Previous October 2002

More October 2002

[> Re: Spike's role in episode 7.3. Spoilers -- Miss Edith, 21:28:21 10/08/02 Tue

I just think the audience reaction has been misjudged. Spike has become a very sympathetic figure to many after his torment was revealed last week. And this week not even one minute is devoted to addressing last weeks scene. Buffy only mentions it briefly because Spike brings it up. Don't get me wrong I must stress I do mot expect the show to be all about Spike. He had his turn last week and it was only right that the episode was devoted to Willow. But I was seriously expecting a brief scene in the basement early on with Buffy offering some comfort and showing genuine compassion, whilst still rightfully wary and possibily with a stake on hand. I would have prefered Spike not to appear at all than just for him to be treated as the conviennient bloodhound and only consulted when Buffy needed to use his help. And using him as a punching bag for others smart ass remarks also left a bad taste in my mouth.

[> [> On the other hand ... (SPOILERS for Same Time, Same Place) -- Robert, 09:28:12 10/09/02 Wed

>>> "And using him as a punching bag for others smart ass remarks also left a bad taste in my mouth."

Spike got a good one in this week against Xander.

"I'm insane, what's his excuse?"

[> [> [> Re: On the other hand ... (SPOILERS for Same Time, Same Place) -- Miss Edith, 10:13:52 10/09/02 Wed

My point is this. At the end of BY mature compassionate Buffy was back. I'm glad because I do believe it or not like the character of Buffy a great deal. It now feels like that compeeling and emotional scene was just dropped in and the writers are now failing to deal with the significanace of what Spike did and the implications it has for Buffy and her worldview.
Making snipey remarks about Spike's smell and intelligence just came across like lead weights. Last week Spike tells Buffy she should "make use of him" and that is exactly what she did. And made fun of him whilst dong so. I like a good quip as much as the next person but Spike was mentally ill. The least Buffy could do if she is using Spike again is offer an occasional thank you and refrain from mocking his personal hygyiene and encouraging her younger sister to do so as well "Its smellimentry". The others take their cues on how to treat Spike from Buffy generally. E.g in Spiral Buffy insisted Spike was part of the group "He stays, get over it". And when in season 6 she just wanted to use Spike as her f**k buddy Spike became isolated from the group and niggled by Xander in NA for instance. Buffy was shocked Spike considered himself part of the gang and had the nerve to attend her birthday party and Spike has to try and justify his audacity in attending Buffy's party with her friends,"I figured we're all on the same side". Therefore I do object when Buffy makes her friends think it is okay to use Spike for help and take the piss out of him whilst doing so. It's just plain rude and unnecessery.
Maybe I'm just not in the age range the writers were going for. When I was younger I did find it funny when tv characters were refered to as "rank". Now I've matured not so much.

[> [> [> [> I don't think it's age related -- Doug the Bloody, 14:16:58 10/10/02 Thu

I'm 18(almost 19), and I agree with a lot of what you said, Miss Edith.

[> Re: Spike's role in episode 7.3. Spoilers -- JMC, 21:31:32 10/08/02 Tue

The end we saw of BY was created nearly a month after ep 3 was filmed, thus we are seeing Buffy respond to Spike based on the origional BY scene were Buffy did't cry or feel anything but hate and fear towards Spike. Spike was totally insane in the origional scene thus Spike was much more insane in ep 3 then he should have been. Also, Buffy showed no postive emotions at all for him in the origional scene and unfortunatly it showed in ep 3. Joss's rewrite make things seem really out of wack.

[> [> That might explain things. Otherwise, I'm at a loss at the jarring change of tone. -- cjl, 21:47:02 10/08/02 Tue

[> [> Re: Spike's role in episode 7.3. Spoilers -- TeacherBoy, 21:54:05 10/08/02 Tue

Great point. I think this post is a good reminder of how the everyday production of a tv show can impact how we see it. For example, sometimes things happen to these people in real life, and it can seem as if the show is trying to send a message, when in fact nothing of the kind was meant (I'm thinking right now of Blythe Danner leaving her new show to be with her daughter due to the death of her husband, Bruce Paltrow. An extreme example, yes). Just something to think about.

Teacher Boy

[> [> Re: Spike's role in episode 7.3. Spoilers -- anonomous, 22:19:30 10/08/02 Tue

This is a very interesting point. Would you let us know where you got the information?

[> [> Re: Spike's role in 7.3. Spoilers- Potential Spoilers for 7.4. -- Wizardman, 22:50:05 10/08/02 Tue

Really? Well, now that you mention it, it does make sense. I was wondering about that myself. Spike was MUCH crazier than he should have been after the final scene of BY, and Buffy didn't treat him nearly as nicely as she should have. The episode was awesome, of course, but after the first two eps, in some ways it was a bit of a let down. Maybe if it didn't come directly after BY, I might have thought more of it. After what happened to Spike last week, I was expecting Willow's return to be much worse. I knew that Xander had already forgiven her. I expected Buffy to be on the fence. I thought it was gonna take time for Dawn to forgive Willow, but then again, they never had a scene together, and also the whole 'Blaming Willow' comment suggested it. And we're probably not gonna get a good Dawn/Willow next week because just as last week was all about Spike and this week was Willow, next week is all about Anya. Speaking of whom, I was really disappointed by her reactions. I was expecting a 'Triangle' x10 blowout when she encountered Willow. Instead she forgave her pretty quickly, and dropped hints of a future Willow/Anya romance. They haven't even really dealt with Tara and they are setting Anya up with Willow? Sorry, nuh-uh, ain't gonna buy it. Another minor disappointment was with Gnarl. ME did a great job with him. I can honestly say that he was the creepiest little bad since the Gentlemen. I would have preferred it if they just did the shadow/hand thing that they set up in the first half of the ep. It would have turned up his creep factor even higher.

[> In trying to do an "it's not about Spike" ep, they went too far in the other direction... -- cjl, 21:41:42 10/08/02 Tue

They got a little bit too flippant with the "he's a wack job" jokes, and Gellar either didn't bother to slip in hidden gestures of empathy for Spike's condition, or we're back on board Buffy's Denial Train, where no emotional revelation from a boyfriend goes unpunished.

OTOH, I found the conversation in the basement fascinating. Spike is talking with invisible people again, and for once, we actually see the "other parties" (Willow, Buffy/Xander) and we can reconstruct Spike's thought processes. I wonder if the writers are telling us something about Spike's OTHER conversations with invisible people. Are they more than figments of Spike's imagination? Are they actually in the room, out of phase like Willow, and Spike's the only one who can see and hear them? I wonder if Joss is going to give us the chance to see "behind the curtain" with Spike's new friends and let us figure out what Spike is really babbling about.

[> [> Good point cjl -- alcibiades, 21:45:25 10/08/02 Tue

[> [> Re: In trying to do an "it's not about Spike" ep, they went too far in the other direction... -- Doriander, 21:54:54 10/08/02 Tue

I wonder if the writers are telling us something about Spike's OTHER conversations with invisible people. Are they more than figments of Spike's imagination? Are they actually in the room, out of phase like Willow, and Spike's the only one who can see and hear them? I wonder if Joss is going to give us the chance to see "behind the curtain" with Spike's new friends and let us figure out what Spike is really babbling about.

That occured to me too. Perhaps Spike isn't THAT crazy after all. I've seen the ep three times and noticed:

1. He's very territorial with his space.
2. During the spell Willow and Anya cast, the HSH was "glowing" (hmmm), that it lit up. He's obviously not the only resident there.
3. Xander says something to the effect that blueprints are futile when navigating the basement, it's as if the walls move (tie this in to zombie ghost saying the basement is a maze).

[> [> [> Re: In trying to do an "it's not about Spike" ep, they went too far in the other direction... -- shadowkat, 17:28:57 10/09/02 Wed

"That occured to me too. Perhaps Spike isn't THAT crazy after all. I've seen the ep three times and noticed:

1. He's very territorial with his space.
2. During the spell Willow and Anya cast, the HSH was "glowing" (hmmm), that it lit up. He's obviously not the only resident there.
3. Xander says something to the effect that blueprints are futile when navigating the basement, it's as if the walls move (tie this in to zombie ghost saying the basement is a maze)."

Okay i need to watch this baby again. But now that you mentioned it? I think you may be right. I'm remembering when Tara went nuts and how she saw stuff the other's didn't? Spike being a vampire - has always had the ability to sense demons. Remember he tells Buffy in Dead Things - vampire, remember? I could feel you?

I think this works. And in Willow's spell to locate demons - all the dots were clustered around the high school, millions of little dots. Willow explains it as being part of the hellmouth. But I'm wondering. Remember Halfrek says to Anya the demon friends are all already here? Is it possible this has a double meaning? One Halfrek is her only friend now. And two they really are all here? Certainly fits with the locater spell.

I for one would not be surprised if we don't see Spike move out of that basement soon. Also was it just me or did Spike seem at his most sane when he is out of that basement??
And at his worst when he is down there??

They seem to be spoonfeeding us info on this right now, which leads me to believe they are leading up to something really big with this.

Also didn't catch the walls moving line...but that works as well. Adds to Spike's insanity. And territorial = makes sense. If your space is constantly being invaded wouldn't you start acting like a hall monitor?

[> [> [> [> Re: In trying to do an "it's not about Spike" ep, they went too far in the other direction... -- Doriander, 04:38:57 10/10/02 Thu

Remember Halfrek says to Anya the demon friends are all already here? Is it possible this has a double meaning? One Halfrek is her only friend now. And two they really are all here?

That's my initial reading of that line! Not until I went online that I took it to mean Hallie implying she's the only friend Anya's got left, which, really, makes more sense. Maybe it could mean both as you said.

I'm also beginning to believe that Spike is not insane. Tortured by unseen entities, tortured by his conscience, conflicting personalities battling within him, sure, but not insane. Or maybe I just contradicted myself. Anyhow, not insane in the way brainsucked Tara or Dru were, because he's too self-aware I think. I'm still waiting for a scene where Spike looks at Dawn, and says 'look at you glowing!' (Yeah, when he first said that in the basement, I really, really thought it Dawn was before him, and was bracing myself for it. But it was Buffy. If I'm wrong, and he's in fact nuts, that's more unsettling, if you think beyond the context of FFL.) Bloodhound Spike, who was apparently crazy talking, wasn't drawn to Dawn's keyness. So really, he's just muttering to himself, and weve seen several Spike soliloquies so this is nothing new, if only a bit manic.

I don't believe he's 'pulling a Hamlet', as some people have speculated. Not at this point, he's still struggling. However, and this is pure speculation, there's potential for him to do just that in the future, as he's wont to fake handicaps in the past (cripple, chipped).

[> [> [> [> [> Re: In trying to do an "it's not about Spike" ep, they went too far in the other direction... -- alcibiades, 08:13:44 10/10/02 Thu

'look at you glowing!'...But it was Buffy.

Of course that might not mean he's nuts there. He said the same thing to her in Hell's Bells. Maybe he can see that in some way she is happy this year as she wasn't for most of last year -- that the depression lifted.

If I'm wrong, and he's in fact nuts, that's more unsettling, if you think beyond the context of FFL.) Bloodhound Spike, who was apparently crazy talking, wasn't drawn to Dawn's keyness.

"You walk in worlds the others cannot see." -- Dru's words to him in FFL.

Also, in the bloodhound scene Spike at no point is actually facing Dawn -- he's ahead of them, facing away from her. We don't know what state he was in when they went to get him.

[> [> I've always thought that was the point (spoilers through 7.3) -- Vickie, 22:53:45 10/08/02 Tue

I always thought that Spike was addressing actual beings. Some were likely himself (OriginalSpike/William/ChippedSpike/GuiltySpike). But some were clearly not him: "Him (glancing up toward the roof of the church), and him...it (glancing downwards)" He hears them all. Some of them have objective reality.

[> And while we're speaking of Spike, what was that thing with Xander all about? -- cjl, 21:55:03 10/08/02 Tue

Calling him the Slayer's "boy"...

Was he insinuating that Xander was Buffy's lapdog--just like Spike was last year? And did he mean that in a "you're a loser for trying to suck up to that bitch" or "you've taken my place as lapdog, and in my own sick and twisted way, I envy you"?

Weeeeeeeeird.

B/X foreshadowing?

Um...S/X foreshadowing? (Nah.)

(But then again, we've probably got the Anya/Willow slash fic writers up and typing tonight. Hey! It's gay subtext year on Buffy!)

[> [> Re: And while we're speaking of Spike, what was that thing with Xander all about? -- Doriander, 22:01:56 10/08/02 Tue

Um...S/X foreshadowing? (Nah.)

(But then again, we've probably got the Anya/Willow slash fic writers up and typing tonight. Hey! It's gay subtext year on Buffy!)

Perhaps there's no joke to All Naked, All Gay Buffy.

I'm loving the S/X and W/A interaction. As to S/X, Spike specifically addressed Xander regarding a "ticket" that he should keep. He said it with a grave tone, it makes you wonder if there's some significance to it.

[> I read it completely differently. (7.3 spoilers) -- Rob, 07:32:20 10/09/02 Wed

I thought that Buffy was doing her usual secret-keeping thing, and this time for good reason. Telling Xander, for example, that Spike got a soul would have brought more derision. How would she explain to him that she felt sorry for Spike? Xander would have had none of that, and would have tried to convince her not to pity the guy who tried to rape her. Buffy, therefore, in a protective mode, decided instead to stress Spike's craziness to everybody. Her saying that she got scared...I think in a way, she actually did. The thought and the immensity of what it did, did scare her. Perhaps make her nervous about seeing him again, knowing that she was the cause of what he had done. She doesn't know how to react around him now, knowing that she is the one who has driven him crazy.

Rob

[> [> Re: I read it completely differently. (7.3 spoilers) -- ponygirl, 09:35:32 10/09/02 Wed

Actually I agree, the basement scene was one of the few times in the episode that we saw a crack in emotionally wary!Buffy. I'm really hoping that Willow's return will allow Buffy to open up a bit more, she may depend on Xander but she doesn't seem able to reveal anything to him. Maybe Spike's line about everyone talking to him and no one talking to each other applies outside that scene.

[> [> Re: I read it completely differently. (7.3 spoilers) -- Miss Edith, 09:36:57 10/09/02 Wed

I don't see why Buffy telling the others of Spike's soul would have caused more derision than Xander thinking she is protecting exactly the same entity that tried to rape her. In Buffy's place I would have sat down honestly with Xander and Dawn and explained that Spike was remorseful for the attempted rape and he now has a soul. I would not start saying Spike should be pitied etc and get Xander's back up. I would simply say that Spike is insane and not doing so great now so can they respect that and try not to give Spike a hard time. I know Spike didn't want his souled status to be known last week but lets face it he is unstable and doesn't really know what he wants. As indicated in Same Time, Same Place he is certainly not doing a great job of taking care of himself at the moment and is very much insane.
Xander suggest putting a leash on Spike in a jokey fashion and Buffy sniggers we should just follow his smell. That is what I object too. I understand the original ending was not as Spike positive or as Buffy positive hence the change in tone. But Buffy was not frightened of Spike last week and this weeks episode should have at least refllected that. Sure she was shocked and had a lot to deal with. But she did not look to me like she was so fearful of Spike she felt the need to avoid him for an entire week.
Using Spike as a bloodhound just did not work after last week, it came across as a sick joke to me. The direction feels all wrong. Making Spike the comic relief and the butt of the heroes jokes will not work on the fans who have been encouraged to feel Spike's pain and sympathise. I mean Buffy leaving him in the basement for a week not even visiting until she needs his help and uses him for info. That doesn't play right and may lose sympathy for Buffy who has been very compassionate so far this season.
Using Spike as the general dogsbody did not fit with the tone set last week. I don't feel Spike deserved to be treated as an idiotic smelly joke and I did not find it the slightest bit appealing. I would have hoped the writers would have recognised this and treated Spike consistently.

[> [> [> I actually dug the "leash" line, b/c... -- Rob, 11:03:37 10/09/02 Wed

...it ties even more into the dog/god metaphors that have been recurring throughout the past few episodes. And I forget who, but someone posted last week a great analysis of "Spike as a leashed dog" and this continues that metaphor as well.

Rob

[> [> [> [> Completely weird thought o' the day: Spike=Cerberus? -- ponygirl, 12:47:22 10/09/02 Wed

He's down there on top of an entranceway to hell, he may have three different personalities, and he kept talking about checking for authorization. Does everyone's favourite dog have a new name and a new job - the guardian of the gate to the underworld? But is he Cerberus or Harry Potter's Fluffy?

Makes Lorne's comment to Fred less inappropriate...

[> [> [> [> [> Not weird. insightful. -- alcibiades, 12:52:02 10/09/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> Not only insightful, but brilliantly so. Never occurred to me! -- OnM, 13:13:25 10/09/02 Wed

And it makes perfect sense. For the past three eps I've been trying to think of a good reason why Spike 'chose' the school basement rather than his old crypt to live in. (I previously wondered if it had anything to do with Clem, if
he's still living there).

Until I find out otherwise, this definitely works for me, esp. speaking as someone who's already tuned into the several 'dog/god' references!

:-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks! And some Harry Potter, Philosopher's Stone spoilers -- ponygirl, 16:49:28 10/09/02 Wed

If I recall correctly there were only two ways to get past Cerberus, you could overpower him, which only worked for Hercules, or you could sing him to sleep like Orpheus. The three headed dog Fluffy in Philosopher's Stone also had a thing for the lullabies. I kind of like the Harry Potter option, we've already had a Dumbledore reference, the shifting walls of the school's basement could be like Hogwart's shifting stairs, and someone, I can't remember who, suggested that the "it's all about power" line had echoes in one of the HP books. Best of all what Fluffy was protecting was not only the Stone but also the mirror which showed people what they most desired to see. I'd love to see the Scoobies use such a device. Have they finally moved to a place where they can see themselves as they truly are, veiny darkness and all? Or are they still hiding behind costumes and fantasies?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> OOH! OOH! BIG MIRROR INSIGHT -- alcibiades, 20:21:15 10/09/02 Wed

Best of all what Fluffy was protecting was not
only the Stone but also the mirror which showed
people what they most desired to see. I'd love to see the Scoobies use such a device. Have they finally moved to a place where they can see themselves as they truly are,
veiny darkness and all? Or are they still hiding behind costumes and fantasies?


Okay, I gave in and rewatched the episode because I wanted to see if s'kat's interpretation worked for me or not. It is definitely less annoying on a repeat.

In any case, when Anya and Willow are doing the spell together at Anya's, there's a mirror near Anya reflecting Willow, so they momentarily have both of them in the shot together. It shows up 2 or 3 times. I kept on wondering what it was there for. I replayed it to make sure I was sure about what I was seeing. And it just showed Willow.

But very possibly it means exactly what you say - viz the Harry Potter mirror. What Willow most wanted was to be seen, to have substance, not to be invisible, perhaps even to see herself just as Willow, to just be Willow -- and that is what the mirror showed her.

In any case, the mirror isn't going to show the Scoobies who they are, just what they most want to see. So no veiny darkness will appear unless that is what they to see about themselves.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Nice catch on the mirror ! Much agreeage! -- ponygirl, 08:52:25 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> Weird thought o' the day 2: Last season minotaur references, now the school basement is a "maze?" -- Dyna, 14:06:26 10/09/02 Wed

I wish I could remember the minotaur discussion better. Is Spike the monster in the maze? Or perhaps with his knowledge of the place, he'll be a means of finding the way out?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Yep, Spike's still Ariadne -- Vickie, 14:54:35 10/09/02 Wed

I caught that reference too. Reminded me of the movie "Labyrinth", in which the little goblins kept rearranging the walls behind the heroine, so she could never find her way.

