (unsucessfully). Amongst other things, it came up
as a sea chanty and the tune was picked up (not the lyrics
although I believe it was colloquially known as the whore's
lament) as a slow march melody by a military group.
Yikes.
The title shows up in a musical about Mary Magdalene (who
has a very interesting history by the way) although I didn't
look to far into this so I don't know if it came from the
folksong. There's also a Dylan Thomas's "Quite Early One
Morning" which I also didn't look at...finding that even I
have my limits drilling down into these things!
One of my favorite things to do when the transcripts come
out is to go back through the lines and highlight the
different references looking for connections. Last week it
led to an speech by Vaclav Havel delivered in Independence
Hall in 1994, 'The Need for transcendence in a Postmodern
World', unrelated I'm sure...but, it was really funny to
read his mention of Gaia and how we "by day work with
statistics" and "in the evenings...frighten ourselves with
thrillers about vampires" and how "we are mysteriously
connected to the entire universe, we are mirrored in it,
just as the entire universe is mirrored in us."
That's one of the intriguing things about the show and the
board for me...all these little memories and connections and
then the new paths to explore. ;-)
[> [>
who knew? rusty ,,,, a demon -- lynx, 00:22:04
11/20/02 Wed
and the big bad - the friendly giant. wow. :)
[> [> [>
Recorder music is inherently evil -- ponygirl now
suspicious of Casey and Finnegan, 06:05:37 11/20/02
Wed
[>
Argh, the Friendly Giant was a plant! -- Scroll,
06:15:27 11/20/02 Wed
He was planted in a kids' TV show to gain our trust and
friendship at a young, tender age, so that when the BBW came
in our adulthood, we would be off guard and easily
exploitable! Damn that Friendly Giant and his rocking chairs
around the fireplace. Damn his wooden recorder and medieval
hosery. Evil, I tell you, evil...
[>
Obviously I have been spared some trauma -- Deb,
11:19:05 11/20/02 Wed
Because I've never heard the song before nor seen the
(toon?). As long as it wasn't Barney's song. YUCK!
[> [>
To see what we've been talking about -- ponygirl,
11:47:51 11/20/02 Wed
You can go here
http://www.cbc4kids.cbc.ca/general/time/history_radio_tv/gia
nt.html
There's some history on the show, a tiny photo, and possibly
the oldest video clip they could find. I'd just like to say
that when *I* watched The Friendly Giant it was definitely
in colour. Still very trippy though.
[> [>
Not a cartoon, think Mr. Roger's Neighbourhood... -
- Scroll, 11:51:45 11/20/02 Wed
...only with a medieval minstral giant in a castle instead
of a 20th century suburban bachelor -- or was Mr. Roger
married? In either case, the Friendly Giant was a
cornerstone of many Canadian childhoods, right along with
Mr. Dress-Up (a much cooler version of Mr. Roger who had the
aformentioned Casey and Finnegan) and Today's Special (that
mannequin was freaky -- long story).
[> [> [>
I'm not Canadian, but I used to watch "Today's
Special"! -- Rob, 10:23:39 11/22/02 Fri
They used to air it in the US on the cable channel,
Nickelodeon. I used to love it when I was a little kid. I
never realized it was a Canadian show!
"Today's Special, Come and join the fun..."
Rob
[> [> [> [>
Filmed in Toronto -- Scroll, 11:01:43 11/22/02
Fri
Actually, I didn't realise it was a Canadian show (you just
don't think about these things when you're 6) until this
thread came up about the Friendly Giant. Yeah, I used to
watch "Today's Special" all the time, but now that I think
back on it, the whole premise of a mannequin coming to life
is really quite disturbing. I marvel that I never had
nightmares about this show! Or perhaps it was an early
indicator that I would one day be enthralled by these
vampire Slayer shows.
[> [> [> [> [>
LOL...It's true... -- Rob, 11:16:18 11/22/02
Fri
Looking back on it, the concept of the show was more than
just a little marginally creepy. I guess we might have been
too young to realize that the idea is creepy! Well, at least
it wasn't a killer, evil mannequin. If I recall correctly,
he had a checkerboard hat, and seemed pretty friendly,
making with the singing and the dancing. Not that that isn't
disturbing, in and of itself! ;o)
Rob
[> [>
I saw it in black and white *blush* -- Wisewoman,
12:04:36 11/20/02 Wed
Originally. I loved Friendly. What a great voice he had. I
always wanted to curl up in the rocking chair by the fire. I
think it had switched to color by the time I quit
watching...but I always loved the theme song.
;o)
[> [> [>
Re: I saw it in black and white *blush* -- matching
mole, 13:05:32 11/20/02 Wed
Very embarassed that I didn't recognize the tune. It was
probably the first television show I ever saw. Don't know
if it was in black and white or colour because we only had a
B&W TV at the time (circa 1965).
[> [> [>
me too (circa '60) -- lynx, 17:44:23 11/20/02
Wed
[> [> [>
I must share my trauma..... -- Rufus, 01:31:03
11/21/02 Thu
As a child I faithfully watched Friendly Giant and when the
bars of Early one Morning started up I expected a comfy
rocking chair, a very tall man, and my friend
Rusty...instead I get blood and dirt.....I should charge
Whedon for all the therapy I'll need to get over
this..
[> [> [>
I'm getting the picture here. Help me figure this
out. -- Deb attempting to find the inner trauma,
11:23:47 11/21/02 Thu
Sorrowfully, or maybe luckily, I have no childhood memories
of this type that can be used against me for traumatic
affect. But my daughter loved Burt and Ernie, and, well,
the problem is there is a vampire on Sesame Street so it's
kinda hard to really feel what you must be feeling. I'm
grasping here though. Uhmmmmmmm. Not Barney. Love to see
him go nuts. OK. Real guy. Whizzo. No I hate clowns, they
are evil. OK! I have watched the same sports broadcaster
on a local channel since I was like 6 years old. Len
Dawson, first QB for the Kansas City Chiefs. I've met him
too within professional context, and I must say that if
Spike all the sudden became a QB or Sportcaster who vamped
people on TV, and if Len Dawson looked like the BB, I'd be
very, very upset.....or I'd be laughing my head off. Oh! I
feel like I've missed out on something here! I didn't get a
big emotional button pushed! But now I realize that my
childhood sucked because I didn't have anyone to bond with
on TV who made me feel safe and comfortable! I grew up
watching the 3:00 horror movie everyday, and the scariest
moment of my childhood, on TV, was when the coffin raised in
the opening scene of "The Screaming Skull." Or when Boris
Karlof's head was stuck on a fly's body and he was caught in
the spider's web with the spider bearing down at 2 o'clock!
Oh my God! I was raised as a child of the night! I also
thought I was the oldest person on this board, but it seems
not!
[> [> [> [>
Re: I'm getting the picture here. Help me figure this
out. -- lynx, 18:33:00 11/21/02 Thu
Friendly is a canadian icon, he was on the air for at least
20 years and his suit and castle are lovingly preserved
behind glass somewhere at the cbc. all children loved him -
probly as much as santa.
and i always wanted the rocker too. :)
[> [> [> [> [>
Yes, Canada loved The Friendly Giant info from the CBC
inside -- Rufus, 01:22:41 11/22/02 Fri
CBC
1958 - 1985
THE FRIENDLY GIANT
"Look up... look waayyy up."
For generations of Canadian children, this familiar line
helped start one of Canada¹s most beloved children
programmes.
³The Friendly Giant² began in 1953 as a radio programme in
the American state of Wisconsin. Robert Homme (pronounced
Hummy) was the show's creator, writer and star.
In 1958, Homme moved the show to the CBC in Canada. The
programme was a big part of CBC Television for more than 25
years. ³The Friendly Giant² introduced thousands of Canadian
children to books and music two things Bob Homme loved
dearly.
For fifteen minutes a day, Friendly and his faithful puppet
sidekicks, Rusty the Rooster and Jerome the Giraffe
entertained decades of young Canadians through story and
song.
From 1958 until 1985, Homme wrote and starred in more than
3,000 episodes of ³The Friendly Giant.²
In 1998, Bob Homme was invested as a Member of the Order of
Canada. Governor-General Romeo LeBlanc travelled to Bob's
home town of Grafton, Ontario, to present him with the Order
in person.
