October 2002 posts


Previous October 2002  

More October 2002

Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- Dochawk, 13:14:03 10/10/02 Thu

I am not too sure about this metanarration stuff, but something someone just mentioned got me thinking. Was Anya's line about magic being a bit sexy really the writers winking at those of us who said that magic was a metaphor for lesbian sex? of course my question remains does that mean they were telling us that it is or it isn't? (given Anya's response that it was a little sexy yet Willow's ? facial response that it wasn't)
[> 7.3 Spoilers Above -- Dochawk, 13:19:16 10/10/02 Thu

[> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- Quentin Collins, 13:36:05 10/10/02 Thu

I believe that magic was metaphorical along those lines when Willow and Tara did it. However, something need not be metaphorical for the same thing in every context even in the same work of fiction. Given that spells have been done by men, women, and by various combinations of the two on the show, it is clear that magic does not always equal lesbianism on the show. I took Anya's reaction to mean that after having been emotionally alone for quite a while, interracting with Willow and helping with that spell allowed her to emotionally connect with someone. Willow's reaction may have indicated that doing cooperative spells like that one has lost some of the "magic" for her without Tara.
[> [> Revealing Concealing -- ZachsMind, 08:28:50 10/11/02 Fri

This is kinda morbid or weird, but remember in the season premiere when Dawn walked into the bathroom and sat on the toilet? I don't know about you, but I never sit on a public toilet with my pants on. I mean doesn't one habitually sorta...? Oh this is just too weird to be talking about..

There are simply some things they choose not to show us. Obviously. We see characters with different clothes on, but they don't actually waste screen time showing us changing their clothes, unless it's stage business and in cases like that, they're either finishing or starting and then the scene just changes. We sometimes see them preparing food, but we don't often see them actually eat. I'm sure Willow (and the other characters) bathe daily, but we only see Willow shower when there's dramatic impact, like when she's crying because Rack just spiritually and mystically raped her. We saw Buffy & Spike in the throes of passion, but by the time they get to the down & dirty, the camera has crossfaded to the next morning as the music swells then settles down. I mean we miss all the good parts.

Magic as a metaphor? It never was that. Not any more than demon hunting being a metaphor for.. well come to think of it a couple times between Riley & Buffy they artistically toyed with that in season four, but it's just cuz that's what they were doing at the time. Had they both been into badmitton, then badmitton would have been the 'foreplay' between them for purposes of storytelling. Tara & Willow did their spells, and then what they did when the camera moved on to show Anya arguing with Xander, well that was left to our imaginations, sort of like the scene in the Shakespeare play Romeo & Juliet where after the two lovers are wed they have their all too brief honeymoon and all we get is their dialogue the next morning.

"It is better to conceal than to reveal" is a useful old axiom both in fashion design and television producing, apparently.
[> [> [> Re: Revealing Concealing -- Miss Edith, 10:07:57 10/11/02 Fri

Actuall Joss said that the orgasmic spell in WAY was the first time W/T had sex. And I'm sure he made some comments on the season 4 DVD about witchcraft being used as a metaphour for lesbian sex as it wasn't allowed to be shown on the original network.
[> [> [> [> This is what Joss actually said -- Rahael, 15:04:39 10/11/02 Fri

"This is another well known scene, the 'we can move the drinks machine' scene. Some people took this as a sign that they would definitely have a relationship, some people didn't, but it is meant to be a very sensual and very powerful image of two women, whether or not, - and we hadn't at this point decided how far the relationship would go - but we wanted it to be a moment which was very physical and very empowering and very beautiful between the two of them. It set off some fireworks, and also moved the drinks machine. It's a very empowering statement about love. Two people together can accomplish more, a great deal more than if they are alone. Greater than the sum of their parts. Looking back at it now, it seems as if there is no other way we could have gone, it really is one of the most romantic images we have filmed.................

The love is readily apparent. Ten episodes later, when Willow actually refers to Tara as her girlfriend, and we got all the angry letters and emails, my first comment was "Urrrr....where were you all for the last ten episodes? Did you see them join hands? Did you see them float the rose? Did you see the spell in Who Are You?" Their love has always been very physical, and earthy and sensual. Anyone who missed it, even though at the time we weren't sure if we were only going to play it on a metaphor level, it soon became apparent that we couldn't do that. Anyone who missed it from the start hasn't seen very many films."

I don't think this subtle statement equates to:

"And I'm sure he made some comments on the season 4 DVD about witchcraft being used as a metaphour for lesbian sex as it wasn't allowed to be shown on the original network."