This image sure is frequent in popular culture.

[> [> [> Also.. -- Rob, 11:11:31 10/09/02 Wed

...the smell line, I think, probably wasn't a put-down of his character, but of the fact that he hasn't been bathing. He's acting crazy, living in the basement, and I doubt that he's thought seriously about getting himself clean ever since his last attempt in "Beneath You." He probably reeks to the high heavens!

Rob

[> [> [> [> Re: Also.. -- alcibiades, 12:25:50 10/09/02 Wed

You know, Rob, Buffy explicitly is supposed to be like a Greek tragedy. Buffy is supposed to have hubris and faults.

If you keep excusing away all of her foibles and bad moments as oh Buffy didn't mean to be unkind because she's a great hero, how does that give you insight into Buffy? And her faults? And her hubris?

If you ask me, that gratuitous comment Buffy made about Spike's stink which obviously came from the fact that he hadn't bathed since he had burned himself on the cross last week, and which didn't need commenting on except to the audience since all three of them undoubtedly could smell it a mile away, contrasts REALLY unfavourably with the fact that Spike never once last year mentioned Buffy's stink from DMP when poor little Buffy was in a fractured state and that was something she was sensitive to.

But then you know, years ago Spike tried to kill all the Scoobies, so what's the big. He deserves every bit of gratuitous cruelty.

[> [> [> [> [> Don't mince words, now, tell us what you really think -- vh, 13:12:25 10/09/02 Wed

Good point. I noticed last season everyone BUT Spike mentioned the smell to her. D'you think this was an intentional allusion?

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Also.. -- JBone, 19:25:35 10/09/02 Wed

Okay, how is the audience suppose to know that Spike has a certain odor about him if the characters don't comment on it? My tv doesn't emit odor unless I hang dirty socks on it. I really hesitate to throw in here, since most regulars are well aware that I'm not a Spike apologist. But anyway, if we are suppose to recognize the faults and failures of the heros, should we complain about them at the same time? It's obvious that I'm not sure what point it is that you're trying to get across. Bashing the episode and Rob's views on it on one hand while praising the show on the other hand for it's penchant for... what was it? Hubris?

You don't need to love everything about it, I know I don't. But the whole stinky jokes that Xander and Buffy made at Spikes expense never fazed Spike, he's got worse demons. If you've never made an inappropriate joke about someone, even not in their presence, you are a much better person than I am. You see, I'm going to hell. I've stuck my foot in my mouth in front of people who cared what I thought about them (and me them), so many times, I'll probably end up in a love triangle with Satan and Saddam Hussein (South Park reference).

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Also.. -- alcibiades, 20:04:00 10/09/02 Wed

Well they made it quite clear that Buffy smelled without Spike being the one to comment on it nastily.

Also, they could have done it in another tone. The point that I was trying to make, and I was a bit harsh to Rob for which I apologize, is that Buffy's tone of voice is actually a commentary on her character at that moment. Trying to finesse it away as not nasty does not illuminate the character. It was meant nastily. And Dawn took pointers from her about how to treat Spike. Just like last year Xander took pointers from her about how to treat Spike in NA. That dichotomy actually helped to trigger the specific psychotic episodes she underwent.

Buffy has a habit of acting one way with Spike, and another way altogether when she is with Spike and others. It's a flaw that ME keeps on pointing out about Buffy. I think that means eventually they'll make her address it. In which case, the audience should not be trying to wall up the bad parts of her or to her her grow a new skin to cover it up.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm trying (mostly) to be serious when I say this -- JBone, 20:50:01 10/09/02 Wed

Well they made it quite clear that Buffy smelled without Spike being the one to comment on it nastily.

I thought the show was over this since it has been so long, but I think that you're suffering from Angel hangover here. Since Angel was easily recognized as Buffy's true love early one (a notion that I personally fought), the fans that wanted an equivalent Buffy/Spike relationship have just been disappointed. Spike's journey is unlike any other character on the show. Ever. He does not need Buffy for some kind of lame validation.

In other words, "Let go of the Spuffy." If anything, Spike's status as a outsider should be a source of pride. A kind of a "he don't need no one" kind of thing. Everyone else needs these interpersonal relationships, but Spike is toting the rock alone. Honestly, I believe that Xander has had way too much lameness to him for the run of the series, but if you switched them around where Xander was alone in a fight against unseen demons, he would be da man in my mind. I wouldn't give a crap about a insult about his smell or his intelligence that flew right over his head (which happened, but it was funny). I would be like "my guy is on the job, and no one has any idea." If they only knew.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree with you, I just note the contrast -- vh, 08:01:51 10/10/02 Thu

Like alcibiades said, it demonstrates a difference between Spike's and Buffy's behavior, judge it or not as you will. Frankly, I'm glad they're apart. On the other hand, Buffy's compassion or lack thereof need have nothing to do with Spuffy, but reflects more directly on her character, strengths, flaws, and all. Spike's forebearance had more to do with his respect for her than any desire to stay in her good graces (what good graces?)--in my estimation--while Buffy has little respect for Spike, so can be flippant. (And we might reiterate that vampires have a better sense of smell than humans while we're at it ...)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm trying (mostly) to be serious when I say this -- shadowkat, 08:11:12 10/10/02 Thu


"Spike's journey is unlike any other character on the show. Ever. He does not need Buffy for some kind of lame validation."

Completely agree. In some ways I'm finding the character arc more interesting without the Buffy validation. The only problem is it does make it difficult to like Buffy at times.
But we have to remember we aren't privy to Buffy's thoughts and she's only human. And well, she was incredibly burned by Angel - I don't blame her for not wanting to revisit that or being terrified of it's reoccurrence. Spike hasn't disgusted her so much as discombobulated and scared her.

Also we've only seen the third episode. There's no telling what will happen next.Buffy could very well help him out at some point in the near future. It's really too early to tell.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm trying (mostly) to be serious when I say this -- alcibiades, 08:11:32 10/10/02 Thu

You have a point. Well Drusilla's point really.

"You walk in worlds the others cannot begin to see."

Also, I finally figured out why Spike smells, so issue resolved, I'm putting it behind me.

In the original scene, which was the one that preceded STSP when it was filmed, Spike talks about himself as having killed and raped for kicks. He begs God for forgiveness, draped on the cross, but all he gets is burns -- signifying to him that even God is repelled by him.

He says to Buffy, "God hates me, you hate me and I hate myself more than ever."

He finds it cosmically laughable in the sense that the universe is playing a trick on him and it's hysterically funny and hysterically painful -- seeing himself now for what he was -- that he ever thought the mere acquisition of a soul would make Buffy love him since with a soul even God is
repelled by him.

He says: "I was the enemy, then I was nothing, and now I'm God's garbage, not even a joke, less than, less than, less than all His creatures combined."

God thinks he's loathsome, Buffy thinks he is loathsome as evidenced by the fact that she left him hanging in the Church (not literally in the first version, but on his knees in supplication before her, his arms spread wide), and he finds himself utterly loathsome.

Now he is making himself loathsome physically -- his outward being reflecting the person he is inside.

So of course he smells, of course he does not mind being used like a dog. That is all he is good for in his own estimation.

[> [> [> Re:about the time line. (7.3 spoilers) -- Sang, 13:00:06 10/09/02 Wed

I found it somewhat strange. Since Willow left for airport in BY, Willow's arrival must be within a day frome the Church scene. It can explain, why Buffy hadn't visited Spike after that and hadn't told anyone about Spike's soul.

But then why Spike smells so much? Well maybe jokes are just jokes. I also have some problems with STSP because of BY's ending. Otherwise, it could be a quite interesting Ep.

[> [> [> [> Re:about the time line. (7.3 spoilers) -- Miss Edith, 13:23:33 10/09/02 Wed

I assumed Spike smells because he is mentally unstable and probably not taking care of himself properly. He's living in a stinky sewer with no access to a shower, and he is eating rats. Him smelling a bit ripe would make sense.
Either that or as some people have speculated Spike smelled from the burn he got on the cross.

Interesting essay (no spoilers beyond Becoming) -- Vickie, 22:45:08 10/08/02 Tue
http://www.thedoormagazine.com/buffy.html

No real new insights, but I found it amusing.

[> I suppose amusing is one word for it -- Dead Soul, 01:34:47 10/09/02 Wed

Certainly, "insightful" isn't.

[> [> I thought it was pretty inoffensive -- Rahael, 02:37:57 10/09/02 Wed

The article appears in what is clearly a Christian magazine.
Not surprising that they are going to see Christ like metaphors in the show! There are many posters on the board who have drawn similar parallels.

I wouldn't agree with all of it's interpretation, (in fact, I think the very evidence they quote could be turned right around) but BtVS does leave that room open. In fact, the narrative thrust that the article describes could be part of Joss' 'incoherent text'.

They clearly aren't one of the religious groups out to do the show down, and the whole thing is just an advertisement to watch it.

Anyway, we all see what we want to see in Buffy - as CW points out in his commandment! Btw, the Jerome quote in the article was great - one to cut out and keep. I think it's a very apt quote to use for Buffy as well.

[> [> [> Oh, I didn't think it was offensive -- Dead Soul, 02:47:20 10/09/02 Wed

Just not terribly well written and very superficial. I think what annoyed me most about the article was the description of the church scene where no mention is made of the fact that it is Faith in Buffy's body, not Buffy herself, who comes to save mankind (the good, church-going part of mankind, that is). Buffy comes to get her body back and maybe save a few folks.

If I misread it, my humble apologies - it's very late and I'm very sleepy.

Dead (and inclining towards the feline) Soul

[> [> [> [> Re: Oh, I didn't think it was offensive -- Rahael, 03:39:22 10/09/02 Wed

You're right of course - but I think the audience isn't hardcore Buffy fans, but people who don't watch and who might be prejudiced about it. Having to explain who Faith was, why she was in Buffy's body would probably be very long and involved. I think it's interesting that such a magazine is promoting Buffy, around about the time it got condemned for being too violent and having too much sexual content by a parent's group. Is 'The Door' British or American?

[> [> [> [> [> Their parent organization appears to be headquartered in Dallas, TX -- Dead Soul, 04:04:55 10/09/02 Wed

And their mission (greatly abbreviated and possibly misrepresented by me) seems to be satirizing the church as a way to keep it from taking itself too seriously and losing its focus. Again, just my brief first impression from reading their "about" page. A direct reaction to the Buffy condemners?

Dead Soul

Anya -- Humanitas, 23:07:52 10/08/02 Tue

It occurred to me this evening while watching STSP, that Anya's entire arc on the show has been in reaction to Xander. She first appears as a reaction to Cordy's pain, caused by Xander. She than falls for the boy who caused this pain, and as a direct result, hangs around for a couple of appocalypses, and becomes steadily more human. Then she goes back to the vengance gig, again, as a result of Xander's leaving her at the altar. The only other person she has really shown any more than a passing connection to is Giles, and that arises out of working for him. Interesting. Thoughts?

[> The Power of Anya -- Buffyboy, 03:39:44 10/09/02 Wed

In Same Time, Same Place the two recent purveyors of vengeance, Anya and Willow, met in a strange reenactment of their very first encounter. During their first 'magical' encounter in Doppelgangland Anya was desperate to return to her life as a vengeance demon. In Same Time, Same Place she is very nearly ready to renounce her one time calling. Anya admits to Willow that vengeance is no longer satisfying and indeed has become 'really upsetting.'

Anya: And the vengeance itself. It'sÖIt's not as fulfilling as I remember it.

Willow: Really, because I got the impression that you enjoyed, you know, inflicting.

Anya: Well, causing pain sounds really cool I know. But it turns out it's really upsetting. Didn't used to be. Now it is.

Anya has come to feel that vengeance isn't fun anymore. And more important than that, that vengeance is quite disturbing to the one doing the 'inflicting.' Willow then utters one of the more important lines in the episode.

Willow: Is it like, you're scarred of losing that feeling [being really upset] again and having it be OK to hurt people and then you're not in charge of the power anymore because its in charge of you?

Anya: Wow. That was really over-dramatically stated. But, yea, that's it.

It's not at all surprising to hear Willow make such a statement, what is much more curious is Anya's agreement with it. For Willow, her greatest fear is falling back into feeling like EvilWillow felt at the end of season six--not being upset by the action of hurting another human being. She isn't at all sure this won't in fact happen to her and once again her power to effective act in the world will slip from her control and in fact control her. She will become the mere plaything of her own power to act efficaciously. She will become the instrument of a power uncontrolled by any concern or sympathy for others.

Anya's position seems very different. She at first appears to be almost lamenting the fact that being a vengeance demon is no longer fulfilling like it used to be and in fact has become really upsetting. But yet when Willow expresses her concern about losing her ability of sympathizing with a suffering human being, Anya though calling attention to the over-dramatic nature of Willow remark, nonetheless agrees that she too harbors this fear. It now seems, assuming that Anya understood Willow remark, that Anya the vengeance demon (not just the human Anya before she reentered the vengeance demon fold) shares Willow's fear about losing her sympathy for human beings. This admission is quite remarkable. A vengeance demon that does not want to lose, and lose very quickly indeed, her sympathy for a human being she might be inflicting vengeance upon is clearly a very unhappy vengeance demon. As I said last week: Anya's days as a vengeance demon seem to be numbered.

[> [> Spoilers for Same Time, Same Place above -- Buffyboy, 04:02:56 10/09/02 Wed

Ep 7.3--the good and the bad -- HonorH, 23:14:09 10/08/02 Tue

Overall, I liked this ep very much. It dealt satisfactorily with Willow's return and the circumstances and Issues thereof. That being said, I've got the one huge freakin' reservation:

Spike. This felt like it was out of sequence. It didn't seem to follow "Beneath You." It's like there was BY, then several more eps, and then this one, with Spike still insane and everyone basically trying to work around him. Do they know about his soul? Did Buffy not tell them? It's a nagging point, and I'm not happy with the lack of closure.

I don't have a problem with Buffy asking him to bloodhound. He's there, and if he'll do it, he should: lives are at stake. His skill, just like if Buffy needed a carpenter, she'd call Xander. Just like Willow asking Anya to teleport. Also, buried in his babble was something about this being what he's supposed to be doing--helping. Buffy might even be trying to give him a concrete place so he *can* help, and it might even be helping him with his soul.

Overall, though, the Spike situation was a big blot on an otherwise enjoyable episode. Let's get to the positives, shall we?

Willow: exactly what I'd hoped for. She doesn't come back to Sunnydale expecting for everything to be okay. She just wants to help. The invisibility which she inadvertantly caused makes her worst fears come true. The monster eating her skin is also looking like some serious karmic payback. Longer and more painful, but not fatal, in this case. When she becomes visible and sobs tears of relief at finally seeing and being seen, I believed it completely. The final scene with Buffy was beautiful. Buffy lending her strength to Willow to help her heal is a wonderful illustration of where I hope this friendship will go.

The fun of the Anya/Willow scenes almost eclipsed it, though. Who'd have thought of those two bonding? But they are, and I can believe it. Anya's unhappy with vengeance. Willow discovered just how unfulfilling vengeance is. Maybe they can help each other. Perhaps Willow can help Anya see clearly what her options are. I like that D'Hoffryn's cracking down on Anya, too. Fish or cut bait time, dear. Where will you come down? The "sexy" spell was fun, too. BYO Subtext.

Xander and Dawn lend very strong supporting roles this week. See? This is how Dawn can be if you but give her a chance! I've been saying this for two years now. She's cute, funny, and helpful, and she doesn't eclipse anyone.

Seriously wigsome monster. Igh! Giles gets mentioned repeatedly. I like. No more, "Giles who?" this year. Funny lines. Great directing!

A classic, but for the Spike question. Ah, well. Nobody's perfect. Can't bat 1000. Don't forget your ticket.

[> Spoilers above, btw. -- HonorH, 23:15:26 10/08/02 Tue

[> One further spoilery note: -- HonorH, 23:40:45 10/08/02 Tue

Giles in a Council meeting. What do y'all think they're discussing? Perhaps the issue of Slayers-in-Waiting dropping like flies? I can't believe it was just a way to keep Giles out of the picture.

[> [> Re: One further spoilery note: -- Darby, 05:58:04 10/09/02 Wed

But who the heck is Willow talking to on the phone? Isn't the Council a bit, you know, secret? But Giles' housekeeper/whoever knows about it?

I wasn't troubled about the Spike stuff - I'm a bit more troubled by the "Buffy never tells us anything" subplot that seems stuck on repeat. Is no one going to follow this up? It happens, everybody's pissed, and then time passes, it happens again, everybody's pissed, over and over again. Spike's soul is another example - Buffy sweeps it under that famous rug and glides along like it didn't happen (which is why the lack of follow-up isn't surprising), until an issue will be made of it, everyone will find out that she's known for a while, and they'll be pissed...arrgh!

And, with all of the Willow-Anya subtext, am I the only one that picked up a similar vibe from the Buffy-Willow linkage? Hey, ME brought the subject up, it's not me!

- Darby, and maybe it is me...nahhh, I don't even understand why guys are supposed to, um, like lesbian scenes...

[> [> [> Standard answer: one glorious day, they'll ask us to join them. -- cjl, 06:48:57 10/09/02 Wed

[> [> [> Re: One further spoilery note: -- Isabel, 19:56:13 10/09/02 Wed

But who the heck is Willow talking to on the phone? Isn't the Council a bit, you know, secret? But Giles' housekeeper/whoever knows about it?

Couldn't she have been calling the Council itself? Wouldn't Giles have given her his work number so she could get in touch with him at all hours? It seems to me that any large organization, secret or no, would have someone to answer the phones and take messages.

[> Steven King influence (ep 7.3 spoilers) -- Cleanthes, 08:18:36 10/09/02 Wed

Seriously wigsome monster. Igh!

I agree fully. This one had my wiggins goosed almost as much as the Gentlemen and that's saying a lot.

Other have mention the kind of "gollum" vibe that his cave and posture and voice suggested, but I didn't see it at the time I first watched (I see it, though, now that someone else pointed it out). Instead, he seemed as gross and bloody as a Steven King monster. I've read all of King's books, but only `The Stand` have I read twice, so I can't actually remember if he had one quite like this.

Nothing like dealing it and then feeling it. Sometimes I like my comparisons subtle sometimes not. Sometimes I feel like a nut, sometimes not. Sometimes I want Andante Cantabile, sometimes 1812 overture.

Paralyzed Dawn had trouble staying on the sofa. So did I watching her...

[> [> Serious Stephen King fan here, and I didn't pick up on that -- vh, 11:29:49 10/09/02 Wed

[> [> Stephen King -- beast916, 11:41:13 10/09/02 Wed

While Mr. King has had many dark, horrifying, and/or gross scenes, he seldom has monsters, unless they are of the human variety or in short stories. Most of the monsters he writes seem almost normal, such as the citizens of Jerusalem's Lot who just happen to be vampires or Pennywise the Clown who just happens to kill children and has been around forever.

The closest I can think of a monster that even approaches the one on the scene is "The Boogeyman", who truthfully was less scary than the father who feared it.

Not to jump on the Gollum bandwagon, but it certainly did seem a lot like Smeagol's older, been-in-the-cave-a-lot-longer brother, but I am of a kind heart (sometimes) and prefer to think of it more as an homage than a rip-off.