Fast Fact:
Photographs of Homme not playing the giant are rare, as he
did not want to ruin his giant-like illusion for young fans.
Cast:
Homme, Jerome the Giraffe and Rusty the Rooster (operated by
Rod Coneybeare), and Angie and Fiddle (created and operated
by John & Linda Keogh).
------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
Bob Homme died Tuesday, May 3, 2000 after a long fight with
cancer. He was 81.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Some more "Insane Trollop Logic" and
icons....... -- Rufus, 04:07:17 11/22/02 Fri
My feeling is why did the writers (those bastards ) pick
on The Friendly Giant when they could as easily gone after
Captain Kangaroo, or that Bloody Purple thingy Barney.....I
should submit a protest....;)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Some more "Insane Trollop Logic" and
icons....... -- Deb, 10:00:06 11/22/02 Fri
See, there is a whole dimension to this story that I am
missing out on. I think I'm not getting the full quotion of
"horror" that everyone else is experiencing.
[>
Re: Song Spike was humming - A question (SPOILER for
7.8) -- Nightingale, 16:12:01 11/20/02 Wed
A friend pointed out to me that the vampire who approached
Spike at the bronze also echoed words from this song. She
thought she heard the vamp say "how could you use a poor
maiden so?"
I haven't double checked on that because I don't have the
episode on tape. Did anyone else catch this?
And if so, how would she know that song? Was Spike singing
when he was talking to her (before he sired her) or is she
somehow connected to the BBW too?
Thanks for your input!
- NG
[> [>
Re: Song Spike was humming - A question (SPOILER for
7.8) -- Wisewoman, 19:22:08 11/20/02 Wed
I'm not sure whether the female vamp echoed the lyrics or
not, but it's possible that Early One Morning is just
assumed to be part of general cultural literacy. Not because
of the Canadian/Friendly Giant connection but because it's a
tune that shows up frequently in films, etc.
If Joss chose it himself, it may be a reflection of all the
years he spent being schooled in Britain. It's probably much
more readily recognizable there.
;o)
[> [> [>
Thanks, WW. I rechecked and... -- Nightingale (who
found a copy of the episode), 17:06:16 11/21/02 Thu
...the vamp didn't say it. It turns out it was 'Mighty
Morphin' Buffy' who said it to Spike as he left the alley.
Thanks for responding, though.
-NG
Rules Messages from Evil vs Messages from Good (Spoilers
for 7.7/7.8, AtS 4--aww, the new ep) -- Kenny, 19:01:46
11/19/02 Tue
First, I've been lurking this board for a couple of months
now, and I have to say that I love the conversations I've
seen here. This is one of the most polite, thought-
provoking areas of cyberspace I've encountered (Usenet--
shudder).
Now, the point of the message. We know that Willow got a
message from the Big Bad. And we've all assumed it was just
from the Big Bad. We (and Dawn) are left to wonder about the
veracity of her visitors. And Buffy's could be seen as a
coincidence or a message from the Big Bad. Tons of
ambiguity going on here.
But what if we don't presume that Evil!Cassie was lying
about Tara trying to communicate with Willow. Maybe she
really was trying, but the Big Bad intercepted (or tricked
Tara into thinking it would really act as an intermediary).
That could mean Joyce was real too. And the interesting
thing...what if Holden was an unwitting messenger for the
good side? Morphy didn't seem happy that Buffy was getting
involved as early as she was.
Evil is stepping up its attack. What if Good is doing the
same thing? Buffy's usually warned through prophecies or
dreams, but things are getting out of hand.
I keep thinking about Neil Gaiman's Sandman. We had all of
these incredibly powerful beings, who on the surface could
do anything they wanted. But they were bound by rules, by
contracts. It seemed Morpheus had the power to do anything
he wanted, but he couldn't do anything he wanted. As Buffy
proceeds this season, I wonder if the same thing applies to
the "powerful beings" in this mythology?
Even on Angel, we have "The Beast". A Big, Big Bad (so,
which Big Bad is, uhm, badder?) Yet he still sets up his
little highriser barbeque. Really, does he have to? I
mean, if he's all that, shouldn't he just be able to start
everything up? Or was he asking an even higher being to
start things up? And if Buffy's evil really is the First
Evil (that everything else answers to), why is it letting
that happen if it's not part of FE's plan (and no, while
I'll be elated if the stories cross, I don't think it's
gonna happen). Or is that part of the deal with the forces
for Good? And if Evil cheats, is there a force greater than
Good and Evil to make sure they play by the rules?
Sandman's analogy to the Fates?
OK, this really grew beyond what I intended. I've opened up
too many questions for myself, and I have to study for a
physics test tomorrow. So, to reiterate the thesis of this
message...are the powers for good stepping up to match those
of evil? I'd hope so. Otherwise it reminds me of an SNL
skit where the (soon-to-be) Americans and the British were
drawing for rules in the Revolutionary War. The British had
to wear red coats and march in lines. The revolutionaries
could wear whatever they want and got to hide behind trees.
Great skit. OK. I'm going to study now.
[>
Welcome to the board!! -- Rahael, 09:43:05
11/20/02 Wed
Much food for thought
[>
I totally agree -- Scroll, 10:52:13 11/20/02
Wed
I think we're definitely seeing a banding together of the
good guys, and possibly a little help from the PTB in
fighting the BBW. Clearly lines are being drawn and sides
being picked. Which side will Spike fall down on? Willow?
Angel? Lilah?
Both fans here and "Sleepers" speculated that Holden was a
manifestation/being used by the BBW to undermine Buffy's
trust in Spike, but I don't see that. In fact, I think
Holden actually helped Buffy. His tip about Spike helped
Buffy to stop Spike from killing more people, which also led
to Buffy realising that the BBW was manipulating Spike. The
Evil!Spike manifestation said that Buffy was out of order;
he wasn't ready for her yet. So Holden had actually done the
good guys a favour. Maybe he'd been planted and/or nudged
into place by the PTB to help Buffy out.
And I'm still not sure if Joyce was the BBW or if it was
really her, trying to help Dawn.
BTW, welcome to the board!
I have a question... (**SPOILER for 7.8**) --
Wisewoman, 19:12:17 11/19/02 Tue
Why didn't she stake him?
I love Spike. He's my favorite character. I'm a B/S
'shipper. However...
I've been watching this show for over six years. I don't
understand why Buffy didn't stake him tonight. Whatever the
reason, he's killing human beings again. He admitted it. In
Buffy's mind that should equal a dust sentence. Oh, we all
know it's not his fault and there are extenuating
circumstances, but the point is, Buffy had to
hesitate in order to find out about them.
Since when does the Slayer hesitate? Her whole justification
on the Spike thing so far has been that he's chipped,
harmless, not fair to kill him. That just went out the
window.
Buffy made a decision not to stake Spike based on what he
told her, and an icky feeling she had that they weren't
alone in the basement. Fine.
But what made her hesitate in the first place?
:o?
[>
Re: I have a question... (**SPOILER for 7.8**) --
meritaten, 19:27:41 11/19/02 Tue
How many episodes did it take her before she was ready to
kill Angel?
She may not love Spike, but she does have feelings for him.
She has hesitated before to kill "people" that she is close
to. Add that to the fact that something has been playing
with everyone's mind. Plus, as she told the gang, Spike is
her best source of info regarding the BBW.
[>
I have an answer -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:28:05
11/19/02 Tue
Buffy has hesitated before. In her fight with Spike, she
was still a little shocked, which has happened before in her
fights with Anya or Angelus. After she'd dusted the other
vamps, you must remember that not only had Spike refrained
from killing her when he had the perfect opportunity, but
was bearing his chest for her to kill him. She was already
starting to suspect something wasn't right with him at that
point, and it's very difficult for her to kill a monster
that doesn't fight back.
[>
another answer -- Clen, 19:37:36 11/19/02
Tue
also, maybe Buffy was worried about the "what if" and
decided to take the other path this time. remember that in
Selfless she reminded Xander she hasn't forgotten that
Xander (and Willow) wanted her to go get him (Angel) but he
got his soul back right before it, so if she would change
one thing in her life, that one would be right up there.