In fact, I think it supports Zach's interpretation. After all, when Joss in his last statement refers to the fact that films often use activities as metaphors to suggest/add a subtext between two people - doesn't it suggest that if they hadn't been witches, but say, dancers or cheerleaders or badminton players, that that couldn't have had a subtext added? It seems clear that in the Willow Tara relationship, the slashy subtext quickly became text.
[> [> [> [> [> Ok, I've read this twice now. -- Sophist, 17:13:22 10/11/02 Fri

And it seems to me that you proved that Miss Edith was correct and ZM was wrong. I must be missing something.

ZM said "Magic as a metaphor? It never was that." I find this unpersuasive: a metaphor is "a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them". I see it as basically a matter of interpretation -- if I see a metaphor, then isn't it one?

Moreover, the metaphor in WAY was not exactly subtle. If Gnarl is metaphor (rather than a sledgehammer), then the floating O sure can be seen that way.

Miss E disagreed with ZM, and claimed that Joss referred to magic as a metaphor for lesbian sex. Now the passage you quoted certainly does not go as far as Miss E, but it does say "Ten episodes later, when Willow actually refers to Tara as her girlfriend, and we got all the angry letters and emails, my first comment was 'Urrrr....where were you all for the last ten episodes? Did you see them join hands? Did you see them float the rose? Did you see the spell in Who Are You?'" He then refers to these as metaphors.

Sure, some other activity could have been used as a metaphor for subtext, but in fact magic was. The floating O spell sure looked like a metaphorical orgasm to me. That seems to me contrary to ZM's point. I must be missing something here.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Requoting ZM -- Rahael, 17:23:26 10/11/02 Fri

You cut off ZM's quote too soon - you'll see he qualifies it.

"Magic as a metaphor? It never was that. *Not any more than* demon hunting being a metaphor for.. well come to think of it a couple times between Riley & Buffy they artistically toyed with that in season four, but it's just cuz that's what they were doing at the time. Had they both been into badmitton, then badmitton would have been the 'foreplay' between them for purposes of storytelling".

(My emphasis)

The fact that Joss says that anyone who couldn't read these subtexts hadn't seen many films - I think what Joss is referring to is not some common cliche that magic equals lesbian sex, but that films and visual media play around with our imaginations, and can make all sorts of activities have a double meaning. That's where I'm coming from.

This long running magic sex debate just shows that all of us can see what we want to in a situation!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Requoting ZM -- Sophist, 18:07:26 10/11/02 Fri

I understood ZM to mean that magic wasn't the metaphor, it was the foreplay. That is, the actual sex was happening offscreen, so magic didn't serve as a metaphor. That's what I took from his comparison to killing demons as foreplay for Buffy and Riley (and Faith, too, for that matter).

Assuming I've read him correctly, I can't agree. The floating O spell in WAY seemed pretty clearly a metaphor for the actual sex act. No one must see it that way, of course, but by the same token, no one can deny that others do see it. I think Joss's quote strongly suggests (though it doesn't say) that ME did intend a metaphor here. To that extent, I'm prepared to say ZM was wrong and the quoted passage supports that.

I agree with you about Joss's meaning regarding movies.

OT, and apologetically: in the thread below, I responded to dream by recommending that she read Sarand's post. At the time I said that, I didn't realize you had responded to Sarand with some very good points as well. I certainly was not intending to be dismissive by omission; sorry if it sounded that way.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Requoting ZM -- Miss Edith, 18:37:05 10/11/02 Fri

I'm sure I remember a quote from Joss saying that W/T's first time was represented on screen with the spell in WAY. In other words the two of them were actually having their first sexual experience together with that spell. Of course I have no idea what interview it might have come from which doesn't do much for my credibility. Can anyone else remember Joss saying that, or did I just imagine it? I'm pretty sure it exists becuase I remember being confused at the idea that the spell was the first actual sex between them as previously I had always just seen the spell as a metaphour of the attraction between them. But according to joss the spell was actually meant to be seen as the first sexual experience. Can anyone else remember Joss saying that?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Requoting ZM -- Rahael, 06:34:05 10/12/02 Sat

Awwww, thanks Sophist! Though no slight was taken!

As for WAY, you're right - you read ZM's argument correctly, and I didn't and I would certainly agree with your reading. So does Joss!!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh for Pete's Sake, gang! LOL! -- ZachsMind, 09:14:24 10/12/02 Sat

"I understood ZM to mean that magic wasn't the metaphor, it was the foreplay. That is, the actual sex was happening offscreen, so magic didn't serve as a metaphor."