[> Re: Ep 7.3--the good and the bad - Anya/Willow (spoiler-y) -- Mystery, 13:07:25 10/09/02 Wed

Everyone seems to be concerned about the Anya/Willow sub-text. I don't think anything is going to come from that.

First of all, Willow wasn't all too aware of the sub-text. It was all Anya. But that doesn't mean that Anya is romantically/sexually interested in Willow.

Remember, to Anya human relationships, real human relationships have always been about sex. It's kind of like how some people become promiscuous because they think sex=love/companionship/committment. As a vengence demon she spend most of her time with women who basically got overly involved in relationships and did everything they could, sometimes including sex, to keep their object of affection. Remember how she was when she first started talking to Xander. She thought that sex and sports were the way to get him to notice her. and throughout the relationship she always focused on the sex.

So Anya wasn't really trying to get a ROMANTIC relationship with Willow. She was trying to establish a closeness. I think it felt good that people were coming to her for help and she wanted to be around more. She definately wants to help everyone out, but she just doesn't know how. And with Willow and that moment, she got her first flash of "one of Xander's friends," in fact, Xander's oldest friend, actually understanding what she's feeling, rather than attacking her all out. She wanted to spend more time with Willow hanging out, not making out. I think Anya really misses real human companionship.

[> [> I agree, that's how I read that scene -- Scroll, 13:41:57 10/09/02 Wed

The way I saw it, Anya made her comment right after she and Willow shared an understanding of the hollowness of vengeance. Since Anya's best examples of friendship and closeness have been with Xander, and through sex, it makes perfect sense that she gets friendship and sex confused. Her scene with Willow is almost a vanilla, G-rated version of what she did with Spike. Anya was reaching out, trying to make a connection, to not feel alone.

[> [> Great reading of that scene! -- HonorH, 16:53:07 10/09/02 Wed

I don't think anything will come of the subtext either--I just thought it was a fun scene, and it was nice to see Anya actually being the first one to reach out to Willow.

[> [> Have to agree -- shadowkat, 17:07:44 10/09/02 Wed

As I posted to Zachs Mind below. I didn't get the subtext at all. Totally went over my head. Why? No chemistry.
None. To me it seemed to be two friends bonding.

That's what I think it is. I can't imagine an Anya/Willow ship at this point. I think we're still exploring Xander and Anya.

[> Spoilers for the "good" bad... -- Wisewoman, 17:43:46 10/09/02 Wed

Gnarl was about the best monster we've seen on BtVS, IMO. I think I caught the name "Cameron Tam." Anybody ever heard of him before? Nothing on google. Wonderful voice work! And the physicality...hey, it's not easy playing a guy with his naughty bits absent, unless it's on his face...

;o) dub

[> [> He was the lead Gentleman in "Hush" -- HonorH, 19:10:27 10/09/02 Wed

In other words, he's now played two of the oogiest baddies on the show.

[> [> [> IOW, we still don't know what he looks like...;o) -- dub, 20:24:09 10/09/02 Wed

But, yeah, I'd say quite the actor there. So much of Gnarl was in his voice, and the Gentlemen were terrifying without having any!

a few thoughts, speculations (spoilers for the end of S6 and maybe S7.) -- Anneth, 00:15:57 10/09/02 Wed

I rewatched Seeing Red, Villians, Two to Go, and Grave a few days ago, and noticed a couple of interesting things. Apologies if these have already been hashed and rehashed.

Seeing Red - Warren calls Jonathan "Sparky" when J jumps onto Buffy's back, ostensibly to distract her while she's fighting Warren, but actually to clue her in to W's magic... uh... orbs. That 'spark of humanity;' that niggling little cry of conscience that J felt through most of the latter half of S6 finally manifested itself by his action, and may have saved her a serious butt-kicking. Interesting, then, that Warren should be the first manifestation of the First Evil and call Spike "Sparky" - and then that Spike himself should go on about "the spark" until it becomes clear to Buffy and the audience that he's talking about his soul... his spark of humanity?

Two to Go/Grave: After Dark Willow imbues herself with superhuman strength begins to fight Buffy, she gasps out "I get it! I understand what makes a slayer! It's not about the violence - it's about power!" And power has come into play as a major force in every episode this season, most obviously in 7.1.

Two to Go/Grave: When Giles and Buffy are talking in the basement/warm-up room while Dark Willow is immobilized, Buffy mentions in passing that she still doesn't know why she's been brought back. Now, I have to admit, this never bothered me much. It always seemed to me that she came back because her friends brought her, plain and simple - she was loved and needed and that was that. But it seems that the Buffyverse has more of an explanation in mind than that. Perhaps, if indeed the prospective slayers or slayers-in-training are being killed off, she's been brought back because, as far as we know, she's one of the most powerful slayers ever. (Further implicating the power theme of this season) And as such, only she can fight off this enormous, looming evil.

So, in sum, I see two dominant themes for this season, and both were foreshadowed by the last few eps of S6 - humanity and power. Humanity is something almost every major character is struggling with this season - Anya, as she revealed in 7.3, no longer finds vengence completely satisfying. The power to inflict pain is still great and compelling to her, but the fact of that is at odds with her remaining humanity. Willow is trying to deal with similar issues; reconciling her feelings about killing Warren. Killing him gave her a sense of enormous power, but it has stricken her conscience in ways we're only just beginning to see. The conflict is most obvious in Spike, of course - it has actually driven him mad (with a little help from his friends). Will we see the same dichotomy arise in Buffy, Xander, and Dawn? Have we begun to see it already?

And I've gotta admit, I was glad the cell phones didn't surface this ep.

Anneth

[> Some excellent thoughts! -- HonorH (having a bout of insomnia), 01:45:41 10/09/02 Wed

I'll admit I hadn't thought of the Sparky connection before. I'd noticed that it was the same term RealWarren had used with Jonathan, but the connection hadn't occurred to me. Good catch!

The power connection had. It's been a recurring theme throughout the series, becoming explicit in "Checkpoint." It seems like more of an issue than ever these days, what with Anya and Willow dealing with their powers in an outright manner and Buffy lecturing Dawn on same. What it'll add up to is something only Joss (and selected PTBs) knows.

[> Re: a few thoughts, speculations (spoilers for the end of S6 and maybe S7.) -- Caroline, 11:39:40 10/09/02 Wed

Very nice post. If season 6 was about 'Oh, grow up', it looks like season 7 is shaping up to be 'Who are you?' That applies to everyone - the roots of Buffy's power, Spike with a soul, Anya's dissatisfaction with vengeance and her developing humanity, Xander post-Anya, Dawn/Key, good or evil Willow. Each of them has some kind of power issue that they need to control in their own lives as they confront who they are. We don't know about Dawn's residual powers as the key, but all the door imagery has to been something. Willow needs to control her magical power. Anya has her vengeance demon power, Spike his soul, and Xander his fears. Buffy has always had issues with her power from day one but now, if the ending of Lessons is anything to judge by, she is going to meet some Big Bad that will require she learn more lessons about her own power and the power of the BB she will confront.

7.3 magics (spoilers 7.3) -- neaux, 06:49:23 10/09/02 Wed

I'm really sorry if this has been discussed but I didnt see it anywhere.

Did anyone else think that the magics that Willow used in last nights episode were Tara-esque.

I know Willow is now using her magics for good. She got the whole Gaia-thing going on.. but her 2 specific spells.. the phase/invisibility spell and the locater spell are spells that either she performed with Tara in seasons past or that Tara herself performed.

Remember the demons that couldnt be seen?

Remember the glowy tinkbell thingy?

or am I as insane as spike?
please someone respond to my lunacy!

[> And another thing 7.3 magics (spoilers 7.3) -- neaux, 06:54:54 10/09/02 Wed

Anya and Willow's Map Burning Spell. Very very similar to Johnathon and Warren's Map Burning spell.

I guess someone on the show loves fire or hates maps.

[> [> Re: And another thing 7.3 magics (spoilers 7.3) -- Caroline, 07:45:14 10/09/02 Wed

Willow and Tara do a demon-locating spell with a map if I remember correctly. Tara, although we don't know this at the time, thinks she is a demon and therefore sabotages the spell by placing the powder under the bed in her room. As for the invisibility thing, I seem to remember that from the Halloween episode where Willow becomes a ghost because that is the costume she is wearing. Oh, and we can't forget Marcie becoming invisible after a lifetime of noone seeing her. Hmmm, seems like they are using these previous plot devices a lot. We really are going back to the beginning with all the plots this season. What next - surely they won't bring back hyena people?

[> [> [> Re: And another thing 7.3 magics (spoilers 7.3) -- DEN, 08:09:34 10/09/02 Wed

maybe I'm an optimist, but it seems that for the first time someone at ME has bothered to do some basic reading on the various approaches to magic, and at least begin developing a reasonably coherent structure of magic for the Buffyverse. As for last night's ep recycling earlier spells, the ones used seemed the kind of basics that are the equivalent of cell phones or computers: one would expect to see them employed regularly--or not?

It's All About Your Point of View - (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- shadowkat, 09:58:23 10/09/02 Wed

SK is having trouble accessing the board today so I am posting this for her via email (can't guarantee how the formatting will work so if it's messed up mea culpa and many apologies...now on to the good stuff.)--aliera


It's All About Your Point of View - (Spoilers 7.3! long)

(Not sure if this is redundant of not, I wrote this on the train this morning before reading the board and at work. And like most of my other posts an attempt to deal with something that bugged me.)

Whether you liked last night's episode has a lot to do with whether you liked being in Willow and Xander's limited pov all the way through it. I didn't like it, but then the story arc I'm interested in right now, Willow and Xander aren't exactly privy to.

Point of View is a film/literary technique that tells a narrative from a certain perspective, this can be from one person, two people, three, or omni (everyone). The more limiting the pov, the more frustrating it is on the reader or audience, since you only see things through the perspective you're given. It's a bit like having someone hand you a pair of glasses that are red, suddenly the world appears to be tinged in red. You can't see any other color until you remove said glasses. According to the book I'm reading, Kant's philosophy is that we cannot know what the world is like for anyone besides ourselves, we are limited by our point of view or by how things appear for us in time and space. If we put on a pair of red glasses, we see in red. "Everything (we) see is part of the world around (us), but how (we) see it is determined by the glasses (we) are wearing. So (we) cannot say the world is red even though (we) conceive it as being so." (From Sophie's World, A novel about the history of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder (yes, I'm still reading it, just imagine how long it would take me to read Kant.)

Another example, if a filmmaker chooses to place us inside just one character's head, we are limited to just that character's views, opinions, desires, and perspective on the world. We are not allowed to see beyond it. A great film (IMHO at least), Being John Malkovich explored what it would be like to suddenly find yourself physically inside someone else's head. Without going into too much detail, the film is a fantasy piece about a bunch of people who physically journey through a tunnel and end up inside John Malkovich. Once inside him, they only see, feel and perceive the world through John Malkovich's senses.

Btvs pulled a similar technique on us last night in episode 7.3: Same Time Same Place.We found ourselves in this episode limited to seeing the story through one pair of eyes, well two pairs but never at the same time. I did not like this episode very much until it dawned on me early this morning why what I desired to see in the episode was missing. Why weren't there any more slayers being killed? What did Buffy do about Spike? Does she even care? What a bitca! And what about Anya? The episode jarred me, because for the first time, we were no longer in Buffy's point of view. Not once during this episode were we in Buffy's pov. All we know or perceived of Buffy, Anya, Spike and Dawn was what Xander and Willow perceived. That's right ME put us smack dab in the pov's of the two people on the cliff in Grave.

ME used an interesting device to do this and they set it up in the very first scene, before the credits roll. It's the scene that the title comes from. This technique is used four times.It is called rewind and let's see that from another point of view now, shall we?We see the opening scene first through Xander's eyes (or what appears to be Buffy/Xander/Dawn but I'm pretty sure the focal point is Xander) and then through Willow's.

The first scene focuses on Xander's nervousness. The camera highlights this by first focusing on the people disembarking from the plane and entering the airport, then swinging to Xander's face then takes in Buffy and Dawn. Xander is holding a sign printed out in yellow crayon, which is barely visible to the viewer or Buffy. In fact Buffy or Dawn (doesn't really matter which) states that Willow probably won't be able to see it.Xander worries that Willow won't get the sign , and in his nervousness repeats a story he has clearly told ad nauseam. Dawn and Buffy also appear nervous, but Xander is not really privy to their thoughts. His focus is on He has already forgiven her, of course. But he's not so sure about Buffy and Dawn. Xander is also the first to notice and comment on the fact that Willow isn't coming out of the plane. In fact everyone has arrived but Willow.

Now we do something very interesting. We rewind and watch the whole scene again, but this round from Willow's perspective. We see the exact same scene. The same people leave the plane. The only difference is a)We now see Willow and b) Buffy/Xander/Dawn are missing.

After setting up the gimmick, the writer and director continue to use it throughout the episode. Hence the title Same Time, Same Place. This gimmick is used to startling and from my perspective frustrating effect four times. The next one is in the house. We see Willow enter, wander about, struggle with the memory of Tara's death, the first mention of it we've had all season. Hear a bang. Run downstairs. Find no one and fall asleep on the couch. Then we rewind and see Xander, Buffy, Dawn enter the house go upstairs, worry about what Willow is up to, and sit on the couch. Buffy is accusing Willow of being evil again or expresses her fears regarding it. Xander keeps defending her.Xander clearly is terrified he's lost Willow again. It is tempting to think we are in Buffy's pov here, but we aren't. We don't see Buffy if Xander or Willow aren't present. You could argue I suppose that B/D/X are a combined pov and I certainly thought so until I replayed the next two times ME repeats this technique.

The third time we see the rewind gimmick, Willow (after getting info from Anya, will get back to her later) has gone to hunt for Xander at his construction site. Instead she sees her worst nightmare. The skinned man. Willow's worst nightmare is also Xander and Buffy's. We rewind and see Xander and Buffy standing over the skinned man as well. And Buffy voices the fear that Willow did it. A fear Xander would rather not even contemplate. When I thought back on this scene I realized of the two characters, Xander was more wigged by the skinning in Season 6 then Buffy was. And the body appears at Xander's workplace. Xander called Buffy. Xander is the one struggling here, while Buffy is clearly in slayer mode.

Willow now goes to the high school to hunt down Buffy and Xander. She can't find them and figures maybe the basement. Anya after all had told her Spike was crazy down there and maybe Spike knows about the skinning or at least where Buffy and Xander are. Willow remember knows nothing about Spike except what Anya tells her. Forget what we learned last episode. All we know about Spike is what Willow has been told.Willow talks to Spike who seems even nuttier than he was before. Half of what he says makes zero sense. The only thing she can figure out is that Buffy and Xander think she skinned and killed the man and she must prove her innocence. She also has a faint inkling that they don't see her and she can't see them. But it's only an inkling nothing concrete.

Then we rewind and see the same scene from B/X, except if you watch it closely and then think about it, it's not really from B/X, it's only from Xander. Once I figured that out, I started liking Buffy again. Spike seems to be talking to Buffy or Willow about someone leaving. Xander thinks it's Buffy and we like Xander aren't clear what Buffy is talking about, she says very little nor does Xander care (forget what you saw last episode, you're in Xander's pov). Willow thinks he's talking about her. (again in Willow's pov.) From this scene, I think it's pretty safe to assume that Buffy told Xander very little about what happened in the church and of course Willow knows nothing outside of the brief explanation Anya gave her. Buffy appears almost cold and contained in the scene. She appears to be treating Spike the same way she did in Normal Again, and every other scene where Xander was present. What we are seeing is Xander's perception of Spike NOT Buffy's. We have no clue what Buffy is thinking, we only know what Xander thinks she is thinking. We also have no clue what Spike is thinking. Just Xander. To Xander, Spike is an insane vampire/dog that can help them get information, nothing more. They are only talking to him to get that information. Remember Buffy did not tell Xander she saw Spike in the basement previously.

When we rewind, we approach Spike through the eyes of Xander, we see the back of Buffy almost. We enter the cell, Spike is pacing and talking to someone. Xander assumes himself. It's not until Spike mentions Witch that Xander and Buffy realize that Spike has seen Willow. And when he says something about blood and there not being any, they realize he knows something about the demon and can possibly be used to lead them there. We aren't given any additional info on Spike, because of whose point of view we're in. Xander's.

The final time we do the rewind, is in the cave, with Willow entering it and confronting the demon at the same time as Xander, Buffy and Dawn. Dawn gets hurt. They seal the cave. Willow is stuck inside. I kept wondering what the heck happened to Spike. But that again makes sense. If Buffy pulled him aside or spoke to him or saw him take off, we wouldn't know about it. We're in Xander's pov. Xander's focus is his fear of this demon who skins people and his relief it's not Willow. Spike means zip to Xander. All Xander cares about right now is Willow and this demon that terrifies him.

Each episode has a demon representing the focus characters fears. In Lessons it was the three people Buffy failed to save and Buffy and Dawn's fears regarding Dawn surviving SHS and Buffy being able to protect her. In Beneath You it was the worm that Buffy and Spike feared he'd become and that it would devour them both. In Same Time Same Place it is the skinning demon that represents what Willow did and is Willow and Xander's fears about Willow enjoying torturing Warren and the fact they both felt Warren deserved it.

Anya is quite interesting in this episode. Because we are now in Willow and Xander's pov, we actually see a nicer side of Anya. A more human side. Anya clearly is no longer happy being a vengeance demon. She and Willow actually bond here. She wishes Willow was less accommodating, it's makes it hard for Anya to feel angry to want to punish her. Willow wants to be punished and Anya has grown tired of punishing people. Vengeance, Anya tells Willow, has lost it's appeal, she no longer enjoys it as much as she used to. This surprises Willow a little but Willow also gets it, and it is an important conversation to have at this point, because Anya is expressing aloud something that Willow has probably thought a great deal about. Vengeance in theory seems wonderful but somehow when enacted? Doesn't bring much satisfaction. Willow and Anya both have lost more due to vengeance than they gained. Anya is also seen from Xander's perspective as helping them, she comes to their aid and genuinely cares about Willow. Tells them about the demon and how badly hurt Willow is and when she realizes they can't see Willow, goes for help. From Xander's pov , we see Anya is still the Anya he fell in love with. Last week when we were mostly in Spike/Buffy's point of view, Anya was more of a vengeance demon.

Anya and Spike are the only one's who appear to see Willow. Both attempt to help in their own ways. How this comes across has a great deal to do with whose pov we are in. Willow has neutral feelings towards Spike and is pretty much self-absorbed in this episode. Her primarily focus is on her fear, desire to hide from her friends, and clear herself of suspicion. Willow is not afraid of Anya or Spike nor does she care what they think of her. Her feelings towards both are fairly neutral. It's Buffy, Dawn and Xander that scare Willow. And in typical Willow fashion, she hides. Before seeing this episode, I re-watched School Hard, where Spike first comes to town and tries to kill all of them at a Parent/Teacher conference. When Xander and Willow learn about Spike's plans, Willow's first response is "can we hide?", Xander's is "what about a vacation?" Willow spends most of the episode hiding in a closet. Is it any wonder, that when faced with her friends' reactions to her crimes, her first unconscious response is to hide, via magic? She uses magic much like Spike used clothes in Beneath You, to hide from the people she loved. Both Spike and Willow have a desire to hide. Anya also wants to hide, behind her demon visage. To retreat from the pain Xander's rejection caused. But hiding doesn't help any of them. Willow's attempt to hide places her in the hands of the demon who tortures her in much the same way she tortured Warren. Willow discovers in this episode what we've known all along, she is her own worst enemy. No one can hurt Willow more than Willow. And what she feared most? Buffy's inability to forgive her? Turns out not to be such a major problem after all.