She seemed a little bitter, so maybe, just maybe, she felt
Xander misled her. Soon after that, she learns that Spike
may be killing, and maybe, just maybe, the BB may be
misleading her. So, she hesitated. Don't want to be fooled
into losing love again. (especially so soon after opening up
about her feelings for him in CwDP)
[>
Re: I have a question... (**SPOILER for 7.8**) --
ponygirl, 19:42:14 11/19/02 Tue
Because she LOOOOVES him. ;)
No just kidding. Well maybe not... ah who knows? But
Buffy was being told repeatedly throughout the episode that
things might not be what they seemed. Spike's alibi in the
form of the chip is something Buffy has been buying for
years, even before any sort of an emotional attachment.
Initially she only had Holden's word. I'd like to think
that Buffy, especially after recent events with Anya, and
other s7 instances where her judgement has been
questionable, would hesitate.
What I do find interesting is her first words after Willow
asks what she would do if Spike's killing, are "I can't--
"
[> [>
Also... (7.8 spoilers) -- Rob, 20:31:58 11/19/02
Tue
What Buffy said to the SG later...that she thinks that
whatever's been messing with them is doing the same to
Spike, and she wants to know more about what's going on.
There's obviously some reason Spike is important to the BBW,
and she wants to know what it is. She stakes him, she'll
lose a valuable source of information, besides her complex
emotional relationship with him.
Rob
[> [> [>
Yes, Rob. And... (7.8 spoilers) -- Vickie,
08:11:47 11/20/02 Wed
Buffy does know that something's been messing with them. She
doesn't know (absolutely) whether Spike did kill these
people (likely) or has been manipulated into thinking so
(barely possible).
More important, when Buffy's pinned by a few vamps and Spike
can move in for the kill, he doesn't. He backs away and
hides in the corner. That alone would make her want answers
before dusting him.
[> [>
A part of growing up (Spoilers Season 6 and 7.8) --
Deb, 07:11:09 11/20/02 Wed
If this whole show is about adolescense and growing up,
Buffy might just be using her own judgement now and not
giving in to peer pressure, which was a HUGE concern for her
last season. 'What would they think if they found out I was
allowing Spike to do those things to me?!' She's the/A
Slayer. If anyone should have good instincts regarding the
situation, it would be her and . . . Spike.
In addition, she just found out that others were mislead by
the BB, so of all the people the BB would want to use, and
get rid of if IT cannot use this person, it would be
Spike.
Finally, in the Buffy confronting William/Spike scene (the
big kick out of bed), Buffy left the room with a lethal
sounding warning to him; that she was looking for evidence
that he was killing again. It left me with the impression
she would dust him if she found the evidence. The BB
thought so also, I believe, and used it against Spike, or
tried to. Buffy already knows the BB is out lying to
people, so when William/Spike tells her that he knows she
will dust him because He (the BB) told him so and HE has
been there all along, singing, etc. it was enough for her to
believe that he was being manipulated too. Buffy also saw
him is his "hypnotized" state and commented on the
difference in him. Buffy could have fought off the vamps
that were holding her for Spike, but she didn't even try.
She waited to see if William/Spike would come to himself, so
to speak. He passed her test. She kills the sired and the
BB tells Will/Spike that's he's next. Loved the acting in
this scene too.
There are many things I would like to say about last night's
ep, but I have several writing deadlines looming over me, so
I'll just give a general overstatement now. (and probably
sneak back the rest of the day.)
I thought the show last night was fabulous. As my daughter
said at the 3/4 hour, "There's still 15 minutes left. I
can't believe they've done so much in one show." I'm ready
to suspend my theorizing about what is really happening just
to wait to see what does happen (this might be due to those
deadlines too.)
I thought JM's acting was superb. Think about it. He was
playing three parts last night: William, Pavlov's Spike, and
the BB. I loved the confrontation scene between Buffy
(thank God he was wearing pants then) and William/Spike.
Even though the topic of conversation was not "typical" it
felt real, and showed a great deal of the William
influence.
Anya's (the dear story driver) scene with William (her
words) was funny and it was nice that he lied to her about
her hair.
How did William/Spike get Buffy's cell number?
Liked the "joke" about the Academy Award goes to . . .
Comment on lack of Emmies or Emmys?
Xander was still saying the same stuff, but not with as much
conviction. Everyone is pretty much trusting Buffy, except
doubtfull Dawn. (She's doing the very same thing she
accused Buffy of doing last season. Not telling everythng. I
can't wait to see how the house looks next week, esp. after
the trailer.)
Liked Buffy's comment to the bouncer about who actually
looks like whom. If you saw it, you know whom.
Finally, I don't know if it was the full moon, or what, but
JM was sizzling hot last night. Later in the evening I'm
sitting with four other females, and all has been quiet for
at least 30 minutes, grading and studying. One friend
breaks the silence: "Did anyone notice anything about
Spike/William tonight other than me?" Whole group "Ohhhh
yeah..." Friend "So I'm not the only one who felt the heat
and got a little steamed?" "Ohhhh no. You were definitely
not alone." Silence, but everyone smiling as they work
now.
It's all about presence in all of its many forms.
[>
My guess is ... (**SPOILER for 7.8**) -- Robert,
20:36:46 11/19/02 Tue
Buffy doesn't want to stake Spike because of his soul. Buffy
has always made very clear distinctions between the souled
and unsouled.
[>
Re: I have a question... (**SPOILER for 7.8**) --
Kenny,
20:44:03 11/19/02 Tue
I think having a soul is enough. The popular term on AtS
and around here is "vampire with a soul." But it's just as
easy to think (for me anyway) human trapped in a vampire's
body. Six of one, ya know. And where humans are concerned,
Buffy's going to show reasonable doubt. Heck, while Xander
wanted to make sure that her feelings weren't cloudinng her
judgment, even he seemed to agree that they should find out
what's happening before staking him. A soul can save your
butt in the Buffyverse.
[>
Me Me Me......my hand is up......ask me.....<g>
spoilers for Sleeper -- Rufus, 21:12:38 11/19/02
Tue
First off, Buffy knows Spike and has known him to be helpful
even without a soul. Add in the sexual relationship and what
appears to be her growing feelings for Spike, she just can't
do it.
As for Buffy as the Slayer.....if I were her I wouldn't kill
him either...the thing, it needed Spike but in getting close
to Spike there just may be a grain of information in Spikes
mind that could come in handy at a later date. A line from
the the "other" Spike.....
Other Spike: THERE'S AN ORDER. SLAYER'S NOT IN
ORDER. BUT IT CAN'T HURT TO PLAY. GET YOUR CLAWS IN THE
MOUSE, YOU KNOW?
Spike could be a wealth of information as he seems to be
remembering more and more what happened to him....plus he is
strong enough to be a useful fighter. I just wonder what
they will do with the Manchurian Candidate facet of
Spike....can they deprogram him?
[>
I have a question... for you, dub... -- Marie,
01:41:45 11/20/02 Wed
I've missed so much, it's going to take me forever to troll
the archives, and read the episode summaries, so for the
love of mike, please tell me - where's
Cleeeemmmm!!!
It seems from these posts that Spike needs his friend, and
Clem wouldn't just leave him suffering all alone, would
he?
(That sentence to be read in plaintive-voice!)
Marie
and who is Mike, anyway?
[> [>
Y'got me there, Marie... -- dub ;o), 10:57:44
11/20/02 Wed
I agree, we're woefully Clem-challenged, but our boy is
missing in action, and there's no word AFAIK on his next
appearance. Not that I have a direct line or anything, but I
have been known to receive e-mail directly from James
C.Leary himself, and there's nothing on the horizon that
he's been able to tell me. Of course, he may be sworn to
secrecy...
My secret wish is for a Clem-centric Christmas episode!
;o)
[>
The specific moment of hesitation -- Wisewoman,
11:12:05 11/20/02 Wed
I re-watched last night to see if my initial perception was
off. The exact moment where I said, "Oh, c'mon, she's gotta
stake him!" occured in the basement (of course)--Spike had
gone vamp face, there were just the two of them at that
point, no new sires, and then he'd cut her with a
piece of broken glass, but she'd bounced back, had him down
and was straddling him. That's when she hesitated.