Exactly! One can call it a metaphor but that's not quite what it was. It's more like teasing. A metaphor is not a tease, it's a replacement. If a scifi writer tells a story about aliens from another planet having political issues with human beings, the writer can opt to use this interaction as a metaphor to tell things about race relations here on Earth today, in a way that won't upset people as it might if he just told a realistic tale about black & white people in today's environment. The scifi setting becomes a metaphor - a replacement - for something he really wants to say.

The magic spells between Tara & Willow were not a replacement for actual physical contact. It's just that those were the scenes for the story that the censors would allow the writers to tell. Later in their relationship we'd actually get intimate and tender moments between the two of them *gasp!* in bed with little to nothing on. Early in their relationship though, the writers and producers were not sure how far they could safely go, so the magic spells were more like hints than metaphors. They were hinting to the viewer, "yes there's something going on between these two but we're not gonna show you EVERY little thing! Sheesh! Git yer minds out of the gutter."

It's like when Oz got with that werewolf babe. The music swelled as they both turned hairy, the camera pulls away and then the scene fades to the next morning with Willow walking in holding takeout from Burger King. Are we to say the takeout from Burger King is a metaphor? No. It's just another part of the scene.

Or to quote from Freud: "Sometimes a banana is just a banana." =)
[> [> [> [> [> [> Or maybe I'm misinterpreting ZM! -- Rahael (doing some rereading!), 17:55:58 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> Revealing not Concealing -- Darby, 09:41:00 10/12/02 Sat

There's another aspect of the Magic-as-lesbian-sex metaphor that no one has discussed - it plays out in discussions about Willow and Tara that way, in such episodes as The Yoko Factor and Restless and Family - where their "magic" was being discussed, the syntax was very much and very purposely also about sexual preferences, to the point where they were confused in TYF. Too many times, the "spells" very obviously equalled the sex. And I'm not going the way of Joss and Bill Clinton here to confuse definitions - I wouldn't say that orgasmic spellcasting is sex. It's a stand-in, a metaphor.
[> more sexy magic -- neaux, 13:38:40 10/10/02 Thu

Visually, I would say getting turned into a rat and turning back into human form as a naked SMG is definately SEXY MAGIC.
[> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- TRM, 13:59:16 10/10/02 Thu

It seems that the writers have been winking at us quite a lot this season. Dawn's high heel comment came from MT's statement once that she should get to wear high heels on the show (and the mention that she was already one of the tallest).

In a more direct response to your question, I think that ME is telling us that it was but it isn't. Remember a little while ago the whole fiasco about if lesbian sex = magic and magic = addiction, then what's the what and are we going to be sophists (not you Sophist!) about this?

But Willow didn't feel particularly "sexy" after casting the spell with Anya. Also Giles also told Willow specifically that her magic was no longer an addiction. I think ME has a new direction for magic to go. Trying to control a little bit the audience interpretation and to prevent any possible sophisms like those that I mentioned above, they are making it explicitly clear that, yes, they used magic to symbolize lesbian sex and they used magic to symbolize addiction. But now they're moving on and magic is not supposed to represent neither sex nor addiction anymore. Or at least, I think that's what they're doing...
[> [> **Spoilers above (through 7.3)** -- TRM, 14:01:30 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> Agreed, thats what I was saying, but you said it clearer -- Dochawk, 14:04:07 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> So magic is..? -- Slain, 15:31:16 10/10/02 Thu

I think so far magic seems to represent contentment and self-knowledge (understanding your authentic self, for an existential aside), at least in terms of Willow. Or, perhaps, magic is a representation of the individual - so Willow's magic can have negative effects (invisibility) if she has negative emotions, or it can have positive qualities, as with Buffy and the healing spell.
[> [> [> ...multivalent -- leslie, 15:53:52 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> magic & addiction -- meritaten, 16:35:56 10/10/02 Thu

I can understand that magic was sexy for Willow and Tara but not for Willow and Anya. However, I don't understand the fact that Willow is no longer addicted to magic. They made such an issue of her addiction last year. Now, Giles says it isn't an addiction. Are we just supposed to forget S6? I read that some people heard him say "It isn't an addiction anymore" or "It is no longer an addiction". However, all I could hear was "It isn't an addiciton". My hearing isn't great, so it is possible that I just can't hear a line that is there, but I still don't understand how they can change something so important to the story arc. How did it cease to become an addiction?