Throughout the episode Buffy is presented as unforgiving and the cool aloof slayer/ hero Buffy. I kept wanting to bash her over the head with a stick. (Sorry, the Buffy that Willow and Xander perceive annoys me.) At the end of the episode, Buffy confronts Willow in her room. Willow jumps slightly. Buffy joins her. Listens to her. And offers to give Willow some of her strength. Taking Willow's hands in hers. It is the first time during this episode that I saw compassion from Buffy, because finally Willow sees it and realizes that Buffy can forgive even her. Willow just had to stop hiding long enough to find out. It's similar to the end of Willow's dream in Restless when Buffy rips off Willow's wiccan costume revealing the true Willow underneath. Except in Same Time Same Place Willow does it herself.

Okay end of my take on the episode. Hmmm...I find myself liking it better in retrospect than I did while watching it. Maybe that's because I was resisting the point of view? Any feedback, thoughts, arguments??

Thanks for indulging me.

[> By George, I think she's got it! -- HonorH, 10:23:29 10/09/02 Wed

That does explain some things that left me unsatisfied in the episode. The Spike problem, for instance--seen through the eyes of Xander or Willow, he's not nearly so complex or sympathetic. Limiting pov like that is a common thing for a writer to do, but it's less done on TV. Like "The Zeppo," for instace, being all Xander-pov, and that was an episode that left me a bit frustrated as well.

Thanks, s'kat. Less irritated now.

[> [> that new show Boomtown is nothing but limited povs -- JBone, 16:59:50 10/09/02 Wed

But it has many (I'd guess 10 to 12 on average) in a given episode, and they hit the reset for the big scenes at least once, if not more. And it jumps around in time quite a bit. All that said, it's compelling tv.

[> [> [> Re: that new show Boomtown is nothing but limited povs -- shadowkat, 17:18:11 10/09/02 Wed

"But it has many (I'd guess 10 to 12 on average) in a given episode, and they hit the reset for the big scenes at least once, if not more. And it jumps around in time quite a bit. All that said, it's compelling tv."

Interesting. It didn't grip me. This must just be a technique I don't like very much. 24 does the same thing. I find the jumping points of view jarring. In BoomTown it was interesting but I felt disconnected from the characters. Of course I've only seen the first episode, it comes on at 10 pm on Sundays and at the moment I have to get up at 6am Mon to go to work - so it's either tape or miss. And well I only have so many tapes. LOL! (taping firefly, angel and btvs, also er b/c it comes on at 10 too). ER also jumps about but it's not limited pov like Boomtown.

Boom Town is actually the best example of this technique. But is was also used in several recent films. Most notably: Mullholland Drive and I think The Limey? It's a tough technique/gimmick to make work without confusing the heck out of your audience. You have to have the audience with you early on or they revolt and hate it. I tend to despise gimmicks by and large, because they often sacrifice things like plot, character development, and substance for style.
And I'm a substance over style girl. Whether Same Time Same Place committed this sin or not, may be open to interpretation. Right now? I'm veering towards substance.
But I promise to try Boomtown again this week, give it another chance to see if it holds up.

Thanks for bringing that up. Also enjoyed the levity your contests brought to the board Jbone. Much fun. Even if the Tara beat my favorite Slayer and the Mayor beat my favorite Vamp. ;-)

[> [> [> [> Another one that people love or hate is Pulp Fiction -- JBone, 17:43:53 10/09/02 Wed

Most of my favorites got beat out before the final four, but what are ya gonna do?

[> [> [> [> [> Loved Pulp Fiction -- shadowkat, 17:56:10 10/09/02 Wed

But hey...you probably guessed that. Like dark characters here.

And yeah, I noticed that. Every character you liked got kicked out. And you ran the contest! Guess that's proof it was a fair one. ;-)

(Okay I admit I voted twice for Faith but it didn't do any good, Tara beat her anyway.)

[> [> [> [> [> [> perhaps I'm a nemesis -- Rochefort, 19:08:26 10/09/02 Wed

Hated every moment of Pulp Fiction and all it's "dark"ness. Loved Same Time on first viewing. Love Tara and voted for her. I never cheat. (Plus you think I whine, and don't hesitate to say so.) So what do you think? Are you in need of a nemesis?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: perhaps I'm a nemesis -- shadowkat, 07:10:50 10/10/02 Thu

Not completely. I love Tara. It's some of the bizarre posts on this board using Tara to bash other characters that have made me dislike her at times. But I do love the character.

I just preferred Faith's story arc is all - it was more interesting. Tara seemed to be somewhat limited to Willow.

[> Re: It's All About Your Point of View - (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- Luna, 10:26:30 10/09/02 Wed

Excellent! Roshomon, anyone? I had missed the first 10 minutes and thought too that it was pretty simple-minded, because again I'm interested in what's happening with Spike, the strange people in Istanbul, and others not in this episode. But the careful management of POV from ShadowKat made me see it as more complex than I had thought, and doing more with the characters. I keep suspecting them of going back to the fun of the early shows, at the same time I think that's what's really missing from season 6.



Roshomon, anyone?

I liked the way it made very graphic character's inability to see each other's pain, esp. when Xander and Buffy couldn't see the wounded Willow--and the image of paralysis fit Dawn and Willow's current state fairly well, too. Also liked the continued development of Anya--dealing, like Spike, with a return to her former self that's not what she expected and not easy to cope with, but unlike Spike she's quite sane and also comic.

[> Brilliant, s'kat! (And thanks to aliera for posting it.) -- Rob, 11:08:58 10/09/02 Wed

I personally loved the episode already, which you can kinda tell from my gushy "favorite episode" post lol, but your post has added even more perspective to what I thought was already a brilliant episode. Thanks!

Rob

[> Wow! Complete gear shifting in my brain! -- ponygirl, 12:09:34 10/09/02 Wed

Well, now you've gone and done it. Completely altered my perspective on this episode! Makes it all the more interesting to think of Xander and especially Willow trying to piece together complicated situations with only tidbits of information.

It's also making me think about the final scene as well, when Buffy takes Willow's hand that is the first time anyone actually touches Willow in the whole episode. I'd thought it strange that in the cave, even when Willow is visible to Buffy and Xander, they didn't touch her. Odd since she was lying there crying and injured. Anya never touched her either. Willow still doesn't fully connect until Buffy finally offers some of her own perspective - her thoughts and feelings about what had happened.

Great work! Hope your computer woes are only temporary.

[> [> Re: Wow! Complete gear shifting in my brain! - Me too! -- acesgirl, 13:02:56 10/09/02 Wed

This is really great stuff Shadowkat. Although, I'm still holding fast to my position that Buffy did tell Xander & Dawn about Spike's soul. I could be wrong, but I just can't see Xander going with Buffy to that basement to seek out Spike's help if he didn't know about the soul. If he didn't know about the soul, then his perspective on Spike before going into that basement is that Spike tried to rape Buffy, left, then came back and the first time he's around the Scoobies again he engages in a brawl with Anya & Buffy in the Bronze and now is looney tunes. So Xander knows all of that but not about the soul and he's willing to go with Buffy to seek his help, not once but twice? I'm not buying. Of course, I'll probably be proven wrong next week, but until that time, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

[> Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- alcibiades, 12:10:57 10/09/02 Wed

You may be right s'kat, and I certainly like the show better from the perspective you give it, but I have to say how unattractive does it make Xander and Willow as characters.

First, Willow kind of deals with Anya -- but only because she is the only one Willow can find -- she also cuts her off when Anya is communicating what is important to Anya -- because hey, the only important one in the conversation is Willow -- I had a friend who used to do that regularly, and just like with Willow, it was a mark of her deep self-involvement.

And then, in the cave, for her to moan about being all alone when Anya is sitting right there helping her. Either it reveals she doesn't think that Anya is anybody - a really attractive thought -- or she's talking about herself and she needs Buffy and Xander to feel complete -- and that's another unattractive thought right there.

Willow seemed mature and dealing with herself in her scenes with Giles, but here she regresses past bearing. She's afraid to use her powers to fight the Gnarl because hey big scary powers and that might make her look scary to Xander and Buffy. She'd rather play the helpless victim they have to find and rescue than help herself and try to be integrated -- even the scary parts that other people will find unsettling -- and whole and ultimately safe. Instead she reads like some princess in a fairy story who can only wake up with a kiss when she finds out she is loved. So she regresses to the passive voice. And becomes utterly passive.

Spike is right there dealing with every bit of himself despite the fact that is a very unattractiv messe. Ultimately I think he'll find re-integration. But if Willow keeps on denying a part of herself because in the past that is the only way she has ever been loved, I don't think she'll ever find reintegration.

Furthermore, don't know what to think about regrowing the skin. Healing wounds -- that's obvious. But she's also regrowing a tough skin to cover the bits of her that are vulnerable before she has actually dealt with them fully. It may be her way of just covering herself up again because she still can't deal with Willow despite the fact that she just wants to be Willow.

Also, I'm not sure how great it is she is now sleeping in a child's bed in a child's room. Obviously she is happy with that -- she wants Buffy to be her loving mommy figure. But the point of last year's finale was surely that Willow deep down did not like having to play second fiddle to Buffy all the time - second on the power hierarchy. She resented the hell out of it. Now to move back in explicitly in the child's room seems to be a good way to reinforce deep down exactly the same resentment -- despite the fact that it was Willow who made herself the childlike princess in the fairy tale.

In all kinds of ways, it might have been better for Willow to live alone -- nearby -- in an attached apartment, somewhere where it won't reinforce the childlike persona she assumes when she doesn't want to face herself.

As for Xander, it seems he can't get past thinking of both Spike and Anya as dogs. Spike is a bloodhound. And Anya once more is the happy puppy loping behind her master.

This may be why for me the episode seemed all about the Triumph of Calvinism with the Scoobies as the elect once again. Buffy is the High Priest of electedness, Dawn is newly elect -- but was it ever a question. Xander is elect. And Willow -- she was elect, and then Satan tempted her and she almost fell -- but hey, folks don't worry, she's elect again now.

And Spike and Anya -- well they're just demons. Does anyone care about their spiritual welfare? How could they possibly be elect? In the spiritual world, they're dogs.

Which is why the episode seemed extremely claustrophic to me. Because no one else counts when it comes down to it, but the Scoobies.

Xander also seemed curiously off in this episode. He really did seem slow -- it's obviously purposeful -- but what is going on with him to make him this out of it so early in the season.

[> [> Brilliant stuff! -- Caroline, 12:29:03 10/09/02 Wed

I was thinking the same things about Willow and Xander as I was reading the post. The self-involvement level of Buffy and Willow has not changed. They both appear to be in denial - Willow about her darkness and Buffy about her orientation to Spike. First 2 episodes rated a Yay! Willow's return - disappointing.

PS - Willow sleeping in another room - I can understand that. She doesn't want to sleep in the room where Tara was shot.

[> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- shadowkat, 15:41:24 10/09/02 Wed

I had similar problems to your's alcibades.
It was why my initial reaction to this episode was to rant.
I was sooo disappointed. Then this morning on the train, I started to think about it...and realized wait, let's think about what the writers are trying to do here? The show deals with inner fears. And Buffy slays them, right?

So what are Xander and Willow's inner fears about Willow's return? Willow not being accepted back into the group.
Willow and Xander really aren't focused on Anya and Spike.
Anya and Spike are demons. We're dealing with two 21 year old adults who have felt lucky to fight alongside the slayer and last year one almost ended the world and one saved it. They can't really see beyond that at this moment.

Spike says some interesting things in this episode about both Xander and Willow which oddly enough fit what you say above.

1. to Willow: "You go off, you try to wall up the bad parts, and put your heart back in where it fell out. You call yourself finished, but you're not; you're worse off than ever, you are." Willow feels she lost her heart.

2. to Xander:"Keep your ticket, you'll need that." Ticket= soul/spirit.

Whoa. Wait a minute isn't Willow's strength spirit? And Xander's heart? Has he switched them?

Crazy people in Btvs often see the true person underneath. Tara saw Dawn as a energy ball when she was nuts. Dru could always tell what was going to happen next. Now we have Spike.

In your post you point out how Willow has retreated, she's not branching out. She's living in the child's room.

Xander is treating Spike as a dog. And seems out of wack.

I'm wondering if this isn't on purpose. If maybe this isn't how Willow and Xander see themselves? Maybe it's who they think they are?

(RE: Calvinism - Could you explain what you mean?
I asked Rah on a different post and she gave a completely different perspective. Would be interested to hear more on yours? Why is this considered Calvinism as opposed to Puritanism? Does Calvinism look at the world in this manner?)

[> [> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- Arethusa, 07:54:12 10/10/02 Thu

I'm wondering if this isn't on purpose. If maybe this isn't how Willow and Xander see themselves? Maybe it's who they think they are?

Yes, I agree. (I tried to post a comment about this yesterday, but I've been having huge problems reading the board, and not been able to post at all.)
I couldn't figure out why Xander seemed so much dimmer than usual, until I read your comments about point of view. The pov is not only how Xander and Willow see others; it's how they see themselves, also. Xander is acting less smart than usual, and he's also carrying the crossbow-I can't remember many instances that he carries weapons, although I'm sure others can. (Is it significant that like in opening of The Zeppo, the Scoobies are fighting a monster in a cave?)

[> [> [> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- shadowkat, 08:22:57 10/10/02 Thu

"Is it significant that like in opening of The Zeppo, the Scoobies are fighting a monster in a cave?)"

Interesting. I think it is. Especially since it's a cave
Xander doesn't see until Spike points it out to him.
Inside the cave - the SG deal with their buried fears.
Xander's fear of being useless not helping. Notice how he keeps repeating how he saved the world last year with just his mouth - in the beginning. Xander feels like a big doofus. The line he focuses on with Spike?

"Her boy??"

Xander is lead to the cave somewhat reluctantly by Spike.

Willow is lead there by magic. And wants Anya to check it out for her.

Both Xander and Willow would rather have the two demons look into it first. Neither demon cooperates. Anya says she can't teleport any more. Spike shows them where it is and leaves.

Entering the cave - Dawn gets hurt, Xander does zip. He is carrying a crossbow that he never fires. Buffy makes some comment about his uselessness. The best he can do in the fight scene is comment on the grossness of the fight and go for the eyes. In Xander's pov, i felt his feelings of inadequateness.

Willow inside the cave - gets abandoned there, and it is ironically her own fault. She's trapped - sealed in. She tries to do spells but the demon says how he keeps spells for pets. She's helpless. She is Willow of the Harvest, Witch, Season 1 Willow. And paralyzed with fear. Unseen.
The irony? Being unseen is her doing.

Another interesting thing that occurred to me just now and further emphasizes how this episode was intended to focus on these two characters views of themselves and the other characters:

Spike only foreshadows what will happen to Xander and Willow. He comments on their deepest fears.

1. You went away and took your heart out, then thought you could put it back in, you thought you were finished, but you are worse than before. (to Willow and not exact)

2. That's your ticket you want to keep that. (to Xander)

Xander is afraid of losing his heart? Willow is afraid she lost her's and is worse than before? Both fears are spoken aloud by Spike - who can now see things they others are unable to see. He can see all of their fears including his own.

The more I think about this episode through Willow and Xander's pov the more interesting it becomes.

[> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- Rahael, 16:00:31 10/09/02 Wed

Great post.

Willow moved into the Child's bedroom, where last season she was in the 'mother's room' the room of authority, power and ownership. She programmed the Bot. She made the decisions in the W/T relationship. But it was a premature maturity, she misused her authority, and she broke.

Buffy is clearly shown as moving back into the position of authority, and particularly maternal authority. She tells Willow that she has so much power, she can give away some of it. (Does this tie in with Wesley giving blood to Angel? - though the parent/child dynamic there is so tense!)

As for the Calvinism, I pretty gave my perspective on it a couple of days ago, though you may disagree with it.

But I'll just make a point, hopefully to clear up SK's misunderstanding. The point about elect status is that you cannot switch back and forth from elect to damned. You won't even know whether you are or not. God made an arbitrary decision before you were born.

I'd say Spike and Anya's very actions, with it's explicit counterpoint to the Scoobies - that pretty much undercuts the idea that there is a hierarchy in the spiritual world. And Spike's bold decision to ask for a soul (and indeed, Anya's to lose her's) shows that in the Buffyverse, 'elect' status (if one wanted to use that term) is not arbitrary. If we're going to use any kind of Christian theology here, I'd say, go to the very view that Calvin and Luther were reacting against - the idea that through his actions man could reach God.

In fact, the fact that Spike and Anya come out of this so well, doesn't it question whether demon or human or vampire with a soul actually means anything at all? Isn't it about how we choose to behave toward others, and how we choose to lead our lives, nothing more? I've caught some echoes from posts here that Anya's being excluded from the scooby gang, even by Buffy. Now, I'm a big Buffy supporter, but after the last two eps of SEason 6, I'm a big big Anya supporter. She showed the kind of courage and compassion and sheer humanity that I'd always admired in Buffy.

If Buffy excludes her and brings Willow back into the fold? watch out for some posts from my alter ego!

[> [> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- shadowkat, 16:25:30 10/09/02 Wed

Thanks Rah - I was hoping you'd come and clear up the Calvinism thing. I think I may understand it now. At any rate your view seems to make the most sense.

"In fact, the fact that Spike and Anya come out of this so well, doesn't it question whether demon or human or vampire with a soul actually means anything at all? Isn't it about how we choose to behave toward others, and how we choose to lead our lives, nothing more? I've caught some echoes from posts here that Anya's being excluded from the scooby gang, even by Buffy. Now, I'm a big Buffy supporter, but after the last two eps of SEason 6, I'm a big big Anya supporter. She showed the kind of courage and compassion and sheer humanity that I'd always admired in Buffy.

If Buffy excludes her and brings Willow back into the fold? watch out for some posts from my alter ego!"

To clear up some concern. I strongly disagree with posts that mention Buffy excluding Anya. In this episode alone we see Willow go to Anya for help. Then we see Buffy call Anya to watch Dawn. When Anya tells them about the Gnarl - Buffy requests Anya accompany them. Anya doesn't want to, but reluctantly gives in b/c she cares about Willow. In this episode Anya shows a great deal of concern for Willow in front of both Buffy and Xander and goes off to get help for her.

The reason she's not in the SG is not b/c of Buffy, but because she is an active vengeance demon and D'Hoffryn has already given her one warning for helping the good guys. For removing the vengeance curse - her teleportation privelege is removed. She's being punished in this episode.
Anya is excluding herself from the SG not the other way around.

Wait until you see it - but I'm pretty sure you'll agree.
I love Anya too. And she comes off better in this episode than the last two.

[> [> [> [> Re: Deconstructing Willow and some Xander (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- Rahael, 04:55:13 10/10/02 Thu

Thanks for the Anya reassurance! Good to know.

[> Re: It's All About Your Point of View - (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- MaeveRigan, 12:39:44 10/09/02 Wed

Fabulous, shadowkat! It's a pleasure to find someone reading the episode instead of simply reacting to it.

[> A very helpful post. -- Cactus Watcher, 12:41:02 10/09/02 Wed

I caught Willow's pov just by watching it the first time. But, I missed that the other pov is mostly Xander. Since usually we get Buffy's side of things it did make things appear a little odd, especially when Buffy climbed on to the bed to help with Willow's meditation. If as you say we had no idea what she was thinking, then the suddenly helpfulness can exist just in Willow's version. Helping Willow can be what Buffy wanted all along.