Instead of dusting him, she tried to talk to him.
I guess it was the act of cutting her that did it for me.
Sure he only nicked her arm, but it could just as easily
have been her throat. At that point he became too dangerous
to allow him to live, IMO.
;o)
[> [>
However-- -- HonorH, 12:30:04 11/20/02 Wed
She also saw, at that point, that something was definitely
"off" about him. He'd been talking to her, obviously
confused and tormented, and then, like a switch, he was
someone else. Something was wrong, and she was trying to
get through to him.
Also, yes, he did cut her, but Buffy's had worse injuries.
She knew she could take him if it came to that. That's the
whole reason she didn't stake him the second he came back to
town.
First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy theory
for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- ponygirl, 19:20:19
11/19/02 Tue
Well, I have to say I wasn't crazy about this episode. Oh
sure STUFF happened, lots of stuff, but I'm used to a little
more subtlety this season. Coming after the elegance of
CwDP there were a lot of moments that felt... awkward, but
since this really felt like the first half of a two-parter
rather than a complete show I'm going to hold off on the
negativity. There were however a number of things that
struck me:
Xander's decor. Skulls, red lights? When did Casa Xander go
all voodoo lounge? Since I doubt Xander is letting Spike
help with the decorating, I've got to wonder what Xander's
choices are saying about him. And that's a nice size closet
he's got Spike in! I'd have called it a study, or in the
case of my apartment, the living room.
Xander also uses Holden Webster's nickname Webs, which I
hadn't really picked up on last week. Does this add to the
number of spider references we've seen this season? They're
starting to outweigh the hearts. And were there any heart
references in this episode?
As with last week, we see Spike on the prowl with a woman,
but we don't hear him speak. This was a lot more noticeable
this episode since the girl from the lineup was talking to
him. Is Spike's status as a speaker of truths to the
audience being protected? Are we to have some confidence in
what he says?
634 Hoffman Terrace. I don't do numerology, but I wonder if
the Hoffman is a reference to ETA Hoffman, he wrote a lot
about doppelgangers.
Morphy's words in the basement were pretty notable.
"Slayer's not in order"-- could be Spike moving the plan
ahead of schedule, but could it also refer to the
possibility (which I'd say is pretty definite) that the
girls we've seen killed in Istanbul, Germany, and London are
Slayers-to-be. Are the killers working their way backward
to Buffy? Is she still in the order? Also Morphy's urging
to Spike was to "taste her, weaken her" not to kill her.
Does Morphy want Buffy alive?
Spike's reaction to tasting Buffy's blood. The effect was
similiar to Buffy's reaction to tasting Dracula's, it
brought back his memories, snapped him out of the thrall.
He's had Slayer blood before, so why such a strong reaction?
Could be his love for Buffy, but maybe there's something
more.
I really wish I'd seen Buffy's face when she said she'd help
Spike, but Morphy's reaction was interesting too.
None of the Scoobies seemed too enthused about helping
Spike. I wonder if they think Buffy's judgement is being
affected by possible feelings for him. And Xander and Anya
have got to be thinking about Buffy's seeming eagerness to
go after Anyanka vs. "getting close to Spike". Completely
differenct situations I'd say, but I think the sword in
Anya's chest might make her and Xander a little less willing
to see Buffy's perspective. Willow though, I'd expect to be
a bit more sympathetic, but then as Buffy said they weren't
there in the basement, they didn't see him.
More basements, more stairs, and Spike moving into Buffy's
house! House metaphors are always favourites of mine, since
Rowan's essays on exactly that is what first got me lurking
on the board.
And now for what has led to my Whacked Out Theory of the
Week. In all the scenes of Spike killing, we see him
feeding, but no siring. With the girl from the line at
least he actually flees the scene. Is he actually siring
these vamps? Could the identity of this particular Morphy,
but NOT the Big Bad Whatever, actually be Drusilla?
Drusilla in league with the BBW and using her powers to
cloud minds, and be in people's heads, to control Spike.
Dru's appearance as the sole not actually dead (well
technically) baddie in the parade of villains in Lessons,
her line about singing in that episode, the use of the song
in this episode as a trigger -- childhood memories aside the
lyrics of the song are about betraying a lost love -- along
with the not entirely coherent lines Morphy spoke and It's
reaction to Buffy's offer to help Spike are all making me go
hmmm in a big way.
Sorry for the incoherence. Looking forward to reading
everyone's thoughts And to next week!
[>
Re: First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy
theory for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- Clen,
19:27:59 11/19/02 Tue
Furthermore, if the BB wanted Spike to taste Buffy, and
tasting her brought his memories back, did the BB know that
would happen? Maybe BB was hoping Spike would lose control
and drink too much, but if the slightest lick snapped him
out of it, he could also have snapped out of it like Angel
did when recovering from the poison.
[>
Re: First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy
theory for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- Juliet,
19:37:56 11/19/02 Tue
Maybe I'm just dense, but the Drusilla thing seems to have
come out of left field.
[> [>
Re: First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy
theory for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- Dariel,
19:47:29 11/19/02 Tue
Maybe I'm just dense, but the Drusilla thing seems to
have come out of left field.
Except for that song, which totally reminds me of Drusilla.
As soon as I heard Spike humming it (while digging), I
thought of Dru. Part of the lyric is "How could you use a
poor maiden so?," or some such, a line that evil, Morphy
Spike actually says in the episode. It's just the kind of
ironic thing that Dru would sing (not being anything like a
"poor maiden" herself!)
[> [>
Well I said it was a *crazy* theory ;) -- ponygirl,
19:48:40 11/19/02 Tue
[> [> [>
Not crazy at all. "We'll always be together...
singing our little songs..." -- OnM, 20:37:58
11/19/02 Tue
As you probably know, I had thought about the Master being
the one in league with the BB, going after Spike, but after
several folks pointed out that I had forgotten about
Drusilla, I did amend my theory to suggest she could also be
the one.
I'd say this ep provides even more evidence in that
particular direction.
Hang in there, ponygirl-- I'm with ya on this one!
[> [> [> [>
That would make sense...(7.8 spoilers, Crush
spoilers) -- Rob, 21:46:16 11/19/02 Tue
...and would tie in to how she tried to get Spike to drink
in "Crush." I really am very intrigued by your theory that
the Big Bad actually is working with villains from the past.
I can't wait to see how the year pans out. The winter break
is going to be excrutiating.
Rob
[>
Re: First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy
theory for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- Kenny,
19:46:06 11/19/02 Tue
Two things I noted that your message reminded me of.
First, I was actually impressed with Xander this episode.
Until there was proof of Spike killing, he was calm about
it. He wasn't all gung-ho "Let's string Spike up." For
once, his admonition for Buffy to be objective didn't seem a
cover for his equally-polarized feelings. In fact, I almost
got the feeling that he didn't want Spike to be guilty, but
they still had to look at the possibility of it.
Secondly, I think Spike really did the siring. When he
started remembering, it showed from bite to bury. I don't
see any reason anyone else would have to step in for the
actual siring process.
And there was even a clip of him biting a guy! So much for
his posturing.
[> [>
Xander's "objectivity" (Spoilers for 7.8)
-- Sophist, 08:35:59 11/20/02 Wed
I was actually impressed with Xander this episode. Until
there was proof of Spike killing, he was calm about it. He
wasn't all gung-ho "Let's string Spike up." For once, his
admonition for Buffy to be objective didn't seem a cover for
his equally-polarized feelings.
I dunno. Xander's lines last night sounded nearly identical
to what he said in Angel:
Xander: Alright, uh... (sits also) ...you have a
problem, and it's not a small one. Let's take a breath and
look at this calmly and objectively. Angel's a vampire.
You're a Slayer. I think it's obvious what you have to do.
(grins)
I do agree that Spike did the siring. I wasn't sure last
week, but it seems clear now.
[> [> [>
Will everybody please give Xander a break here?
(spoilers 7.8) -- cjl, 09:00:39 11/20/02 Wed
Was he exactly the most supportive guy in the world
regarding Spike? No. He's hated him for years, and the
supportive thing ain't going to happen overnight. Was he
leaping at Spike with a sharpened stake, scraming at Buffy
that "if you're not gonna do it..."? No.