Can anyone help me with this?
[> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- Miss Edith, 16:39:58 10/10/02 Thu

Giles said magic isnt a hobby or an addiction, its part of who Willow is now.
[> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- leslie, 16:46:49 10/10/02 Thu

I was wondering whether the subtext here was that just as different magics have different effects on the external world, so do they have different effects on the practitioner. Certainly during Willow's rampage, the sources from which she drew her power--from which she re-juiced--seemed to effect her mental state. Rack's magic all along was presented as dark and addictive and druglike, while, for instance, you could hardly say that about the first magical act that Willow and Tara performed--moving the soda machine to block the door against the Gentlemen. Now, Willow's final re-juicing was of the magic in Giles that had been placed there by the coven--would that magic have literally changed the effect of magic within/upon Willow?
[> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- meritaten, 16:49:46 10/10/02 Thu

When and how did it stop being an addiction?

I was so tired of the whole "magic as addiction" story last season. Now, are we to assume that we misunderstood?

Giles says it isn't an addiction and we forget about the story last season?

This seems to me to be a major continuity issue.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- aliera, 19:06:26 10/10/02 Thu

Not necessarily, I had major problems with this reference last season... it just made no logical or historical or metaphorical or emotional sense to me (guess I must have some sort of magick tunnel vision.) But I view the references this season (so far) differently. I believe that she has changed and so, her magick after what happened in TTG/Grave. Transmutation. That was major mojo-time.
[> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- JM, 16:50:07 10/10/02 Thu

I thouhgt that the writers were trying to convey that althought this was the intellectual construct that Willow and the others adopted last year to deal with what she was going through, that it was probably never that simple. It wouldn't be the first time in history a twenty something had to renegotiate her understand of herself and the world. It's possible that wrapping it up in conventional substance abuse metaphors made Willow's journey that much harder.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- TRM, 17:22:20 10/10/02 Thu

I think so far magic seems to represent contentment and self-knowledge (understanding your authentic self, for an existential aside), at least in terms of Willow. -- Slain

It wouldn't be the first time in history a twenty something had to renegotiate her understand of herself and the world. -- JM

Interesting comments. I don't know if Slain had meant to include the previous seasons in saying "so far," but combined with JM's statement then magic makes both sense as lesbian love, addiction, and perhaps whatever it metamorphoses into this season. Willow learned about her sexuality through magic; she dealt with her desire to assert herself which transformed into a desire for power (or a high, which in some sense is a drug-induced existentialist attempt to control the world even in the non-buffyverse); and now? Well, she's trying to figure out who she is and who she had always been.

Self healing through meditation? Self healing is a way for Willow to reconstruct who she is/was, not by changing herself (as arguably she might have tried last season) but by changing her perception of herself. As Giles said, "we all are who we are, no matter how much we may appear to have changed." Meditation, the channeling of her magic and thus the channeling of her newfound and yet to be understood knowledge of herself is, the method in which Willow is going about this (supported psychologically by her friends).
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- shadowkat, 12:38:33 10/11/02 Fri

Agree with what you, TRM said in first post and in this one, and what JM and Slain state. One additional point:

"she dealt with her desire to assert herself which transformed into a desire for power (or a high, which in some sense is a drug-induced existentialist attempt to control the world even in the non-buffyverse) "

I think this high you mention works in the show's history.
Remember in the Dark Age, Giles explains his experimentation with magic in his early 20s - stating how he and Ethan discovered Eyghon and summoned the demon to inhabit them - he says they did it because it "was a tremendous high". This is very similar to Willow/Amy and Rack. Willow and Amy go to rack and get hits of magic, Willow also summons a demon with it in Wrecked, it's a tremendous high just like Giles' with Eyghon. But like Giles' states in Lessons she's not addicted to the magic. And Willow later states in STSP. The high was from the power. Just as Giles' high was from the power.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- Ete, 15:37:17 10/11/02 Fri

"Remember in the Dark Age, Giles explains his experimentation with magic in his early 20s - stating how he and Ethan discovered Eyghon and summoned the demon to inhabit them - he says they did it because it "was a tremendous high". "

So what ? Maybe it was still a metaphore of magic as sex. Except group sex. Okay, maybe I should stop the Giles / Ethan shipping :)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> LOL!! oh boy...got sucked into magic as sex debate afterall -- shadowkat, 17:51:17 10/11/02 Fri

LOL! On the Giles/Ethan shipping. In the same episode, Willow does say that Eyghon is called in magical orgies and Xander says Giles and orgy in a same sentence is more than he can handle. LOL!