Just a tiny bit more ammunition for your Willow and hiding theory. In that consummate pov episode Restless, when Giles in Willow's dream gives his final instructions to the acting students he tells them above all to "hide." Just as Buffy's "You men with your... sales!" speech is really Willow acting the part of Buffy, so too Giles, as the purveyor of acting advice, is Willow playing at being Giles.

[> [> I agree -- DickBD, 13:00:42 10/09/02 Wed

I am among those who didn't like this episode as much as the others. This helps, and I don't mind working at it if there is eventually a big payoff--and there usually is on Buffy. Then, the question is, was Anya's "pass" at Willow in a sexual way simply as it was perceived by Willow. (That is, was a basically innocent mark magnified in her perception?)

While on that subject, I must confess that I accept the fantasies of Buffy, and it is still a good series. After all, I don't believe in witches and vampires or anything else supernatural. It seems that human nature rings true though. Except for the transition in sexual orientation. Willow had a crush on Xander and then Oz. And her true love turns out to be Tara. Can that really happen? (I suspect it is quite rare.) Now are we going to witness Anya changing her orientation?

[> [> [> Re: I agree -- newlurker, 14:00:41 10/09/02 Wed

IOW, is sexual orientation fixed or fluid? If it's fixed then you're either gay or straight and never wander. If it's fluid, you can have some folks getting attracted to people of either gender. I've seen it happen - heck it's happened to me - so I'm going with the fluid notion.

[> [> [> suggestion -- another lurker!, 18:20:08 10/09/02 Wed

I'd recommend talking to some gay or lesbian people - I think you'd be very surprised by the number of people who've been in love with (or at least had a crush on) people of the opposite sex at some point in their lives, before either deciding that they're gay, or that they're bisexual. It's more unusual for someone to have been absolutely 100% gay from year dot, than it is for someone to have been outwardly straight, at least on some level.

Willow's arc isn't in any way a particuarly odd lesbian story; in fact, I'd go as far as to say it's considered the 'norm', at least among everyone I've spoken to. No disbelief need be suspended!

[> [> [> Re: I agree -- JM, 16:29:53 10/10/02 Thu

Also, if you take a look at some of the literature (I'm talking erotica, not psychology here) women are not terribly unlikely to incorporate elements of same-sex interaction into fantasy sequences, even if they aren't interested in exploring them in actuality. Sex impulses are probably biology plus. Since we don't just interact in order to reproduce. Women seem somewhat more likely to acknowledge the sensual in their own sex. Which makes sense, since our sex-roles are, though occasionally more confining, are somewhat less narrowly defined than those of males in the dominant American culture.

[> Well taken, however -- vh, 13:00:13 10/09/02 Wed

You've made some good points. However, I think that the points in Miss Edith's thread are well taken as well. Can we assume that Buffy said things that Xander did not hear or didn't say things that he did hear (stinky Spike)? I do hope that the text isn't being stretched that far! I think the more likely scenario to explain some of the jarring disconnect in tone is the reshoot, as suggested below. I know that is a far less satisfying explanation, but these things happen in a TV shoot. Hopefully, any major glitches will be fixed with reshoots or smoothed out by future dialog/action.

[> Very interesting, Shadowkat -- Sarand, 14:07:52 10/09/02 Wed

I did think when they did the rewind at the beginning that we were in Willow's POV, but I kept thinking that "this" is not really happening, it's what Willow fears/wants to have happen. At times, I thought it was dream-like and when it turned out not to be, I confused and not happy with the characters. I didn't get that it was Xander's POV as well. So, what do you think that means for the things Buffy was saying at times? Like when they were in the basement with Spike, when she referred to the smell as they followed Spike and particularly when Anya and Xander were playing with "posable Dawn" and Buffy seemed rather uncaring and put the remote in Dawn's hand and went out the door. Did she say these things or is this the way that Xander heard them? Makes me less annoyed at Buffy but more annoyed at Xander. Reminds me of conversations between my mother and my brother with me listening. I swear, neither one hears what the other is actually saying. Of course, me - perfect hearing. LOL! And today, I kept thinking that Willow was being so self-centered. Duh, I guess, but it bothers me that she's so concerned about being accepted and loved but not so concerned about making amends for what she did. So is the last scene really Buffy or Buffy the way Willow wants to hear her?

Very nice post. Put things in a whole different perspective and gave me something to think about. I still think, though, that the episode was badly placed in the scheme of things. Too jarring after last week's emotional ride.

[> Whew...finally can read the board! And I missed it! Thanks! -- shadowkat, 15:20:56 10/09/02 Wed

I've tried to access this board all day long - I could access every other net site but Atpo and Atpo is my favorite. I didn't realize how much I truly love this board until I couldn't access it. I really missed you guys. This truly is the best Buffy/Angel discussion forum on the net! By the way the subjective pov idea I sort of owe to Rah, who got me thinking about it after reading her reply to a post I made on the Nietzche thread.

I haven't rewatched the episode yet, but like most of the posters on this thread? I was extreemly disappointed in it last night. In fact, poor aliera who sooo kindly posted this, got my first reaction - you so do NOT want to hear it.

Willow seemed overly self-absorbed to me. Xander overly nerdy and nervous. Buffy too aloof and contained and cold.
Spike more insane than usual. Anya actually was likable.
So was Dawn. And I didn't find it funny.

So I thought about it some more and realized wait a minute, this episode employed a major league gimmick. Why? Pov!
And wait! The comments made by the characters surrounding Xander - all sound a lot like Xanderisms. What if the writers decided to put the episode in the pov of the two people on that cliff and show their fears? And suddenly I saw a whole new depth to the episode.

Thanks for your wonderful replies. Will go back and address some individually. Now that I FINALLY can!!

[> [> Re: Whew...finally can read the board! And I missed it! Thanks! -- Rahael, 15:44:11 10/09/02 Wed

Cool! and great post!

[> Sophie's World -- Lyonors, 17:28:31 10/09/02 Wed

SK: I was reading your post-via-aliera and came to your quotation about Kant and recognized it immediately. After reading your post, I realize how much I need to reread that book. I read it while I was taking my basic western philosophy class in college, and after my prof realized how much better I understood what was going on, he made it required reading for the class.
Your post really helped me understand the episode better. I had a general like for it, but as my VCR hates me, I didn't get to record it and rewatch it. I totally missed the Xander POV. As always, you have managed to clear up the crazy thoughts after a new episode!

Thanks!
Ly

[> Once more with the almost crossovers - (Spoilers 7.3! l and Angel 4.1) -- fresne, 18:13:18 10/09/02 Wed

Excellent lens for viewing STSP.

I'll admit that I liked the episode quite a bit more than much of the board. I mean, I don't quite want to have it's love child or anything, but a light flirtation wouldn't be amiss. It was funny. It had a creepy villain. Although, gotta go with she whose name may only be tremblingly whispered, so august is her horror re: Buffy's top. That was a fashion choice that should be thrown into the bottomless pit where the nameless and indescribable things can eat it.

But I digress, ramble etc. Lack of sleep. Got up at 1:00 am this morning and was so twisted to all normality that I washed my dishes and cleaned my room before going back to sleep. Possibly posting is a bad idea since I really get the Escher perspective at the moment. Whatever.

I actually had the pleasure of watching Angel (horrible VCR accident, a community of taping friends is a wonderful thing), then Buffy, then okay off topic Smallville.

Some things which randomly occur.

Vengeance is something that came tantalizing up in both episodes. Of course, on Angel we had last season's tangled web, which really needs a Visio diagram, but I'll settle for this:
Holtz , Angelus/Angel
Justine , all vampires
Angel , Wesley
Connor , Angel
Lilah , Angel
Linwood , Angel/Connor
And then you know the random people caught in the crossfire.

which leads us to

Fred - Connor
Wesley , Justine
Justine slit Wesley's throat, killed Holtz, lied to Connor about it and helped lock a sentient being in a box, which she then helped dump under the ocean. Wesley's actions are thus chilling and all the more morally troubling because in a Dante's Inferno kind of way, Justine's punishment fits the crime. Also, the statement that she has always been a slave, lends itself to the idea that each character's own inappropriate patterns of behavior that have led them to 'getting what they deserve.' At this juncture, I wonder if Wesley behaves as he does because he sees himself as damned and thus no further fall is possible.

Although in a tangent, if Wesley was sulking like Achilles in his tent then my feelings would be much more straight forward. Agamemnon was a jerk, stinky and his hair stuck straight up. In fact the whole war was just plain lame. Note how I write off one of the great works of literature with sweeping bold strokes. Surely flames to rival that of Troy must, I don't know, sit there scorching the carpet. Although, statements as to Agamemnon's jerkitude are not meant to imply that he, and certainly not Cassandra, necessarily deserved axing in the tub. Come to think of it that was a nice round of vengeance in itself.

Anyway, so according to Anya and Willow, revenge isn't as satisfying as you'd think. Good to know.

Angel when finally able to confront Connor, pretty much states my life philosophy (life sucks, therefore we have an obligation not to), offers him love and tells him to leave. Consider as Angel does this, he must be thinking of how his own father cast him out of the house. How as a way of proving himself to his father, Angel, newly born from Liam, killed his father.

Which BTW is why I think Connor is still at the hotel. He, like Angel, wants a family. Longs for a father figure. Holtz who raised him, who died and left him alone with nothing but vengeance. Angel who Connor sent to a watery tomb. Connor rebels against Gunn and apologizes to him almost with the same breath. Runs away. Comes back. Leaps into the void. Panders for praise. Connor has had his vengeance, but it isn't as sweet as he thought, if he had a thought beyond the now. Now he is merely empty with his whole life ahead.

Willow has had her revenge and found it bitter. Now she's not even sure who Willow is, if her friends will know her.

I found it interesting that Willow was seen by those members of the group that have been marginalized from the group. Members who were necessary to carry out the episode's action. Spike to find the demon. Anya who had demonic experience. Who could see Willow. Thus, I quite enjoyed Willow and Anya's bonding. Two people who have known each other for years suddenly relating in new ways.

Theory alert , I think Warren/Big Bad told Spike about Willow's little hijinks this last year, all the better to torment him.

As to why Wesley went Ahabing all on his Justine-ish lonesome, I'd guess it's because he didn't want to give the game away to W&H and Connor. Or maybe it was an Ahab thing, vengeance on the white whale not by killing it, but by saving it.

Other random bits.

Skin , Spike's costume. Veiny Willow versus Crayon Willow (Xander , slight tip, yellow crayon on a black background is much more visually striking and I think more to the point. Because Willow is yellow crayony and dark.) Willow's invisibility. Flaying to reveal the inner revolting you. A demon which devours not useful bits, but the surface. The victim was a graffitier who was concerned with covering the surface.

Escher perspective , The basement which changes like a maze. A map which bursts into flames. Angel's hallucinogenic visions. Willow and Scoobies not just invisible to each other, but standing in the same place. Out of phase with each other. The constant leaping off of buildings, climbing ladders, crawling into caves, wandering basements, going up stairs past pictures of doors, following a madman through the woods, sending a vengeful Justine into the deep. Un-welding Angel's box and snipping his chain, tying Connor up, walling Willow in a cave. Tazering Connor and immobilizing Willow and Dawn.

Who needs crossovers. Sleep yes. Crossovers at this point would irrelevant.

[> [> Excellent as usual -- Rahael, 18:43:08 10/09/02 Wed

[> [> Re: Once more with the almost crossovers - (Spoilers 7.3! l and Angel 4.1) -- Rufus, 20:08:57 10/09/02 Wed

Escher perspective , The basement which changes like a maze. A map which bursts into flames. Angel's hallucinogenic visions. Willow and Scoobies not just invisible to each other, but standing in the same place. Out of phase with each other. The constant leaping off of buildings, climbing ladders, crawling into caves, wandering basements, going up stairs past pictures of doors, following a madman through the woods, sending a vengeful Justine into the deep. Un-welding Angel's box and snipping his chain, tying Connor up, walling Willow in a cave. Tazering Connor and immobilizing Willow and Dawn.

ATS and BTVS have crossovers all the time where a theme explored on one gets forwarded to the next show. The thematic use of perspective was brought up in Angel only to be utilized in Buffy. Sneaky writers....;)

I also liked this episode better on the second and third viewing and to hell with an MC Escher perspective...I'm coming from a codine perspective. Look to the use of stairs the imagery of above/below...seen/unseen...and now the use of another characters perspective. It was through Willows eyes we got to see just how much Anya has changed...all because Willow had made herself invisible making herself more open to seeing Anya for the first time. It also showed that what is important to one character is trivial to another.....less Spike, no wonder...he is seen the most through Buffy's eyes so the fact we are looking through Xanders perspective brings home to me how each one of us, viewers see the show through their own perspective or preference of one or more characters.

[> And this is all my point of view! -- Slain, 18:55:37 10/09/02 Wed

I've been vaguely thinking about not discussing this season until it ends, but here I am, back again after all. So -

I didn't have a problem with this episode, not at all. I agree with the point about perspective, but I think the episode works without delving into the specifics. I had been expecting, like many, some kind of emotional rollercoaster in which we get to grips with Spike's soul and other issues, in some fashion, and I was hoping for it, too. However I don't think that's how this season is going to be written.

Cast your minds back to Season 5, or any other season before 6. The emotional-type storylines weren't the main storylines, in the way that they were in Season 6. They were significant, and in the long term the more significant, but on the episode-to-episode basis it was about either the big bad arc, or the individual bad of the episode. The business of saving the world tended to get in the way of the character's lives, usually literally.

In Season 6, this didn't happen. The only episode where it really did, the much-maligned 'Doublemeat Palace', seemed out of place. An old woman penis monster wasn't what we wanted to see - we wanted to continue the plot arcs of the characters.

But I think Season 7 has marked a shift away from this, away from drama getting in the way of monster fighting, and back to monster fighting getting in the way of drama. Buffy can't go back to the basement to save Spike, she's busy saving Dawn and the embryonic Scrappy Gang. Buffy can't have a long talk with Spike, she needs to use him to find a monster, and inevitably slips into the easy role of Season 4 Buffy, using him as her dog. Willow can't say how great it is to be back, she's invisible, and besides Noel Coward is trying to eat her skin.

I think this is at the root of some fan's, understandable, disappointment at the way the Spike/Buffy story has been handled, or rather not handled. But, to be honest, I really prefer it this way. I wrote more essays about Season 6 than any other, but I generally didn't enjoy watching the show as much, at least through the season's gloomy midsection.

That's why there's murmurings of inconsistency and plots left hanging - because, yes, this season's tone is inconsistent with the previous season's (and, as in the past, comedy and drama are juxtaposed, often as non-sequiturs), and because the plots are deliberately being left hanging. Buffy and Spike, and all the other issues, will resolves themselves - but there won't be so much of a focus on the 'soap opera' (hate to use that term) of the show.

There will be scenes, as in 'Beneath You', where Buffy and Spike talk, but not episodes, and the scenes will be fewer and further between. How do I know this? Because this is, disregarding Season 6, the way BtVS works. But, as I've said, I like it this way - Spike's situation is fascinating, but I think it's very wise of the writers not to glut themselves on his character, or on any other. Season 6 gave us too much of the drama, too much of the characters, and many of us either ended up full, or ended up expecting the same from next season. But Season 7 is redressing the old Buffy balance, giving us small amounts of drama, rather than centring the show around it; "emotional resonance and rocket launchers" is what Joss calls the philosophy of the show; lightness and darkness, depth and superficiality, drama and comedy. This season is going back to this. Good show, I say!

[> Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- Slain, 19:16:11 10/09/02 Wed

Now I've read the post properly, s'Kat, I do disagree with the point about perspective - sorry, I'm guilty of skim reading!

I don't think it was about us seeing Buffy through Xander's eyes, or through anyone else's. POV is important, but I was never given to understand that it literally alters events - it could put a spin on them, as in "Being John Malkovich" (a film I watched for the first time just last night). So if Buffy made a joke about Spike, she made that joke. Perhaps Xander could interpret her meaning as being more insulting than she had meant it - but I don't think that scene was from Xander's POV, anyway.

In, BtVS, there seem to be two main POVs. Firstly there's the usual TV style 'invisible eye', where we apparently see the action being played out without prejudice. Then there are episodes or scenes (The Zeppo, The Body) where we're completely in one character's perspective; but in 'Same Time Same Place' we saw most of the scenes from the invisible eye perspective, in which there was no bias. Restless and some other dream sequences introduced a third, but I don't think we saw that in this episode.

Aposable Dawn, stinky Spike? This was a Jane Espenson episode, and she doesn't avoid a good joke because it might offend the fictional characters or the real fans - sometimes it can throw the characters in a bad light, but I think if we the viewers don't take the show so seriously, there's no problem. So Buffy made a joke about Spike, and the Scoobies were a bit naughty with Dawn? It was funny. I don't think it makes her a bad person. Comedy often sacrfices some of the likeabilty of the characters in order to suceed; sometimes the character has to play the villain for the joke to work. I personally like her more because she was able to see the funny side of an unpleasant situation.

[> [> That's my (only) problem with Jane Espenson... -- cjl, 22:36:00 10/09/02 Wed

She does have a tendency to occasionally sacrifice the character for the joke, and if you're writing a series like BUFFY, that's a no-no. Once might not be bad; but you pull laff-a-minute stunts like Bloodhound Spike too many times, people might stop laughing and think the Buffster is a real bitch.

Luckily, there's no chance of that happening, right?

[> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- Ete, 04:02:03 10/10/02 Thu

"So Buffy made a joke about Spike, and the Scoobies were a bit naughty with Dawn? It was funny."

Sorry if I don't find it funny when people humiliate other people. Happenned to often to me.
And yes comedy can enhance the likeness you have for characters. Bujold's books, for exemple, gets me Laughing out loud often without making the characters mean or petty.

[> [> [> Comedy and taste -- shadowkat, 07:08:06 10/10/02 Thu

1. "So Buffy made a joke about Spike, and the Scoobies were a bit naughty with Dawn? It was funny."

2. "Sorry if I don't find it funny when people humiliate other people. Happenned to often to me.
And yes comedy can enhance the likeness you have for characters. Bujold's books, for exemple, gets me Laughing out loud often without making the characters mean or petty."

This is interesting and I've been thinking about this quite a bit over the years. A great comic once said, might have been Gleason, no clue, that all comedy is pain.

It is. We make jokes out of our pain. Sometimes the best jokes and best comedy is about what hurts most, because laughing makes it better. Richard Pryor used to do a rather horrid joke about being set on fire while doing drugs. This was based on a real experience i think. George Carlin has made a living making fun of how we react to curse words.

MASH the series and movie made fun of war, the horror and insanity of it. Buffy the Vampire Slayer makes fun of the humilation and nastiness of high school. Seinfield made fun of the alienation of living in a big city. There's Something About MAry has jokes that include a man catching his balls in his zipper on the night of his prom.

I personally can't stand most slapstick - I find laughing at someone falling on their face or being humilated to be sadistic. I'm embarrassed for the person. I don't find embarrassing situations funny. Crush for instance, written by David Fury, was to me extreemly painful at times, the date which Fury no doubt thought was funny, made me squirm in my seat. I also hated the film Meet The PArents - which my friends thought was the funniest film they saw in years.
To me it was embarrassing. Because like Ete, I've been humilated too much in my own life and I find being embarrassed the worst thing. So I can't handle it when someone is embarrassed on screen. This is the reason many situation comedies in US don't work for me. I couldn't stand Three's Company for example and a lot of the comedy on Friends goes right over my head. I don't find Ross' clutziness funny. Seinfield on the other hand was funny with it's wry jokes. And I found MASH to be hilarous.