We're talking about Xander Harris, and I thought he was
incredibly level-headed about the whole situation. When the
rumors of Spike and Holden first came up, he went right
along with Buffy that they needed more evidence before
condemning Spike. Heck, he even felt secure enough (or at
least unconvinced of the worst) to leave Anya in the same
house as Spike. S6 Xander wouldn't have done that in a
million years...
And when the definitive proof came that Spike was indeed
killing and siring, I think he was just as confused as the
rest of the gang. There's a lot of "what the hell do we do
now?" around the Summers house, and I don't think Xander is
going to put forward "stake the vampire" the way he would
have in the past. He realizes: a) Spike has a soul; b)
they need information about the BBW from Spike; and c) for
whatever inexplicable reason, Buffy cares about Spike.
Xander WILL ask Buffy if she's sure her feelings aren't
clouding her judgment, but given what they just went through
with Anya, he probably won't press further than that.
I don't want another huge dramatic confrontation between
Xander and Buffy. But it would be nice to see one scene
next week: Spike, chained up, interrogated by Buffy about
his connection to the BBW, pouring out his guilt and
heartbreak over the whole godawful mess. Buffy, forced by
the situation to be the taskmaster, even though she doesn't
want to be; and Xander, watching from a respectful distance,
realizing the complexity of the creature sitting in front of
him, and the complexity of the relationship between the
woman and that creature. He'd then look over to Anya, who
would meet his gaze. They'd both look back to Buffy and
Spike. No words would be said. None would be needed.
[> [> [> [>
The problem with having a reputation -- Sophist,
10:07:30 11/20/02 Wed
is that sometimes it's deserved. In Xander's case, his
character has consistently hated vampires since at least
1.2. He's never wavered in that. Given that, and his
previous reaction to Angel, it's a little hard to accept his
reasonable sounding words at face value.
The passage I quoted from Angel was clearly insincere
at one level. I don't know yet whether he was sincere or not
last night. But I think reserving a little doubt is wise
given his history; we'd do the same about Willow's
witchcraft, Dawn's hysterics, or Anya's vengeance. I'm not
saying Xander's guilty, just that, on this subject, he's on
probabtion.
[> [> [> [> [>
"Mature, level-headed, compassionate--ok, what
have you done with the REAL Xander Harris?" -- cjl,
10:46:55 11/20/02 Wed
After seeing what life was like at the other end of the
telescope in "Selfless," Xander seems to have learned that a
cry of "kill the monster!" isn't necessarily the best
response to an emotionally stressful, morally ambiguous
situation like "WTF are we going to do with Spike."
Of course, he could revert to form in Never Leave Me, and
once again sing the executioner's song when it comes to
Spike--but if he even moves an inch in that direction, Anya
will clobber him with a vase. And I think he knows
that.
There's another possibility (as indicated in the message
subject): his calm and mature attitude toward Spike could
indicate that Morphy has already sucked his brains out--and
Xander is the Sleeper of the title. But Joss wouldn't be
that perverse, would he?
Aw, who am I kidding...
[> [> [> [> [> [>
On sleepers/spec/7.8 -- alcibiades, 11:15:19
11/20/02 Wed
Well literally there were 3 sleepers in the episode: Xander,
being woken up from sleep in his first scene, Spike who was
the one we saw asleep, but that makes sense since this whole
episode was about how he was a "sleeper", and Dawn, who
Willow tells us is asleep.
I think that leaves room for spec about what will happen
later on to Dawn and Xander - will they be effected as
sleepers by morphy too?
Dawn was also left with a vampirish bloody mouth last week.
And there have been a lot of hints about how dangerous and
scary she is.
And Xander of course has been doing altogether too well. No
one does that well in the Jossverse without a fall. Not to
mention all the skulls and weird red lighting and other
morbid objets decorating his apartment.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
there are two Xanders -- Clen, 15:44:51 11/20/02
Wed
lest we forget there are two Xanders, and they are BOTH the
real Xander. there is the girlfriendless loser who does
everything wrong, and mr. assertive. mr. assertive was not
there at the start, but his rumblings manifested themselves
-- I'm jealous, Angel die; hey Cordelia let's date; how dare
I get dumped, time for a love spell.
But at the very start, oh yes, brave, but he was not able to
kill his buddy, he got dusted by accident. So...if Xander
is going back to how he was in the beginning (as is my half-
ass theory) he wouldn't have been able to reach for the
trigger with Spike because he's "going back to the
beginning" just like he got bowled over in the brief debate
over saving Anya in Selfless, mr. assertive has begun to
submerge. If this is so, maybe we will begin to see his
employment situation deteriorate.
I also believe that Xander's ancestor was Pike. Not
literally, don't be silly, but the movie was a flip --
damselboy in distress, female hero. When the time came for
the tv show, the boy damsel popped up, but he got tinkered
with into becoming a friend, with a female counterpart --
Willow. But still, at least Willow could do the computer,
but Xander was still the Pike, jumping in and losing,
occasionally in distress. Then they began to wonder, hey,
how could Xander evolve past Pike status? Let's pair him up
with the hottest girl in school, and seal off the romantic
thread in the air with Buffy left over from Pike. Now,
let's explore his loserness, etc.
But if we go back to the beginnig, Xander will be back to
being damselboy, and wouldn't assert himself on stopping
Spike permanently, rather go along with the consensus.
Hey, this makes me wonder, but I'll put it in another
thread.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: The problem with having a reputation -- Kenny, 11:42:39
11/20/02 Wed
But he's already shown a different attitude with Spike. For
starters, I doubt he would have ever let Angel move in with
him. He wasn't keen on the idea (and let's face it, who, in
their right mind, would be?), but he went along with it.
Plus, Xander was always up front with his feelings towards
Angel. He wears his heart on his sleeve, which is one of
the things I admire about him. The one time he really
didn't was his insecurities with Anya, and he sees where
that got him.
And after the trip Buffy tried to lay on him in "Selfless",
he could have seen this as the perfect opportunity for a
little vindication, but there was no trace of that. The
best way I can describe his conversation with Buffy about
Spike's possible murders is "stern, yet gentle." With
Angel, he always threw his disdain for the Buffy/Angel
romance in Buffy's face. Here, all he did was make sure
Buffy was asking herself the questions she needed to ask
herself; I didn't get any sense of judgment from him. And I
give him props for making sure he asked it; if I were in his
shoes after "Selfless" I'm not sure I'd have the guts to,
but it needed doing, and he did it. Given his history, all
I can do is see how much he's changed.
[> [> [> [> [>
That quote came. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:58:53
11/20/02 Wed
. . . before any of the Scooby Gang knew that Angel was a
vampire with a soul. Before that point, they didn't even
know that such a thing could exist. After Xander found out
about Angel's unique situation, he wasn't all "kill Angel"
though he still hated the guy with a firey passion.
[>
Re: First thoughts, numerous questions and one crazy
theory for Sleeper (spoilers 7.8, duh) -- bluestar,
19:58:34 11/19/02 Tue
Dru a definte possibility as helping the BB. also a very
scary thought she has allways been around the vampire spike
before they left sunnydale the first time. she knows all his
weaknesses also remember her comment about how electricty
lies if any one could over ride his brain it would be him.
her hesitation could also come from the fact he CALLED her
he did not have to do this and it is out of sorts if he had
ment to hurt her. also the speech in Xanders closet he
madesome very good points. and he did the jeckle hyde i've
been hypnotized or somting all intelect seemed to leave when
the BB spike impersonater started singing that song.
spike is impulsive and impatint but why make his life
intentionally ninty times harded?
now all they have to do is find a counter to that song that
doesn't involve Buffy blood.
and these cliffies need to stop now but we can be
realitively certain that htese are slayers in waiting that
keep getting killed and what has begun?
[>
..."in the dark, singing our little
songs..."(spoilers for 7.8) -- Dead Soul,
01:49:45 11/20/02 Wed
As soon as I first heard Spike humming as he dug the grave
for the blonde girl, I flashed back on Drusilla in Lessons
telling him he still belonged in the dark with her, singing
their little songs. I wonder if, drat, brainfart on the
name of it, that song was one she sang?