Pulp Fiction - made me laugh out loud. The black humor was hilarous along with the absurdity. While someone posted above - Rochefort (I think) that he despised Pulp Fiction didn't find it funny at all, but really found the jokes in STSP to be. (Have to admit, I didn't hear the Buffy joke about Spike and I did find the Dawn bit funny, it was so Anya who has never quite known how to handle Dawn or kids in general, and I liked Xander's quips - but I always find Xander's smart alec remarks to be funny. So STSP's humor was NOT my problem with the episode. Didn't really notice most of the humor actually, I might on a second viewing.)

Hume states that we will all agree on basic facts. Example: the earth is round. A ball is round. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is on tv. Where we are bound to disagree is on our sensory perception of secondary things such as how something smells or how a color appears or tastes or how we hear something. These secondary items? There are no right and wrong answers. Our perceptions of these things have too much to do with how we were raised, our culture, our gender, our size, our personal experiences, what our body is like, etc. But we can learn a great deal about one another through our opposing tastes.

If you like slapstick - you may not get embarrassed easily or maybe the way you dealt with embarrassment early on was by laughing at it and you made tons of friends that way.

If you like black humor - maybe you find it easier to deal with the darkness in your life by seeing it as absurd and this is a way of controlling it. If you laugh it keeps you from crying?? Maybe by seeing something more violent, it gives you comfort because it makes your life feel better?
I don't know.

I do know that until we are able to literally switch bodies as Faith and Buffy did in Who Are You, we'll never fully appreciate why one person prefers oranges and another apples. But we should at least try to tolerate the fact that they may like the apple while we prefer the orange.
It's not like we can't have both. I think the same can be said here. The writers at Btvs appear to be giving us both as well.

[> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste -- Miss Edith, 07:29:07 10/10/02 Thu

I don't have a problem with people making jokes out of their own pain. But laughing at Spike and humiliating him felt nasty and inappropriate as his metal condition was so fragile. Joss did make fun of the nastiness of highschool but he did not use Buffy to do so. E.g when we first meet Willow Cordy is sneering at Willow's outfit and putting her down. The audience is endeared to Buffy when she looks past appearance and makes friends with Willow.
And in Gone we have Buffy mocking peoples fashion sense when she was invisable and treating their fear as a joke. She also makes a social worker think she was going crazy. That humour just doesn't work for me if it reflects poorly on the characters.
I do find difficult to sympathise with nasty humour primarily because I was an outsider at school and I know what it feels like to be laughed at and have people use you for study help and then snigger and make fun of you behind your back. Therefore it hits a raw nerve when I am left with the moving ending of BY and in the following episode see Buffy using Spike as a bloodhound without so much as a thank you. No respect was shown, rather she was sneering at his smell. That was what makes me uncomfortable as I expect compassion to be shown by the heroine in order for her to be likeable. But that's JMO and I can understand other people feeling humour is not meant to be taken seriously or used to judge Buffy.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste -- alcibiades, 08:00:37 10/10/02 Thu

But that's JMO and I can understand other people feeling humour is not meant to be taken seriously or used to judge Buffy.

But why shouldn't it be used to judge Buffy?

It doesn't reflect well on Buffy -- I don't think it is meant to.

The last positive comment we heard Buffy make about Spike is "He's a hottie," in Lessons. That was a BIG admission for her -- one she could not have made last year. One she did not make last year. That, for Buffy, represents progress.

Buffy thought about Spike in strictly physical terms -- and her excuse for that was he did not have a soul. Now he is not such a hottie. In fact, he is the antithesis of a hottie. The manpire that Anya -- not Buffy -- told us smelled so good now smells terrible. And he has a soul. So he is also the antithesis of what he was. Because all of his focus is inward, not outward.

While she is complaining of how he smells, he was talking about the state of his soul, saying the following,

"William's a good boy. Carries the water; carries the sin. It's supposed to get easier, isn't it? Supposed to help to help. But it doesn't. Still so heavy."

The spiritual quests of others are often extremely uncomfortable for those around them.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Purity and Danger (Spoilers, STSP) -- Rahael, 08:11:46 10/10/02 Thu

Just thinking about the way you put this, that Spike no longer smells so good - is it somehow representing how he is an 'unmixy' thing? Was it you who brought up the idea that things which rest uneasily between two different states are considered dangerous? Certainly, a poster brought up this point recently, apologies for forgetting who.

In my recollection, the anthropologist Mary Douglas argued that those things which human beings consider 'taboo' are those which transgress certain boundaries, whether physical or mental. Spike certainly does, since he's both a Vampire, and he has a soul. He smells, he's 'impure'. You could say he carries the stench of mortality and death.

The cross is not only a symbol of 'eternal life' but also a reminder of torture, and mortality, and is resonant with this tension.

Is Spike dangerous and 'disgusting' because he is transgressing so many boundaries in the Buffyverse? Alive and dead. A vampire, with a soul he's chosen. Both insane and sane...

[> [> [> [> [> About that smell line -- shadowkat, 09:28:36 10/10/02 Thu

Okay am I the only one who missed this line? I truly didn't hear it. I heard, "Don't want to tie ourselves to insane vampire" and "something about spike following smell of blood." And that was it.

At any rate if i did? yeah it probably wouldn't have sat right with me. But neither did all the damn smell jokes in DMP - AYW. Found them blatantly annoying. Or the smell jokes in countless other episodes. Buffy makes comments about Angel. Xander makes comments about Angel. They make comments about Xander. I ignore all of these comments, b/c well the seem juvenile, but then bathroom humor always has.
Btvs actually has relatively little of it. South PArk has wayyy too much. I have a true and utter distast for scatological humor and smell jokes (it was part of my problem with Austin Powers actually. Just don't find it funny. Some people do. Go figure. (shrug))

Will say I enjoyed it when the Buffster got staked in FFL after calling the Kiss Vampire smelly. Seemed retribution to me. Also my favorite line from AYW: "Where do you get off saying I smell bad. You're dead. You smell like it." LOL!! (Uh buffy, you've been sleeping with a dead guy? two in fact.) The Buffster defies logic. Always has. Why I love and hate her at the same time and would often like to shake some sense into her. Also must say, I think i like being in her pov more than Xanders - Xander doesn't seem to think to highly of himself or anyone else IMHO. Although he does have a healthy sense of humor and is much with the not taking things too seriously view of life.

And all these comments on the board have served to convince me more than ever that I'm on the right track on this one - they were going for a Xander/Willow centric episode. Probably thought they pulled it off (would be right up their experimental cinematic alley - particularly since they probably saw the apparently controversial Pulp Fiction and Mulholland Drive and countless other films that have done the same thing. )and hence the reason they didn't think they needed to re-edit after redoing that scene from BY. (Which I'm on the fence about believing btw. Yes I buy Joss wrote it..it feels right. But i'm not completely sure.. Do you guys have some inside source who feeds you this information? (And how believable/reliable is this source?) If so, no wonder Fox went after AngelX for posting spoilers on this stuff...it's like having your readers read your first draft of your novel after you published the final copy. Would drive me nuts if someone did that to me.)

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: About that smell line -- Miss Edith, 09:43:30 10/10/02 Thu

I heard Doug Petrie say that Sarah wanted the scene refilmed as she felt Buffy came across unsympathetically and she was concerned about how the audience reacted to her character in season 6. But then I also heard it was Joss who decided the scene needed redoing so I'm not sure what the exact story is.
And as for the comments that got some people riled up, this is what I got from the Tabula Rasa site which posts an episode summory:
Spike is wondering along talking about the sin he's carrying feeling so heavy and he thought it was supposed to get easier. Xander says "We should have put a leash on him" and Buffy glibly replies "Yes, lets tie ourselves to the crazy vampire". Xander then asks "Do you think this is really going to work". And Buffy says "Pretty easy. Spike follows the exciting smell of blood. We follow the fairly ripe smell of Spike". Dawn then picks up on the joke and makes the crack that "Its smellementry"
And Xander also gets in a few jokes at the expense of Spike, "Boy he's extra useful today...hes chock full of sanity" and he snarks about Spike's unhelpfullness, "Give him a break, Buffy. Maybe it's a vicious skin-eating rock cliff". That was what pissed some people off as Buffy was so moved last wek and she has gone back to treating Spike like a dog there for her convieniece and to be otherwise ignored.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: About that smell line -- Miss Edith, 09:51:04 10/10/02 Thu

Sorry just wanted to add quickly that I do feel the jokes were poor judgement on Jane's part. In England I have not yet seen the episodes. But just the transcripts and the screencaps for BY had me in tears. I am not going to go from weeping over Spike's anguish to laughing about his smell and stupidity in the next episode. Either Spike's soul and his confusion, guilt, insanity is a point of angst or it's not. The writers can't expect to have it both ways and treat Spike as a joke or as a figure of pathos depending on who's writing the episode.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Spike and King Lear -- Slain, 11:27:05 10/10/02 Thu

Whether or not we laugh at comedy is up to the audience - BtVS isn't a comedy show, so we don't have to laugh. If we don't laugh while watching 'Friends', the show has completely failed. But, in BtVS, comedy can serve other purposes. Here, I think it's being used to show the pathos in Spike's character rather than, as you suggest, something separate from this - he's never seemed more pathetic than now, wandering through the woods with a soul, smelling bad and being shunned by Buffy. Isn't that pathos?

In 'King Lear', humour is used in this exact same way, to build up pathos. At one point, Lear talks to a chicken and a milking stool, mistaking them for the daughters (Regan and Goneril) who've cast him out. I find this pretty funny, but many people find it deeply sad and upsetting, to see such a noble and great king reduced to madness, talking to poultry and furniture. Shakespeare was a master of writing plays which could be viewed in this way - as comedy, or tragedy, or a mixture of the two. BtVS does the same thing, and 'Same Time Same Place' was a great example of this. You can laugh at Spike, you can feel sorry for him, or, like me, you can do both. It's doing a disservice to Jane Espenson, I think, to simply say "we are expected to laugh at Spike". It's not as simple as that. Unlike in a straight drama or straight comedy show, we have the option of following either, or both, paths. The fact that some people were unhappy with the way Spike was treated in the episode shows how completely it suceeded. Spike can be laughed at (much as Angel and Riley have, and he deserve no special treatment), but he can also be sympathised with.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree ...well said -- shadowkat, 12:04:33 10/10/02 Thu

"In 'King Lear', humour is used in this exact same way, to build up pathos. At one point, Lear talks to a chicken and a milking stool, mistaking them for the daughters (Regan and Goneril) who've cast him out. I find this pretty funny, but many people find it deeply sad and upsetting, to see such a noble and great king reduced to madness, talking to poultry and furniture. Shakespeare was a master of writing plays which could be viewed in this way - as comedy, or tragedy, or a mixture of the two. BtVS does the same thing, and 'Same Time Same Place' was a great example of this. You can laugh at Spike, you can feel sorry for him, or, like me, you can do both. It's doing a disservice to Jane Espenson, I think, to simply say "we are expected to laugh at Spike". It's not as simple as that. Unlike in a straight drama or straight comedy show, we have the option of following either, or both, paths. The fact that some people were unhappy with the way Spike was treated in the episode shows how completely it suceeded. Spike can be laughed at (much as Angel and Riley have, and he deserve no special treatment), but he can also be sympathised with."

Agree. Very well said. I'd say most of Shakespear works this way. One of the funniest and most tragic scenes is Mercutio,(Romeo's clownish friend) death scene. Mercutio
when it is played well - flounders about the stage and we laugh with Romeo and his friends, thinking he is playacting when in reality he has died. Another trageocomedic character is Benoviolo (sp?) in Twelth Night, the snooty man's servant who is horribly humilated in the comedy.
When I saw it this summer I reacted with peals of laughter. When I saw it at Stratford Upon Avon - I was horrified and saddened by his plight. In Henry the IV and V - Falstaff is a comedic character - a character Spike himself was compared to in the Gift when he quotes the line "we band of buggered". When we laugh we catch ourselves...feeling pity at the same time.

One of my favorite scenes is in Becoming Part I where Whistler tells Angel how rank he smells and Angel retorts, at least I have better fashion sense. LOL!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes!! -- Rahael, 13:23:16 10/10/02 Thu

That's it! How did I not remember King Lear's madness?

Thanks for pointing it out.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yes!! -- JM, 17:00:50 10/10/02 Thu

Actually, I thought Buffy came across a little sad when she said the line. Sad, and maybe funny because it's true. The big difference from last week is that she obviously accepts that he's broken and messed up. He's not a threat and he's not playing her. Even a bad-ass Spike demo at this point wouldn't be enough to change her mind.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Buffy and King Lear -- Artemis, 19:53:09 10/10/02 Thu

I don't know if this has been discusssed. I haven't had an opportunity to read all the threads. First off I think you make an interesting and valid point. What I also found interesting is that when I first saw this episode, in particular the scene of Buffy killing the skin demon, the first thing I thought of was Regan and how she blinded someone in Lear. Do you think the writers are deliberately alluding to "Lear" , and if so what are they saying?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: About that smell line -- shadowkat, 11:31:20 10/10/02 Thu

One quick suggestion? Watch the episode and see for yourself. What I saw on the episode was very different that some of what I saw in the wildfeed and Spikefeed summaries.

I know from experience that the writer tends to color their summaries with their own opinions. You may actually like the episode better than you think you will.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Rewrites and evolution of a story -- Dochawk, 14:14:54 10/10/02 Thu

Lord of the Rings is a great example of what you are talking about SK. Long after publication of the final drafts of LOTR Tolkien's heirs have published many drafts of this masterwork. The changes are enormous. Some people actually like the rough drafts better, but for the most part the fleshed out story is so far superior that its almost inconcievable where the final story really developed. And if you read the originals you would not have wanted to read the final edition.

One other problem with serial television compared to literature. If Tolkein got to a place in his epic (and I am beginning to think of Buffy as an epic as well) that needed a certain history he could go back and change it. LOTR was a completed work when it was published. Buffy is literature in motion, changing weekly in front of our eyes. Joss doesn't have Tolkien's option. He can't go back to season 2 and change something in the story to make it consistent with what he wants to show now.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste -- Malandanza, 12:40:16 10/10/02 Thu

"But laughing at Spike and humiliating him felt nasty and inappropriate as his metal condition was so fragile."

If Spike were a nicer guy, I might have more sympathy for him. But Buffy's remark was rather mild compared to some of the things he's said. Remember last season when just after Xander left Anya at the altar Spike called Xander the "king of the big exit"? Where was the outcry about Xander's delicate emotional state and Spike's insensitivity? Over and over, Spike has deliberately hurt Buffy and the Scoobies for his own enjoyment -- he's getting a little (very little) of what he's given out. Even during his moment of lucidity this season, he made sure to insult both Buffy and Anya -- using their past sexual relations with him to hurt them.

I think the remark was also intended to let us know just how far gone Spike is these days -- that he doesn't even pay attention to personal hygiene. So we have an insane vampire, living in the basement of the school, talking to demons that only he can see and no one's doing anything about it. He is dangerous and ought to be treated as such -- locked away somewhere. Instead, Buffy is too sensitive (and blames herself, at least in part, for his condition) so she gives him free reign (perhaps rationalizing that since she works at the school she can keep him from hurting the children) while her repressed worries occasionally manifest themselves in inappropriate humor.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Mal - nicely put -- Dochawk, 15:02:10 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste (7.3 spoilers) -- Indri, 08:19:41 10/11/02 Fri

I don't believe that anyone was humiliated in this episode as it was presented. I rewatched it yesterday to be sure.

Dawn's paralysis is of a strange kind which permits her to communicate via the movement of muscles around her eyes (conveying her expression) and through sub-vocalised speech. She looks understandably worried in this scene, but only shows signs of actual distress when Buffy mistakenly suggests that the paralysis is permanent. Dawn even makes a joke about her condition. At no point does she look truly upset. If she did, then yes, the posable Dawn jokes would be cruel. Instead, I got the impression that she would merely be rolling her eyes at the others' behaviour---she might even be amused by the childishness of it. This is why it is, to me, amusing.

As for the smelly Spike jokes---yes, they are juvenile and offhand. If you've only read the transcripts, you may not know that Dawn, Buffy and Xander are a few steps behind Spike in this scene, at a distance sufficient to be read as "out of earshot" in most TV grammars. So she's not insulting him to his face, but making a grumbling remark about something that is obvious to them but not to the audience. Even if Spike's sensitive vampire ears did pick up her comment, it wouldn't matter. While he is, admittedly, mumbling under his breath about sin and redemption, his manner and bearing in this scene indicate that he's in his GoodSpike of HumanSpike persona. This isn't the vunerable William we saw at the end of 7.2, but Spike's self-reliant and sarky self. This is the character whose preferred conversational style is quips and insults---he treats such comments as play (even as foreplay in some contexts). When Xander finally says something Spike can clearly hear, Spike's riposte ("I'm insane, what's his excuse?") is clearly the winning barb and GoodSpike saunters off.

Nor do I think it's demeaning for him to act as a bloodhound. It's a skill he has and it makes him useful. In 7.2 he made it clear that he wants to help and now he's helping. It makes him feel valued. I don't deny that jokes about him being a dog will be wearing in the long term, but in this instance it's not that big a deal. He's at least as able as we are to determine whether a joke is made out of cruelty or nervousness.

Neither Dawn nor Spike seem hurt by these jokes, which makes them qualitatively different from the type of joke Cordelia would make in Season One, which clearly did distress Willow.

I admit that there is a big difference in tone between 7.2 and 7.3 and it is jarring. But taken on their own terms, the jokes are not needlessly vicious.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste (pre-emptive addendum) -- Indri, 09:16:32 10/11/02 Fri

Apologies for replying to myself, but there was one point I didn't make clear in my previous post.

Constantly joking about anyone is, of course, demeaning unless it's clear that there is mutual respect between parties. In this case, Buffy and Xander insult Spike (Dawn merely makes a pun). In Xander's case it reflects poorly on him, but I don't expect any change in his behaviour because I don't think he knows about Spike's soul. Nor does he realise he's ever hurt unsouled Spike's feelings---we have a privileged view of Spike in that regard. Buffy should know better, but this really isn't the kind of comment that Spike's going to take to heart, especially if she has shown any sign that she values him, as I believe she did in the final scene of 7.2 and in her willingness to ask for his help in this episode.

Also, yes, a typo in my previous post: GoodSpike OR HumanSpike. I'm sure everyone worked that out, though.

[> [> [> [> Re: Comedy and taste -- vh, 08:49:22 10/10/02 Thu

Your post really made me think about my own comedy tastes.

I like slapstick. I don't like slapstick. I love Buster Keaton (just about my favorite) and Jackie Chan, but I've always disliked the Three Stooges, and even Chaplin (while imaginative) gets a little too sentimental for me (please, don't beg for my sympathy!). You mention Meet the Parents. I'm avoiding it for just the qualities you mention. I expect not to enjoy that type of thing.

I like black comedy. I hate black comedy. Black comedy is so very difficult to do well that I mostly don't care for it. I didn't care for most of Pulp Fiction. Some good black comedy is subtle (can't think of a good example off the top of my head, though!), some over-the-top ("Who's going to believe a talking [disembodied] head? Get a job in a sideshow!"--extra credit if you can identify this). I personally found the film version of The Shining to be hilarious, but I don't think that was the intent (or a typical response). [Note to SK fans: I don't expect an SK novel to be faithfully adapted, so I don't get mad if it's not.]