Dead (and soon, I swear it, soon to swear off
parenthesizing)Soul
[> [>
And, double drat, really need to read all the previous
posts in a thread before replying -- Dead (but blaming
the sleepiness) Soul, 01:54:45 11/20/02 Wed
[> [>
Don't (ever) change, Dead Soul! -- ponygirl (always
liking the parenthesizing), 06:01:42 11/20/02 Wed
[>
questions on your thoughts (spoilers for eps aired so
far) -- anom, 22:33:05 11/20/02 Wed
1. "That's a closet??"--my 1st reaction to seeing Spike's
room.
2. Is "Webs" related to spiders...or to the web of deceit
the morpher is weaving? The spiders in Selfless didn't look
like the web-spinning kind.
3. London? I remember Istanbul & Berlin, but when did we see
a possible proto-Slayer killed in London? The only London
scene I can think of was the one at the end of Sleeper,
w/Giles (which I don't want to think about!), & I'm not sure
that was London. But I did wonder if the hooded figure w/the
ax was related to the ones who offed the women in the 1st 2
eps.
[> [>
Re: questions on your thoughts (spoilers for eps aired
so far) -- ponygirl, 06:36:45 11/21/02 Thu
Re: #3 The first scene in Sleeper after the teaser was an
exterior shot of a London street complete with a title that
said London, England (Joss' vacation video?), we then see
Giles' friend-- was his name Robson?-- enter the apartment,
find a young woman on the floor dead, and get knifed
himself. I gotta think she was another Slayer-wannabe.
As for the spiders, I'm starting to make a tally of
references: we've had the spider in Selfless, the kid who
got skinned in STSP was spraypainting "Spider" on the wall
when he got killed, and now we have Holden "Webs" Webster.
I'd also make a stretch and say Buffy swinging in to save
Nancy in BY was kind of a Spiderman move. I'd say the
Scoobies seem to be caught in some sort of web. The thing
about spiderwebs too is when something happens on one part
of the web it's felt throughout -- all connected.
[> [>
You must've missed the beginning (Sleeper spoilers)
-- Scroll, 06:54:01 11/21/02 Thu
After the teaser and credits, the first act began in London,
England. Robson, the Watcher guy, rushes home to find his
SIT already dead on the living room floor. Two robed guys
were waiting for him, and attack. Robson has a few moves,
tries to get a hold of a sword, but is stabbed in the back.
From the few minutes you saw at the end, Giles arrives at
Robson's house, finds the girl dead and Robson nearly dead.
Then the axe... But don't worry, I'm sure Giles isn't dead!
I won't let Giles be dead, I'll fly to L.A. and hold Joss at
crossbow-point to make sure.
[> [> [>
And to further emphasize -- Isabel, 16:18:49
11/21/02 Thu
The robed guys were using the same knives that they killed
the Isanbul and Frankfurt girls with. The guy with the axe
was later, maybe he's the cleanup crew?
[> [> [> [>
heh--oh yeah, & more q's. -- anom, 20:37:39
11/21/02 Thu
I didn't even remember that scene till Ponygirl reminded me
(maybe that's just a measure of how gripping the rest of the
ep was?), & then I didn't connect it to the scene at the
end. So I watched it again--duh....
As for the ax, well, w/an ax you don't have to sneak up so
close. And I think it was already in the room, not brought
by the hooded baddie, or that the one swinging it was a
separate hooded baddie who came later.
So do you think Giles lived there? It looked as if he forced
the door rather than using a key...maybe he'd been knocking
& not getting an answer. And how come Robson wasn't in the
same place he fell when he got stabbed?
[> [> [> [> [>
Robson not dead yet, probably dragged himself --
Scroll, 09:38:55 11/22/02 Fri
First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) :Spike, Clockwork
Orange, Pavolov's dog -- shadowkat, 19:37:02 11/19/02
Tue
I'm leaving to visit the family in Hilton Head, SC Tomorrow
- short two week trip, so probably won't be on board much.
Anyways here are my first impressions.
Whew what an episode. I was really really dreading this
episode, expected the worst, because I'm not a fan of David
Fury. But they surprised me. That was the best writing I've
seen from Espenson and Fury in ages. (Their last efforts
were Same Time Same Place, Double MeaT Palace, Grave and
Gone).
Regarding Spike? Lacheisis? - you were right when you stated
that the soul meant a great deal and was important and Spike
was now where Alex in A Clockwork Orange is in Chapter 21.
The bad boy is struggling to deal with what he's done. But
ME in all its nastiness has decided to add a little twist -
give him a BB that can take on any form and play with his
mind.
The episode deals with the idea of conditioning and mind
control. The BB has been at Spike for only Joss knows how
long, playing with his head. And unlike Willow - Spike
didn't know if it was real or in his head. He didn't have
Willow's clarity.
The song Aimee Mann sings emphasizes the idea of
conditioning. "I hear the sound of Bells....Ringing
Pavolov's Bell".
Pavlov - was the scientist who discovered that a dog or
animal could be conditioned to do certain acts by pain or
rewards. Such as food. Anyone who has taken a Behavorist
Intro Psyche course has probably had to use the same
approach with a rat - training it to go through a maze with
negative and positive conditioning.
Okay - in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE - Alec, a violent juvenile
delinquent who talks and walks and has a gange like Spike,
gets grabbed by the government and is conditioned through
negative drugs and reinforcement to get sick at
violence.
At the end of the book in Chapter 20, he is grabbed a
dissident group, who tortures him, them de-conditions him
using positive and negative reinforcement. Stanley Kubrick
did a film that shows this as well - A Clockwork Orange, and
Joss Whedon is a huge Kubrick fan. He cites Kubrick in his
Restless Commentary and Doug Petrie cites ClockWork Orange
in his commentary on The Initiative.
What happens in this episode? We see how the BB has
deconditioned Spike. Spike is right when he tells Buffy that
it's not the chip but his soul keeping him back.
Unfortunately - he still has a demon in him and the demon is
connected to the BBW. Or as I prefer to call BBw = IT.
IT has figured out to decondition the demon - using similar
approach to the dissidents in A Clockwork Orange. But it
also conditions the souled entity =William to take a back
seat. How? With a song.
The song is I believe an 18th century ballad about "A fair
maiden..." which William may have sung as a child. It's an
English Folksong. The moment IT starts singing it - the
demon in William gets control and the soul blacks out.
We saw how IT did this early on - in Beneath You when
William says "not nearly ready" - IT fires the chip causing
pain. Then when William goes against IT in the club by
calling for help? IT posing as evilSpike echoes "not nearly
read" with a meaningful glance. When William tries to
continue fight it and is starting to remember - IT starts
singing the song that it's been using to bring William to
the surface. The song acts like a post-hypnotic
suggestion.
There's another film this reminds me of btw: The Manchurian
Canidate - starring Laurence Harvey, Angela Langsbury and
Frank Sinitra. In it a man is brainwashed and conditioned to
be an assassin. He kills without knowing it. All he needs is
a well placed trigger - a catch-phrase.
And of course there's my favorite movie: Telefon with Lee
Remick and Charles Bronson, KGB agents are triggered into
action with the Robert Frost poem - "miles to go before I
sleep".
The trick of the trigger is it works on a subconscious level
and must be connected to something deep within the person,
something they do not consciously understand.
Subconscious. Interesting. See the discussion in Hacceity's
post about the need to be aware of our subsconscious/dark
urges in order to ensure they don't become actuality.
Spike is unaware of the killing of the girls. IT disquises
itself as Buffy and Spike himself while using the song to
get Spike to do this and cause the soul not to know about
it. It's not until Spike remembers and becomes aware of
these horrible acts that he can get Buffy's help and try to
stop it.
So what breaks IT's control over Spike's subconsicous or
demonic id? The super-ego, the ego? (IT has actually grabbed
Spike's role model of super-ego= Buffy to use against Spike,
so no that's not it.) IT messes up with Spike in somewhat
the same way the FE messed up with Angel in Amends. IT tries
to get Spike to kill Buffy - but Spike's heart won't let
him. And he remembers. And what he remembers overwhelms.