Stand-up comedy too often relys on sex and profanity in an attempt to shock laughter out of an audience. George Carlin decided a long time ago that he wasn't being true to his natural crotchety self and dropped the hippy-dippy persona and morphed into the venomous gentleman we know today. Personally, I prefer the cheery guy who compared football and baseball ("Baseball's played in a park; football's played on a gridiron. Baseball has the 7th inning stretch; football has the 2-minute warning.")--this one's just sad.

Just my taste. Your mileage may differ.

[> [> [> [> Believe it or not, it's not about Spike :) -- Ete, 14:03:41 10/10/02 Thu

But about Dawn.
Well, not that i found the smell line funny, but it didn't bothered me a lot. Hardly very sensitive from Buffy's part, but I think you and Mal made a good deal of explanation... Spike's situation is currently very bothering for Buffy, and that kind of humour is the kind of stuff you'd expect to try to deal with it.

But Dawn ? Buffy would let the girl she wanna see become a beautiful and powerful woman be reificate by Anya and Xander without caring the least ? It's not even not-funny, i find it chocking. It's out of character and... and Hello ! Little sisters are not some kind of doll you can play around and just put into something when you can't take care of her. I dunno, it just bothered me.

Well apart from that I found your post excellent :) I also love black humour. The case of Bujold I mentionned is also about situations full of embarrassment for the characters, but the difference is the humour springs from the autoderision of those characters and they come bigger from it, by comparaison with the kind of humiliation joke that I don't find funny :).

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Believe it or not, it's not about Spike :) -- Slain, 15:17:53 10/10/02 Thu

Well, now I know it's Dawn you were talking about, I'll respond ;).

Actually when the Scoobies were playing with Dawn I went through various reactions - but while I was watching it I assumed they were making it so Dawn could watch the TV while they were gone - hence remote control placed so paralysed fingers could use it. Which is fairly nice of them, in a silly sort of way. I thought the only naughtiness was Anya's making Dawn salute.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Regarding the salute -- shadowkat, 05:24:30 10/11/02 Fri

Okay, granted I have a tendency at times to read more into the text than may honestly be there. But someone made a comment about Spike doing a salute in Lessons. "Cheers
for Stopping by with his left hand". Now we have Anya
making Dawn salute with her left hand and keeping it in position.

The gesture on both for some odd reason (besides reminding me of Monty Python and the Holy Grail), made me think of knights. Any thoughts?

(Hmmm...I guess I was amongst the few that thought posable Dawn was amusing. But then I still hold that the focal point is Xander's ;-) )

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Regarding the salute -- Arethusa, 07:31:44 10/11/02 Fri

My 8-year old daughter is Barbie-obsessed, and I thought Poseable Dawn was hilarious. I hoped to see Anya try on little hats and matching high heels-at least Dawn would get her heels that way!

I made the salute comment-I thought it might be a slight reference to the salute Number 6 made in "The Prisoner." I'm not sure about Monty Python, although the references to a Philosopher Smackdown reminded me of the Philosopher's Song from Monty Python

The Philosopher's Drinking Song

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out consume
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya
'bout the raisin' of the wrist.
Socrates himself was permanently pissed.

John Stewart Mill, of his own free will,
after half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.
Plato, they say, could stick it away,
'alf a crate of whiskey every day!
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
and Hobbes was fond of his Dram.
And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart:
"I drink, therefore I am."

Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.

http://www.cs.rice.edu/~ssiyer/minstrels/poems/615.html

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> LMAO!!! -- shadowkat, 07:50:43 10/11/02 Fri

Glad I wasn't the only one who was amused. Was beginning to wonder about my sense of humor on that one. LOL!

Thanks for the song btw. I think it should have a place of honor on the board - so we can refer to it whenever we go overboard on the philosophy pondering. ;-)(yes, I was reading Sophie's World again this morning - finally made it through Kant, and can I say, yes! I finally get what everyone means when they say Whedon is doing the Kantian view of the soul? "our universial moral code is inherent in us, so we know what is right and wrong and without that inherent code we are a slave to our desires and physical needs. With it we have a choice to ignore them." Ah! It all makes sense now...except I think I liked my own meandering existentialist interpretation better. Sorry I guess I'm just not very Kantian . ;-) )

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Inherent morality. -- Arethusa, 08:21:35 10/11/02 Fri

Watching my small children (8, 5, 3), I'm not sure how much moral code we're born with. They have to be taught very basic things, like hitting other people hurts them, calling someone ugly names is mean, and destroying things might be fun, but means that you'll no longer have that toy. Different societies have different moral codes, according to the needs and values of the society, right? Many people have little or no moral code at all-and I'm not just talking about sociopaths. But I do agree that kids who aren't taught empathy, self-respect and self-control are slaves to their desires and physical needs. They have little or no internal brake to the engines of their self-destruction-they are See-Want-Take.

My own Drinking Philosophy is closest to John Stewart Mill-more than one beer, and I'm contemplating the evils of being and wishing for nothingness.

[> [> [> [> [> It's about Dawn -- Cleanthes, 16:26:25 10/10/02 Thu

I adored the paralyzed Dawn scene, and I see a very high purpose for it.

Dawn took it in stride. Being manipulated like that would make many a sage whine.

For the Stoics, taking insult was 729 times worse than giving insult. Would that modern moralists agreed!

[> [> [> [> [> Oh, come on! -- dream of the consortium, 13:00:57 10/11/02 Fri

Little sisters are not some kind of doll you can play around and just put into something when you can't take care of her.

Since when?

As the youngest of four children, I have to say that that was charmingly realistic (quite frankly, much more so than the "I live for my sister" stuff). Dawn wasn't in danger - they just had to kill a demon, and for Buffy that's a nightly chore, and it's not like they harmed her. It seemed like healthy, familial teasing.

Buffy's attitude toward Spike seemed a little off to me. She didn't come across as very sympathetic, and it was jarring after last week. But she thought she had a homicidal former best friend on the loose, and it was just a day or two after the church - she hasn't had time to absorb it all. I can forgive it.

[> [> [> [> [> [> I'd have to agree with dream... -- BunnyK., 15:19:33 10/11/02 Fri

As the youngest of 9 children, I was stuffed into enough snowbanks, thrown into enough pools, and help upside down and tickled so much that it's remarkable I can walk with my legs instead of my nose and ears. Dawn gets off pretty easy if all that happens to her is a little posing. =)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hey I'm a younger daughter too ! -- Ete, 15:29:41 10/11/02 Fri

And I never liked it when she treated me like a Barbie.
As I said, it screams reification and is deeply humiliating.

*sights* maybe it's really just a matter of perception. Some find that very funny, and others find it bothering.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hey I'm a younger daughter too ! -- Miss Edith, 17:42:07 10/11/02 Fri

I think some people might have found it disturbing because of the emphasis on Buffy being Dawn's mother, rather than a sister. There is only a five year age gap and in season 5 Buffy mostly saw Dawn as the bratty kid sister. So perhaps treating Dawn as a barbie would have been seen as more acceptable then. But there has been a real focus on Buffy being Dawn's guardian and mother figure, wanting to take care of her and show her the world. Hence the big sister teasing may not have come across well to some viewers. Just a thought.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hey I'm a younger daughter too ! -- BunnyK., 18:25:35 10/11/02 Fri

I can see that some people would be offended by that. No one in my family was ever shy about messing with me, or with each other for that matter, so maybe I'm just more used to that kind of relationship. I don't think teasing within a family indicates a lack of love or responsibility, just a different style of family life.

[> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV (spoilers 7.3) -- fresne, 13:10:11 10/10/02 Thu

Well, the humor at Spike's expense is to a degree counterbalanced by JM's utterly chilling delivery of the ticket line. He goes from a babbling madman to, oh who the heck knows, prophetic, menacing, certainly no one that should be dealt with lightly. I was reminded of all those ghostly train conductor stories. 'Keep your ticket. You'll need it.' What the heck does that mean? And, even insane, Spike holds his own. His response to the skin eating cliff line.

'I'm crazy. What's your excuse?'

And to put in my own humor preferences, I like snark, wit, dry humor. My reaction to slap shtick varies. I may think it is profoundly sad or I may chuckle. But mostly Black Adder, not Mr. Bean.

But the real reason I'm commenting is, did you know that Bujold's novella of Miles' wedding will be out in February? I expect some hijinks, although not necessarily a butterbug pie fight.

[> [> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV (spoilers 7.3) -- Ete, 16:21:49 10/10/02 Thu

'I'm crazy. What's your excuse?'

Yeah I loved that. Especially the mirroring the "I'm a vampire, i'm supposed to tread on the dark side. What's your excuse". Seems that Spike always got some excuse :)

Thanks for the Bujold news ! I didn't know that, cool :)
Though I was disapointed by Diplomatic Immunity. Where was the hysteric humour ?

[> [> [> [> [> About Bujold -- shadowkat, 06:08:03 10/11/02 Fri

Where do you guys find this author? I've looked in Barnes and Noble and several other smaller book stores in NYC including a sci-fi comic book related store. And I can't find her.

And what book would you recommend someone start with, who has never read her before??

(Of course I'm not allowed to buy any more books until I finish reading the 100 I already have...but still.)

[> [> [> [> [> [> Pollyficto Amorous, ask me how -- fresne, 07:37:40 10/11/02 Fri

Pollyficto Amorous

Well, that's just shocking. Every bookstore should have her books in stock. After all, she is well nigh to passing Heinlein for Hugos/Nebullas/etc.

Okay, full name Lois McMaster Bujold.

Basically, you have a choice. You can start on her Vorkosigan series (the majority of her books) or she does have a few one offs. I will warn you that I gave one of her books to a friend of mine as some light reading before she started Finals (uhhÖsome years ago), and she cursed me as she was compelled to go out and buy all the books and read them. Thankfully, this was some years ago and there were fewer books.

Anyway, the first book in the Vorkosigan series is Shards of Honor. Good book, although, for me, a bit like S1 Buffy. Yummy, but the best stuff has yet to come. Warrior's Apprentice is also a good place to start since it introduces you to her series main character Miles Vorkosigan, who I freely admit to having a crush on, the hyper active little git.

For a free taste check out The Mountains of Mourning, a short story, on the Baen Free Library.

For something completely different, try the Curse of Chalion. It's a one off fantasy and has a very interesting theological setup.

Can you tell, ahem, I'm practically rabid as a fan. Anyway, need more crossover readers so I can make, "Un-souled Spike makes me think of Bothari. Although, the Buffy-verse Cordelia does not make me think of Lois' Cordelia." Or, "If S6 makes me think of Memory, Miles' dark tea time of the soul, will S7 be like A Civil Campaign: a romance of biology and manners. Five viewpoint characters spinning frantically looking for love, self definition and some other third thing."

Ete- ACC is why I don't mind if Diplomatic Immunity was more Miles has an adventure rather than the normal free for all. I suspect that Lois needed a break. Although, the "Unpack dear" bits were pretty funny.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Pollyficto Amorous, ask me how -- shadowkat, 08:02:54 10/11/02 Fri

Thanks!

"Well, that's just shocking. Every bookstore should have her books in stock. After all, she is well nigh to passing Heinlein for Hugos/Nebullas/etc."

Here's the thing that has always annoyed me about bookstores. They have incredibly limited Sci-Fi Fantasy sections. a) they group horror, fantasy and science fiction all together under science fiction - when we all know that they are three separate genres. Honestly it's like grouping action/adventure with mystery - wait, they do that too..
b.) the section is usually not more than one bookshelf in the smaller stores and maybe three -four large bookshelves at B & N. c) most of the writers are mainstream sci-fi or male. It's hard to find many female unless of course they hit the bestseller lists and are well-known.

Laura K. Hamilton for example can only be found in bigger stores. But Heinlein? He's in every store. So is McAffrey (who I lost interest in a while back...actually.)
I went to both bookstores this past weekend looking for the writers people mention on this board specifically
MacMaster Bujold - zip. I found Philip K. Dick, Heinlein, McAffrey, Butler, Cherryh, Le Quinne (yes I know that's misspelled), Morrow, Tolkien - who is currently taking up all the shelves with the Lord of the Rings Triology. But none of the others. Frustrating. I've decided that us genre fans aren't appreciated by the media nearly enough. Shame. You can do far more marketing tie-in's with genre than you can with non-genre. Just look at Harry Potter.

May have to go back to Amazon and order them - which is more expensive (shipping increases cost) and less well fun.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> They used to have many Bujolds in B&Ns in the city -- otherwise special order, no shipping -- ac, 09:08:00 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Cordelia's Honor-- 2 novellas for the price of one and it's great -- alcibiades, 09:06:01 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordelia's Honor-- not novella, the first two novels -- Freki, 10:11:32 10/11/02 Fri

Cordelia's Honor contains Shards of Honor and Barrayar, the two novels with Cordelia as the primary character. There's also a compilation called Young Miles that contains The Warrior's Apprentice, the novella Mountains of Mourning, and the novel The Vor Game.

Start with either Shards of Honor or The Warrior's Apprentice. Shards of Honor comes first chronologically, but The Warrior's Apprentice was written first. Either makes a good place to start the series. They're terrific, and similar to BtVS in that they're just fun space opera on the surface, with a lot to say underneath.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Pollyficto Amorous, ask me how -- BunnyK., 18:20:55 10/11/02 Fri

Isn't Connie Willis the reigning champ for Hugos and Nebulas? Or was that a few years ago?

Either way, Lois McMaster Bujold is still a great writer. I actually hear a lot more about her than any other scifi writer.

[> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- shadowkat, 06:02:48 10/10/02 Thu

Well I guess we'll just agree to disagree then. Because I like my interpretation better. ;-)

No, seriously - I haven't rewatched the episode yet, so you may very well be right. But it's not the bad jokes that I was talking about. I truly believe Buffy said those things.

What I was trying to convey - is we saw it through more of Xander's perspective. If it was a non-pov like you say it is - why don't we see Anya alone or with Halfrek like we did the previous two episodes? We don't we see Buffy with just Dawn or any more of the dreams? Why don't we see anything that is either not directly connected with Willow
or Xander's fears about Willow? The episode isn't a MoTW episode - it's ALL ABOUT WILLOW episode in the truest sense.
More so than any of the other episodes were all about one character. They even use a somewhat jarring gimick to pull it off. And go to a heckuvalot of trouble to do it.

The gimmick didn't entirely work - we had continuity errors particularly in the Spike scene.

The episode I believe makes more logical sense when I view it from Willow/Xander perspectives.

It's interesting, I posted this on another board as well, and most of the disagreement about the pov suggestion came from people who made these arguements:

1. "So if Buffy made a joke about Spike, she made that joke. Perhaps Xander could interpret her meaning as being more insulting than she had meant it - but I don't think that scene was from Xander's POV, anyway."

(That wasn't the reason I thought it was Xander's pov! Nor do I say that anywhere in my analysis. Actually I didn't hear the smelly joke when I watched it. Didn't know it was there until after I posted this on the board.)

My problems with Buffy in this episode had zip to do with jokes, most of which I actually enjoyed. She came across as SlayerBuffy with very little insight into her character unlike the majority of Season 5, and even DMP (which I loved btw). This was one of the few episodes I've seen in which I really didn't know where Buffy was coming from.


2. It's not ALL ABOUT SPIKE. (not that you said that, others have) Well, duh. Never said it was.
What they are doing this Season is exploring the characters in a different way. This episode gave you a ton of information on Xander and Willow - if you were watching it closely and not just listening to the jokes and the monster.
For the first time we saw how these two see the other characters. Xander still sees Buffy as the hero. He sees Dawn as an active member of the SG, a little sis and Anya as a funny ex-girlfriend whom he still clearly loves.
He has no clue what to make of Spike, except he's a vampire, insane, quite smelly at this point, and useful according to Buffy. He does not understand what's going on with him.

Willow - is scared to death of herself and how the others view her. She also clearly has no idea what is going on.
Why would she? Poor thing has been in England all summer.
Lost her mind in rage and grief last year. And is still clearly grieving.

This episode was not a typical MoTW - it was a risky, ambitious move by ME to examine the other part of the three person triangle. And explore the difficulties Willow faces coming back to Sunnydale.

I find I'm liking the episode more in retrospect than I did before. It is not reminiscent of past episodes. Believe me, I should have an inkling on this considering I've seen and analysed every Bvts and Ats episode and seen most of them ten times by now.

I also have a tendency to dislike Xander centric episodes.
This one felt a little different. IT was Willow centric.
I usually love Willow centric. But I didn't like this one as well at first, not for the reasons you suggest in your post. (Those are the reasons others on this board have expressed, not me.) I disliked it at first because I found Willow's situation frustrating, I wanted more interaction, but I was supposed to feel that way - Willow was frustrated too. I also want to see how everyone dealt with the soul issue. But the truth is I'm not sure they know how to deal with it and it is actually more realistic that they don't discuss it right now. I can't imagine Buffy as a character discussing this at length with anyone. She never discussed Angel with them at length or Riley really. Why start now?
Buffy ain't a talker. We only really get glimpses inside Buffy when Willow and Xander aren't around. We used to get more info with Willow, but ever since Willow went wonky with magic, Buff hasn't felt she could confide in her.
And well, Xander is a guy and has this heroworship thing going and has never gotten her flirtation with vamps and if I was Buffy - Xander would be the last person I would confide in regarding dreams about slayers, Spike or certain other concerns. So as long as we're in W/X pov - we ain't getting any insight into Buffy at least for now.

But if you think about it? How much do you really know or understand your friends or loved ones? You see what they show you. Same here.

Even if we weren't in Xander pov - Buff would still make the joke about Spike (that's her defense mechanism to make quippy jokes. She made several about Angel when she was dating him. And Riley. She does that.) Even if we weren't in Willow's pov, Anya would still worry about the carpet.
Even if we weren't in xander's pov, Anya would discover with glee that you can pose Dawn. These points aren't the proof I was using for my thesis.

My proof is what we aren't seeing. What we are focusing on.
And why. In another thread Rah and I were discussing how it is impossible to be objective about anything and how it is better not to filter out everyone's subjective pov's.
Well if you look at the episode as being in the subjective pov of Willow and Xander - it makes sense why certain aspects are missing. And again I'm not talking about the soap operic ones you and others keep bringing up. (Actually in the Zeppo (an episode I really don't like very much)
there were tons of soap operaic elements, this was not really the same type of technique. It was a Xander centric, I pov. But is was done in a different way.) What I'm talking about is things as simple as the fact that we go to Xander's workplace. That Xander bumps into Spike. That Xander is the one who appears to be looking on Spike in confusion. That Willow looks on Spike in confusion. That
Xander notices Willow didn't appear at the airport.

I felt Xander's fears and worries here. Buffy and Dawn felt oddly in the background. At first when I was analyzing the episode I was convinced it was Willow/Buffy but it just didn't make sense. Elements were missing. And Buff's behavior with those missing elements seemed ooc to me. (I know you don't believe OCC is possible, but watch a daytime serial sometime - believe me it is. ;-) )What element's seemed missing? Well she didn't seem that concerned about Dawn. She seemed more business like then usual. She seemed
less compassionate for some reason. It felt oddly discordant. Then I thought, wait, what if I'm Xander. So I put myself in Xander's shoes and whoa it all made perfect sense. Now if you always watch the show inside Xander's shoes, you may not have seen it. I don't know.

But please don't put words into my mouth. I actually thought posable Dawn was funny. (yes, I know I have a sick sense of humor.) And I didn't catch the Buffy line about Spike, it was quick. Nor did the jokes bug me - I liked most them. But I also found DMP to be hilarous at times.
So I was NOT making excuses for that at all. Nor did those parts bug me. I actually agree that Espenson makes fun of people's foilbles and I happen to enjoy a little of that.
What I was pointing out was some of the jarring inconsistencies weren't inconsistent if you bought the gimmick and realized we were seeing things through Willow's eyes and to a smaller exent Xanders - and by association with Xander, Dawn and Buffy. But in this episode at least Dawn, Buffy, Spike, Anya, were in the background. Just as Xander was in the background in Lessons.

Another glaring difference is - did you notice we were either with Xander or Willow all the way through the episode? In Lessons and Beneath You - we actually left Buffy
and Xander and Dawn and got to visit other character's pov's? This was the first episode we didn't spend any time alone with Spike or Anya without a Xander or Willow present.

(You won't see this by just reading the wildfeed btw. Need to watch it yourself. )

[> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV (spoilers through 7.3) -- Sophist, 09:05:49 10/10/02 Thu

we had continuity errors particularly in the Spike scene

Agreed. And Joss sucks at time zones, too. In BY, we saw Willow leaving for the airport. It appeared to be the same day that Buffy started work at school (the cut was from Buffy in the basement to Giles/Willow in England). But because of the time difference, a flight from London to Los Angeles arrives the same day it departs. In fact, if you leave London at 3:00 p.m. you'd arrive LA at 6:30 p.m.

The clock at the airport in STSP showed 9:20 when Willow arrived. Accounting for her layover in Chicago, she must have departed about 3:00 p.m. However, it's obviously a different day than the events in BY and may even be several days later. This means the cut in BY to G/W had to show us a scene that was in the future of BY. While I'm not usually concerned about dramatic unities, this is disconcerting.

I re-watched STSP last night specifically to see if I could accept your POV theory. It works well for Willow, but I can't see it for Xander. Sorry, but I'm with Slain on this.

[> [> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV (spoilers through 7.3) -- shadowkat, 11:49:15 10/10/02 Thu

Will trust you on the time inconsistencies. I'm like Joss, not good at time zones myself. ;-)

Not suprised you disagree...partly because we disagreed on the Wish. I think we came to a stalemate. Agreed to disagree ;-)

Something really interesting has hit me while reading this board - it is all about our pov. How you enjoyed the episode, whether you enjoyed it, whether you hated it, and what you thought about it? Has a heckuvalot to do with your point of view. Who you are. Why you watch. Which characters turn you on or off as the case may be. Which characters you identify with. Etc.

And i'm sticking by my thesis - the people who seemed to love this episode loved being focused on Willow or have an affinity for Xander. By and large the Xander lovers on both B C & S and Atpo seem to have loved this episode. The people who seemed to hate it - aren't that interested in Xander and were disappointed on Willow. Some who disliked it, don't like Willow that much. Most who disliked it are most interested in Spike. (We all have our blindspots.) I could be wrong of course. But it seems to be the general tone coming from the posts. But neither you nor Slain nor anyone else has come up with a convincing reason or even logical one why it couldn't possibly be in Xander's pov. (Slain just defended the jokes which still seemed to be very Xanderish, which actually sort of supports my theory, although I didn't see the jokes (good or bad) as being all that relevant to my points.) I'm still waiting for someone to do so.

Most of the people who replied, either by email or on the boards, said they did see how it could be from Xander's pov and that suddenly an episode that made no sense to them, made a lot of sense.

So maybe it's like our disagreement over how the Wish should have been interpreted?? It can be seen more than one way?(shrug)

At any rate...i find I like the episode better when I think of it in the terms I outlined in the essay. So until I get a convincing counter-arguement? Sticking with it.

[> [> [> [> [> A somewhat different proposal -- alcibiades, 12:35:18 10/10/02 Thu

Several camera angles on the second Spike scene are all wrong to support a Xander POV.

I know you are not talking just about camera angle.

But in that scene, I'm agreeing with Slain, that both by camera angle and because the audience knows what's going on -- that Spike is talking to Willow and Xander and Buffy simultaneously, that that scene in particular cannot be a Xander POV. It is a TV style invisible eye.

Have you watched it over yet? I watched it over last night with your theory in mind and it didn't entirely work.

I think one thing that might be going on is that we are seeing one of the myriad faces of Buffy. Buffy acts differently -- and in someways is different -- when she is with different people. So are we all.

So we are not just seeing a Xander perspective of Buffy, but rather what Buffy is like in the pseudo family unit of Xander/Dawn/Buffy, the one the text itself refers to when it shows us the family pictures of Xander/Dawn/Buffy and the family phone numbers of Xander/Dawn/Buffy.

It is a less intimate picture of Buffy than we get when she is one on one with various people -- especially with Spike who knows her most intimately. Willow used to know her that intimately but hasn't really been permitted access to her mind in any kind of way since Weight of the World - where she delved right in. She hasn't had a heart to heart with Dawn yet this year or with Xander. And all those scenes where we really get to find out more of what Buffy is thinking are one on one.

So I think you are partially right about the change in perspective here in this piece. But I don't think it is Xander centric especially. I think it is the perspective of the remaining Scooby family unit that bonded over the summer - and their scenes show how they are when they work together. Very limited in some ways and frustrated with each others limitations. Well Xander and Dawn are not all that frustrated with Buffy - except where it comes to keeping Spike secrets - but Buffy is displaying signs of being a little frustrated both with Xander and Dawn. Like any family members. Very close in other ways.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: A somewhat different proposal -- shadowkat, 05:54:16 10/11/02 Fri

"So we are not just seeing a Xander perspective of Buffy, but rather what Buffy is like in the pseudo family unit of Xander/Dawn/Buffy, the one the text itself refers to when it shows us the family pictures of Xander/Dawn/Buffy and the family phone numbers of Xander/Dawn/Buffy. "

I may not be explaining myself clearly enough here.
I think it's both.

I think we have Willow centric. Actually even the D/X/B
dynamic would be how Willow would view it and it is used by the director and producers to convey the sense of being outside the unit. Willow has clearly left her own nuclear family unit and created a new one with X/B/D and Tara.
Tara is gone now. Willow went wonky. So Willow feels like prodigal outside it. Hence the use of X/B/D.

But there is and I felt this on a gut level in rewatching,
a Xander focal point. I was talking to friend last night about the Spike scene and i explained my theory - she at first mentioned your view then thought a moment and said, wait you're right some of that scene with B/X and S feels as if we are outside of S/B dynamic looking at it from a less privy pov. Some of their dialogue feels off and Buffy doesn't appear as compassionate. They also felt there
wasn't a strong sense of Buffy.

Going back to Lessons - When D/B/X are together - Dawn feels more like the focal point. You sense the others, but it feels like we are in Dawn. In Beneath You, the focal point seems to be split between Xander and Buffy when they are together. Here in STSP it is leaning more towards Xander, I especially noticed this in the woods and in the airport scenes as well as the basement, which is admittedly the most confusing scene. I think, and I know several people still disagree, but I do strongly feel this, that Espenson was channeling Xander and Willow while she wrote this and the reason she did - is of the three remaining scoobies, Xander fits two points regarding Willow:

1. He is the most sympathetic to Willow's plight. He loves her no matter what and unlike Buffy and Dawn is not threatened in any way regarding her return. He stopped her, remember.

2. He was the hero that day. And has become a stronger member of the SG, almost the safe member, the dependable one. In each episode you get the sense that Buffy can depend on him.

Contrast to the other very dominant pov, Willow.

1. Willow is heavy with the guilt. Feels alienated outside the group dynamic. She's not really that worried about Xander, he brought her back. But she feels B/D dyanmic won't accept her. HEr view of them is echoed in Xander's scenes with them.

2. Willow was the BB last year. Buffy can't trust her. Buffy has mixed feeling. While she is needed, Dawn has largely taken over her role in the group. Willow has become the weak link...the outside member.

How people have reacted to STSP seems to be also influenced by this. I've noticed the polarization almost falls within the same lines it did in other more Xander or Willow focal point episodes. Some audience members even admitted to me that they always try to see it through X/W viewpoint. I don't - I let the writer place me wherever they want generally - but since most of the time I'm in Buffy - I felt very jarred in STSP. Because I didn't feel much of Buffy here or even much of Dawn. What I felt was how they felt in a triangular family unit or through X or W.
So it was either B as an arm of the B/D/X or D as an arm of B/D/X or Xander and Xander as arm of B/D/X. It's not so much in the camera angles as in reaction shots, textual references, emphasis on jokes and scenes and locations. Even posable Dawn felt Xanderish to me and very funny when I looked at it through his eyes. I didn't sense I was watching it through Buffy, if so it would have felt offensive.

If I could do graphics I'd try to diagram it for you.
It's like a triangle with the main point being X but he's connected to B/D, If he separates - B or D will be with him.

Anyways..it is very subtle, and you'll either see it or you won't. And I suppose a very good argument could be made that I'm reading too much into the text, or overestimating the writer to make the story work for me, or am just plain off my kilter...but it still works for me.

Not that I disagree with your points regarding Buffy or Dawn or the new family unit. I believe those are correct. I think she does exhibit these tendencies particularly from Xander's perspective, as we see in The Zeppo, briefly in Into the Woods, The Replacement, Go Fish, and numerous other episodes where the writers put us behind his eyes. I've always found his view or a better word is focal point to be uncomfortable so I'm hyper-sensitive when they place me in it.

Not sure if that clarified it any. Perhaps I should just call it a draw and give up ;-)

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV (spoilers through 7.3) -- Cleanthes, 16:55:35 10/10/02 Thu

And i'm sticking by my thesis - the people who seemed to love this episode loved being focused on Willow or have an affinity for Xander.

Hmm, well maybe the exceptions prove the rule, but I'm not at all a Xander fan and I'm only the warm side of tepid on Willow, but I very much liked the episode, and I almost completely agree with you that we saw only the Xander & Willow povs. Even the few things with an "omnicient" camera eye, like Dawn falling over after the demon died, would work as how Xander would imagine Dawn would fall. (and I think Xander and Dawn have similar senses of humor)

The more often you listen to this wise guide, the more easily you will be able to change your negative moods yourself, see through them, and even laugh at them for the absurd dramas and ridiculous illusions that they are...
Tibetan Book of Living and Dying

Irony lies between the esthetic and the ethical, and humor lies between the ethical and the religious. S¯ren Kierkegaard

I do understand why I liked the episode despite not being a Xander or Willow fan:

This episode illustrated the existential humor of Dawn, Buffy, Anya & Spike *because* we saw them as the Other. So, when I watched it, especially when I rewatched it with your initial eye-opening post in mind, I saw these four characters (listed in order of my favoritism, for reference purposes) as they might see themselves if they could existentially exit from themselves.

{shush, deleted pompous moral of the story}That's the key to authentic living and why humor lies between the ethical and the religious, and why "religious fanatic" is a contradiction in terms, and why another definition of PC is "humor impaired".

[> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- Slain, 11:44:04 10/10/02 Thu

Sorry for the hazy reply, s'kat - I'd originally intended to just reply to your post, but then I replied to things others had said, some of whom I don't think really understood your points anyway! Hence confusion.

[> [> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- shadowkat, 11:56:48 10/10/02 Thu

Ah...understood! Thanks. And forgiven.

PS: I understand why you did it. I have to admit I'm a tad flummoxed by the reactions to the one liners myself. Btvs has always had smart alec one-liners and insults.

Anya, Spike, Cordelia, Buffy and Xander respectively are the queens and kings of this.

Heck last episode Spike got off some beauts at poor Buffy in the Bronze - far worse than anything said this week.
Actually I think Spike and Xander may be the reigning kings of the well-placed insult. Their chats in Xander's basement in Season 4 were legendary battles in this regard.

[> [> [> [> [> more on that smell -- alcibiades, 12:42:56 10/10/02 Thu

Heck last episode Spike got off some beauts at poor Buffy in the Bronze - far worse than anything said this week.

But the point there was he was in demon face. He was possessed by a demon explicitly when he did it. He was trying to be as nasty as possibly and push every one of her buttons and hit all her sore spots.

If Buffy had changed into a demon before she made the nasty at Spike -- well that would have been different.

But it rolled off her tongue with utter indifference for the character -- just an offhand nasty remark.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: more on that smell -- Slain, 13:08:03 10/10/02 Thu

I've never been quite sure myself about how the demon-soul-body thing works. Clearly the soul is in control (is that a James Brown lyric? It should be), but how much power does the demon have? When Spike calls on the demon, is it posessing him, or is the demon there all the time and the face and fangs only a physical manifestation of this?

I'm inclined to believe the latter, because vampires are still vampires, whether fangy-faced or not; and so therefore I'd follow that vampires with souls are still vampires with souls, fanged or sans fang they're no different. Certainly Angel doesn't change when he's in vamp face; he's behaved tenderly to both Buffy and Connor while fanged.

However at the same time, Angel changes to vamp face to be more violent, and in the end of AtS Season 3 he became overcome by his demon when he tried to vamp - that is, he tried to change his face, but instead the demon was given complete control. Angel has said the going into his fighting mode means the demon is given power. Posessed is the wrong word to use, because the demon is always there - but certainly when a soulled vampire calls on his vampire self, they do give up some power. Angel merely has it under control - I don't think Spike has, to the same extent.

Yet that's not to say he's not to blame for his abuse of Buffy in the Bronze - he is, completely, because he gave the demon the power, and because clearly the demon didn't have complete control. Spike didn't have to say those things - he's both demon and human, so he's responsible for his demon self as much as Angel was with his soul.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> the spiritual and the mundane -- alcibiades, 13:33:39 10/10/02 Thu

that's not to say he's not to blame for his abuse of Buffy in the Bronze - he is, completely, because he gave the demon the power, and because clearly the demon didn't have complete control. Spike didn't have to say those things - he's both demon and human, so he's responsible for his demon self as much as Angel was with his soul.

Oh, I wasn't denying or whitewashing his responsibility. Clearly he was responsible. I was trying to say the opposite -- we know explicitly that the worst part of him is making those remarks, his lower half, because he has his demon face on. It's not an attractive face he shows Buffy and his words are as repulsive. He was trying to be as mean as possible because he wanted her off the "scent."

But that was before he stabbed a man and had his new shiny soul sullied and confused by current actions instead of past ones. He had no idea what to do. And so he confesses.

But Buffy is just mean in an offhand way.

I think what is disturbing about that is that in both versions of the scene in BY, Spike comes across as a spiritual hero.

But here Buffy is treating him like a mundane convenience -- her words from Wrecked. He's not worth enough consideration from her to make the supreme effort of keeping her mouth shut.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Er, actually I disagree... Jane Espenson and POV -- Miss Edith, 16:14:58 10/10/02 Thu

But Spike is supposed to be the confused and messed-up anti hero. In fact in the Bronze scene in BY he was playing the role of villian. That doesn't excuse what he said to Buffy but I can see he is messed-up and trying to hide his soul and prove he hadn't changed. Hence him being crude and looking for a beating. He was in the wrong no question but I can understand his behaviour as coming from a seriously disturbed person. I do find it harder to excuse Buffy using Spike like a dog and making nasty comments about him simultaneously.
Buffy is supposed to be the hero. No I don't expect her to be perfect or without flaws, I would just prefer it if looking down on others wasn't one of them. I admit sometimes I am unfair to Buffy. As she is the hero I expect more from her than I do from other characters. E.g Spike in season 6 was a demon without a moral compass, hence I expected less of him and it didn't particularly bother me when he was snarky with the scoobies. I think someone else used the example of him bringing up Xander leaving Anya at the alter. In that scene Buffy treated Spike like a criminal and Xander was frustrated with himself and spoiling for a fight hence him winding up Spike deliberately, "That's right you run along now". In that context I am going to judge Xander and Buffy more harshly than Spike because they are supposed to be the good guys that we admire.
Perhaps that isn't entirely fair but I have always supported the underdog and that's just my perspective when watching the show. I am a big fan of Faith and Anya as well because the scoobies elitist attitude at times does bother me.

[> Re: It's All About Your Point of View - (Spoilers 7.3! long) -- JM, 16:40:45 10/10/02 Thu

Not sure where to post this, so I'm attaching this here. Fabulous essay. I consider it the definitive reading. I remember feeling a similar dissociation watching "The Zeppo" for the first time. I saw a comment in another board that really sealed it for me. Someone compared Buffy this ep to the Buffybot. Could this be part of the reason the Scoobs were so easily fooled in "Intervention?"

We see Buffy in all her moments, her strong, her perky, her introspective, and her devastated. The Scoobs not so much. They love her, but are often shielded from her pain. To them she is heroically brave and unbelievably tough. They've seen her come back swinging and quipping from things that would have broken them (in their estimation). A lot of season six was Buffy was about her trying to protect them from seeing just how damaged she was. I wonder what it all would have looked like only from Xander and Willow's perspective.

I think that in Buffy's eyes Willow and Xander are a lot tougher than they think they are. She's seen two people who haven't left her no matter what happened. That know what goes bump in the night and stood with her even when they were super strong. Who are compassionate and dependable, even though they could walk away. I'm also wondering now what DMP might have looked like if we had seen completely not from Buffy's perspective. Might have very different. Even though I always thought it was understandable that worry was expressed primarily in anger. It's very human.

[> [> Thank you. Yes...that's exactly what I felt. -- shadowkat, 06:04:08 10/11/02 Fri

Thank you for your points and the kudos. Really appreciate it.

[> [> [> Re: Thank you. Yes...that's exactly what I felt. -- Jane's Addiction, 08:52:23 10/11/02 Fri

Great thread. Thanks for posting this - I think you hit on exactly what I loved about this episode. I know some people have complained about the POV thing being gimmicky, but I thought in this instance it was used to great effect and deepened my understanding of W and X.

While some posters indicated annoyance with Willow's insensitivity toward Anya in the cave, I thought they had a significant bonding moment regarding the emptiness of vengeance/danger of losing one's self in rage. Rather than defining her by her demon gig, Willow now seems to see Anya now as being strong, helpful and "surprisingly sensitive".

As for Willow seeming to discount Anya in the cave, it made sense to me only because the ep was largely about Willow's fear of not being accepted back into the core SG - perhaps her own feeling that she shouldn't be accepted back into the fold, that she deserves to be punished. At the same time, she desperately "wants to be Willow" again, and seems to need the people who've known her from the beginning to look at her and tell her that she's still her.

But is she?Is there still - should there still be - a place for her in the SG? Isn't this what she's wondering? Does she now see herself as the SG's weak link in terms of self-control and dependability? Her comments to Giles and Buffy make clear she's still afraid of losing control under pressure. She's paralyzed by the demon in the cave before she can carry through on her threat to fight him. I don't know if she's clear on just how much power she has at this point. She may actually have the most power of any of the Scoobies, but is she too terrified of herself to use her powers now?

From Xander's perspective, he seems to accept that he can be the Scoobies' Mr. Dependable and can even be the big hero when he's needed the most ("My mouth saved the world!"). But he also still sees himself as perhaps being the weak link in the SG in terms of intelligence ("Huh? How? What's goin' on?") and as the one who stands back saying "Gah! Eww!" as Buffy slays the demons.

Also thought the demon was pretty effective from Willow's perspective. The paralyzing fear hiding away in the dark places (in one's soul?), and stripping away all the surfaces or disguises people adopt (and, yeah, Willow's karmic comeuppance or perhaps her own unspoken desire to be punished for Warren). Or maybe I'm overanalyzing.

Sorry if this is all entirely redundant. It's my first time on the board after posting and lurking about a bit at the end of last season. Love everyone's insights - even when I don't quite agree with them.