So now we know what our heros don't. We know what can defeat
IT's control, which actually is the same thing that defeated
the FE's control over Angel. The individual's connection to
others - love of others - the heart, spirit connection. What
defeats It's control over Willow? Willow's knowledge of her
love for Tara, Willow knows deep down inside that Tara would
never want her to kill herself.
What defeats ITs control over Spike? Spike's love for Buffy,
he tastes her blood but in doing so - he relives his past
crimes and is once again horrified by what he almost did. IT
can't possibly understand why Spike can't kill Buffy. No
more than IT can possibly understand why Willow knows Tara
wouldn't tell her to kill herself.
What's also interesting in this episode is we get a glimpse
at who spike really is...and what scares him. The song.
What is the significance of the song. Did his mother sing it
to him? And what does he say: "It haunts me - what I've
done." What is also interesting is when he is under IT's
control - he says nothing. Doesn't speak. When he's not?
He does. And he is different, he acts different, he facial
mannerisms, his speech, when he isn't under IT's
influence.
Now onto the other stuff:
Xander? Well, can we say hypocrite much? ;-) I half expected
Buffy to turn around and ask him about Anya again who did
choose what she did and was NOT under anyone's control at
the time. And oh yeah, she could take it back - but hey,
that was just luck. They have no clue how many others she
killed. Feel the desire to say the same thing about Anya
actually. (sigh) But I have a hunch Xander is about to have
his own personal experience with IT and something tells me,
that he may not survive it as well as Spike or Willow or
Dawn did. Assuming of course the Xanman
hasn't already been turned.
The Sleeper - that's what this episode was called. Well a
sleeper is the conditioned response. The subconscious. The
dark urge. What if? What if Xander has his own sleeper?
After all Xander has been spending a lot of time at the
school. Xander built the school. Xander is building the
gym.
I'm beginning to wonder about Xander.
Giles? I doubt he's dead. But nasty nasty writers to leave
us hanging like this. And couldn't we have had more of him
than ten seconds?? ugh.
Whatever IT is - it is very organized. IT is systematically
killing all the slayers and watchers, leaving Buffy alone.
Actually I think IT wanted Spike to kill Buffy and the
basement was supposed to be IT's trap. But Spike
resisted.
No problem, IT thinks - Buffy stakes Spike, IT still
wins.
But Buffy didn't give into that. MEthinks that the Buffster
is beginning to learn her lessons and may be harder to beat
than IT thinks.
Anyways that's it for tonight. Must go to bed since I have
to get up at 5:15 am tomorrow morning to get to the
airport.
SK (praying this locks...before I give up.)
[>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) :Spike,
Clockwork Orange, Pavolov's dog -- Kenny, 19:56:41
11/19/02 Tue
About Xander...
For me (and I'll project this onto Xander), Spike and Anya
are apples and oranges as far as immediate threats go.
Ignore culpability, and look at the damage they can do.
Spike can (and has) killed people. He's bonkers. He was a
weapon for Morphy, and he still could be. Anya is sane, and
she doesn't have her powers anymore. She doesn't present
the immediate threat that Spike does, so I believe he had
some justification for his point of view.
I know the similarities between Morphy's actions this season
and Spike's in "The Yoko Factor" have already been
mentioned; but, wow, all I can think after this ep is "Dude,
that's some Karma for you." I really felt bad for Spike at
the end of this ep. I want things to turn out well for him.
But I'm not about to bust on Xander for what he said.
[> [>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) :Spike,
Clockwork Orange, Pavolov's dog -- Shiraz, 14:01:36
11/20/02 Wed
Also, remeber that Xander tried to protect Spike in this
episode; by trying to keep him off the streets while Buffy
was out looking for reasons to stake him.
[> [> [>
That's not how I understood it (spoilers for 7.8) -
- Sophist, 19:54:03 11/20/02 Wed
Xander was following Buffy's orders to keep him inside. I
understood that the reason was twofold: to make sure Spike
didn't kill again (if he was killing; they didn't know yet),
and to give Buffy space to investigate. I don't think Xander
had any concern for Spike's welfare, but that's not intended
as a criticism because I think the point was irrelevant --
it was the welfare of others that was at issue.
[> [> [> [>
Yeah, but -- vh, 08:35:55 11/21/02 Thu
I thought his tone was unusually compassionate toward Spike.
Usually he doesn't talk to Spike in that tone.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yeah, but -- aliera, 09:53:23 11/21/02
Thu
You know what? Given this season's trend I'd feel more
comfortable about Xander's prospects if his weren't
compassionate. I'm in an argument with a co-watcher on both
Xander and Cordy right now (reminiscent of last season's
Buffy spat "a molecular tan? how lame is that?"
I can't seem to get past the worry about the stuff that
happened to Xander...the energy that poured into him from
Willow at the temple scene in Grave...the summer spent
building by the Hellmouth...the lack of a Morphy session in
CwDP...the odd eagerness to leave Anya on Spike-watch so he
can get back to the construction site...I dunno, I guess I'm
alone here in right field...but, he feels odd to me.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Agreed -- dream, 11:08:10 11/21/02 Thu
See the thread up on top of the board about the possibility
that Xander has got the Hellmouth working for him these
days. I wouldn't buy that he has specifically chosen to
align himself with evil - but I would buy either a)
overexposure to evil stuff has him working under someone
else's control, at least some of the time or b)he's dabbled
in a little good-luck magic, which of course will come with
a price, and the guilt is making him act extra nice and
considerate.
Anyway, I would be rather unhappy about such developments,
as they would really get in the way of the "Xander-gets-
vamped" story I've been hoping would close the series.
Maybe that can be the first movie. (They are going to do
movies, right?)
[> [> [> [> [> [>
You're not alone -- Isabel, 15:34:26 11/21/02
Thu
Mr. I-still-love-Anya Harris going cheerfully off to work,
leaving her alone with a naked sleeping Spike. A few
episodes ago he was still resenting both of them for their
tryst.
Maybe I'm being paranoid, but ME likes knocking down
successful people. Characters are dying on Buffy. And don't
forget Jocasta's fate either when thinking of Cordelia.
[>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) :Spike,
Clockwork Orange, Pavolov's dog -- ponygirl, 20:01:33
11/19/02 Tue
"No problem, IT thinks - Buffy stakes Spike, IT still
wins.
But Buffy didn't give into that. Methinks that the Buffster
is beginning to learn her lessons and may be harder to
beat
than IT thinks."
Yes! I really do think that the goal has been to isolate
Buffy. Keep her alone and disconnected. The only problem
I'm forseeing is the Scoobies reactions to Spike. Are they
going to see the value in helping Spike, or are they going
to see this as another instance of the Slayer making
decisions that affect them all? I don't think Buffy is the
only one still dealing with fallout from Angel in season 2,
the Scoobies have never trusted her judgement when it came
to Angel/Angelus. Could they be seeing parallels with
Spike?
Have a great trip shadowkat!
[>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) : How literal
should we be? -- Darby, 20:36:12 11/19/02 Tue
I'm looking over the episode titles so far this season and
they all relate to very literal aspects of the story, except
maybe for Selfless. That in and of itself is not
that unusual, but could this mean that Spike was literally
asleep while these acts happened? That might explain the
lack of speech and the disconnect of the chip, and the lack
of memories, as people often have with dreams, although the
memories might become accessible later.
The other meaning of "sleeper" is of a "sleeper agent," as
'kat mentions from The Manchurian Candidate. Could
be that as well.
I liked that it was never strongly implied that Spike was
going to be staked - that sort of plotline about a character
you know they're not getting rid of is very distracting.
However, having said that, I'm hoping that subsequent ASH
appearances won't be the Big Bad impersonating the now-dead
Giles. Nahhhhh, that'd mean there would never be
Ripper, so we just have to guess how Giles doesn't
get a really extreme haircut...
[> [>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) : How literal
should we be? -- Rob, 20:44:09 11/19/02 Tue
I was just posting about this farther down on the page.
There are 3 possibilities for "Ripper."
(A) Giles did die, and the reason they "postponed" "Ripper"
is because of this.
(B) Giles isn't dead, and can then still go on to do
"Ripper"
and perhaps the least unlikely,
(C) "Ripper" takes place in the year Giles has been in
England, before being killed, parallelling Buffy Season
6.
Which is the most likely? I don't know, but things aren't
looking so good for Giles at the moment. *sob*
Rob
[> [> [>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) : How literal
should we be? -- Slain, 18:10:46 11/20/02 Wed
(D) In death, he will become more powerful than you could
ever imagine.
I think that's a misquote.
[> [>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (future title
spoilers) -- Rook, 03:14:05 11/20/02 Wed
Having seen the list of titles, I was expecting The Master
to show up tonight, to be honest...if you look at the
titles, there are ones that seem to be direct or indirect
references to all of the BB's from seasons past...
Sleeper: The Master
From WttH: Luke: The sleeper will wake. The sleeper will
wake. The sleeper will wake. The sleeper will wake, and the
world will bleed. Amen!
Don't Tread on Me: A snake/Mayor reference
Parthenogenesis: Possibly an Adam reference, seeing as Adam
had a mother but not a father...
\Par`the*no*gen"e*sis\, n. [Gr. parqe`nos a virgin + E.
genesis.] 1. (Biol.) The production of new individuals from
virgin females by means of ova which have the power of
developing without the intervention of the male element; the
production, without fertilization, of cells capable of
germination. It is one of the phenomena of alternate
generation.
Glory: Well...duh!
Duel of the Fates: The name of the song that plays during
the climactic battle of Star Wars, Episode I...a Warren
reference?
Not sure about Angel though...possibly "Never leave me" or
"Shut your mouth" (which makes me think of "close your
eyes")
Of course, I'm probably all wrong since we didn't see The
Master last night, but it was fun to speculate :)
[> [>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) : How literal
should we be? -- ejs, 03:43:23 11/20/02 Wed
"I'm looking over the episode titles so far this season and
they all relate to very literal aspects of the story, except
maybe for Selfless."
Actually, this title had a wonderful double meaning, in that
1) Anya exhibited selflessness in offering to sacrifice
herself to bring back the frat boys, and 2) that Anya had no
sense of self at all, defining herself through whatever she
could cling to obsessively (Olaf, her work as a vengeance
demon, Xander).
[> [> [>
I get that. Early S7 spoilers,. -- Darby,
06:15:08 11/20/02 Wed
I understand how it refers to the episode, but it's on a
concept or imagery level - all the other ones so far have
quite a literal connection to things that are or happen in
the episodes. I'm having a hard time making "Selfless"
literally true, unless you stretch the end to Anya having
had all "selfs" - Aud, Anyanka, Anya - stripped away,
leaving her with just - well, that was the question, wasn't
it?
[>
Oooo! "Manchurian Candidate"!!!! -- Dead
Soul, 01:51:50 11/20/02 Wed
[>
Re: First Impressions for 7.8 (SPOILERS) :Spike,
Clockwork Orange, Pavolov's dog -- Sophie, 06:47:40
11/20/02 Wed
Pavlov's old bell and Pavlov's new bell
Pavlov's old bell was the chip in Spike's head and his new
bell is Morphy's song. Interesting how they are oposites:
the old bell overrides Spike's evil nature and prevents him
doing evil, and the new bell overrides his soul and the pain
from the chip, and causes him to do anguishingly evil
things.
Soph
[>
Learning lessons -- dream of the consortium,
08:51:54 11/20/02 Wed
I HATE plots in which the audience is far ahead of the
characters - and, even more, I HATE plots that depend on
characters not telling one another stuff, particularly if
life endangerment is involved. I loved this episode (though
as someone pointed out, it did feel more like the first half
of a two-parter) because everyone acted sensibly. Willow
told Dawn right away about her experience with EvilCassie.
Spike called Buffy - on the cell phone, no less! - once he
realised that he might be guilty. Buffy gave Spike a chance
to talk at the end. Everyone communicated - except, of
course, Dawn, though that seems only reasonable. She is
clinging to the idea of having seen her mother, her
situation was certainly more complex than Willow's, and the
doubts seeded in her mind are not likely to go away even if
Buffy were to profess, as she certainly would, that she
would never be against her. Also, Dawn is younger and has
suffered less in the past from the trouble of secret-
keeping(not that she hasn't suffered at all, just that she
hasn't had as much time to learn from her mistakes.) But it
was refreshing to see the group working so well, the
difficulties coming from outside them, rather than from
inside. After last year's torture, I feel like we earned the
pleasure of seeing our heroes work so well together, be this
self-aware (heck, even Xander was pretty controlled and
reasonable.) They've grown, and it's great to see - and this
Morphy creature is a complex enough villian to make the
threat real, even while they display strength.
I still don't understand why they didn't call Giles a few
weeks ago, just to get some background, a little advice, but
what can you do?
I don't really understand the use of Early One Morning -
since that song is the lament of a poorly used girl, it
seems an odd choice for sending Spike into vamp-mode. Maybe
just ironic? Oh, and since Willow points out that the
missing people are mostly girls, are we to assume that Spike
prefers to vamp girls (the vamp/sex connection, assuming
Spike is straight) or that he simply would have easy access
to them, being all high-cheekboned and accented and all?
And is it just me, or does Anya look unhealthy? Her face
looks drawn and tired and she seems even thinner than
normal. As far as her character goes, that makes sense;
she's going through tough times, but I'm a bit concerned
about the actress.
[> [>
The Use of Early One Morning/ Spoilers 7.8/4.7 --
alcibiades, 10:10:45 11/20/02 Wed
I don't really understand the use of Early One Morning -
since that song is the lament of a poorly used girl, it
seems an odd choice for sending Spike into vamp-mode. Maybe
just ironic?
A friend of mine pointed out that Spike seems to be playing
the damsel in distress role this year. So far, he's playing
a helpless victim needing the hero to rescue him. So ironic
yeah, but not precisely the way you meant. Also, it seems
to go together with his guilt last year about hurting the
girl that the BBW knows about and is exploiting.
Oh, and since Willow points out that the missing people
are mostly girls, are we to assume that Spike prefers to
vamp girls (the vamp/sex connection, assuming Spike is
straight) or that he simply would have easy access to them,
being all high-cheekboned and accented and all?
After the bouncer told Buffy that the blond guy was a big
time player, I kind of thought that the scene where both men
and women were rising was pretty much ME poking fun while
acknowledging all the fanfic where Spike is sexual master of
the universe with both men and women. Kind of funny on a
meta-narrative level. Like the Xander/Spike look in BY and
the Wesley/Gunn embrace in RoF. It seems that in Season 7
the writers are being more open about the two way
interaction between ME and the fans on the internet.
[> [> [>
Re: The Use of Early One Morning/ Spoilers 7.8/4.7
-- Arethusa, 10:36:54 11/20/02 Wed
"After the bouncer told Buffy that the blond guy was a big
time player, I kind of thought that the scene where both men
and women were rising was pretty much ME poking fun while
acknowledging all the fanfic where Spike is sexual master of
the universe with both men and women. Kind of funny on a
meta-narrative level."
And in their conversation in his bedroom, Spike tells Buffy
"It's still all about you." Very meta-, and surely aimed at
those for whom it's all about Spike.
[> [> [>
Sexual metaphors and writer's speaking to internet
fans -- Caroline, 12:36:27 11/20/02 Wed
I thought that there was a lot of sexual undertone in all
the the biting and licking stuff that we saw in this
episode. At least that was the way it seemed to me was
played by Spike, particularly where Spike was licking Buffy
- it seemed very orgiastic or s&m-ish. (I kind of expected
them to go to Eyes Wide Shut.) Even Spike biting the guy
seemed very sexy. Vampires have always been a metaphor in
BtVS for hunger - particularly sexual hunger - with all the
biting and blood and thrall and loss of control.
As for the interaction between writers and fans - didn't you
love the line by Spike - "It's all about you Buffy". How
many times have we seen that sentence on the board in
response to Spike-centric posts? And how meta to have Spike
be the one to say it to Buffy?
[> [> [>
Re: The Use of Early One Morning/ Spoilers 7.8/4.7
-- leslie,
15:47:19 11/20/02 Wed
I think the significance of the song is that once it gets to
"How could you treat a poor maiden so," he does.
Current
board
| More November
2002