This is the way I see it...and having used metaphor quite a bit myself in writing, I think I understand what Zachsmind,
TRM, JM and Rah are all getting at:

the writers used the spells and magic as a metaphor for sex AND power ...sex often is used as a metaphor for power.
See Basic Instinct - which used sex very much as power.
Or Fatal Attraction. The sexual attraction.

The thing about metaphors is the can be used to mean more than one thing at a time and you don't have to use them only for one purpose. The problem with metaphor is avoiding confusion. Example the soul metaphor? They are a little stuck with using it to symbolize a conscience, move away from that, confuse the audience. Dang. Life would be so much easier if you could erase the first three seasons or
be sure you don't have an audience over analyzing them.
But I don't think the magic metaphor is as confusing. Early on it's been used to symbolize more than just sex or addiction or power...sometimes all three sometimes none of the above sometimes just lack of control ...

Look at the episodes containing magic:
1. Witch Season 1 - now that had zip to do with sex, that episode was all about magic as power.
2. The Dark Age - had to do with power and sex, and the magic was suggested more than anything else, not overly obvious
3. I Robot You Jane - not really sex so much as control
I think in this one
4. Passion - there is a little magic as sex here, but I felt it was more about vengeance and forgiveness..
5. Becoming and the soul - the curse with Willow enacting it. In fact the whole Willow learning magic bit felt very
into power in Season 2 not so much sex.
6. Gingerbread - not sex so much as rebellion
7. Choices - again a feeling of revolt against authority and power.
8. Dopplegangerland - being rebellious
9. Fear Itself - about power, showing not just a sidekick
and fear of control
10. Wild at Heart - magic is about vengeance here - goes back to Passion, Innocence, Dark Age
11. Something Blue - magic also equals vengeance

I think you get the point. Magic has never JUST been used to symbolize one thing metaphorically nor has it just symbolized the W/T metaphor - the insistence that it has bewilders me, it's almost as if everyone is ignoring the episodes that came before Tara was ever introduced.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Interesting post. -- Sophist, 19:47:31 10/11/02 Fri

In reviewing your list, I would say that magic was not used as a metaphor at all in any of these eps, with the possible exception of Gingerbread. In the other cases, I would say it was a tool, a means to an end, and didn't serve any symbolic purpose.

In S4, of course, magic was used metaphorically (see Rah's post above). It also appeared that way in S6 with magic/drugs.

Magic has never JUST been used to symbolize one thing metaphorically nor has it just symbolized the W/T metaphor - the insistence that it has bewilders me

I don't know that anyone has ever said that magic was used as a metaphor only for sex. Every post I saw discussing magic as a metaphor acknowledged that it was used as metaphor for drugs in S6 (many to complain about that fact). As I understand it, the argument was that once magic became a metaphor for W/T sex, the apparent magic/drugs metaphor confused or cheapened the previous one.

Personally, I think your post makes a good case that the first and original use of magic as metaphor occurred in the W/T relationship. In that sense, and at that time, it would be the only such metaphorical use.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Interesting post. -- shadowkat, 20:53:29 10/11/02 Fri

"In reviewing your list, I would say that magic was not used as a metaphor at all in any of these eps, with the possible exception of Gingerbread"

Maybe we disagree on the meaning of metaphor?

Here's the definition in American Heritage Dictionary:

A figure of speech in which a word or phrase that ordinarily designates one thing is used to designate another, thus making an implicit comparison as in the evening of life.

Okay. In Something Blue...I'd argue magic is used to symbolize Willow's emotions and inability to control them.

Magic normally means what? (god, I hope I don't end up making your case for you? LOL!)

"The art that purports to control or forecast natural events, effects or foces by invoking the supernatural through the use of charms, spells or rituals."

So in Lover's Walk - what is magic used for? A delusting spell. So it is about Willow's attempt to control her feelings. It is also about Spike's attempt to control Dru's.

So here it may not be used metaphorically in a direct sense, but perhaps it's being used metaphorically indirectly?? As time moves on...we find Willow using magic to control her universe.

In Gingerbread and Dopplegangerland - she rebells through use of magic.

Magic we know is an art that someone/ practioner uses to control something natural. Willow is using it in that way.
So yes you're right not a metaphor.

However - Willow use of magic is not to control natural forces in the way a true wiccan would say Tara, but to control her life or change things to fit how she wants to see them - in this way, ME is using magic to symbolize Willow's immaturity, insecurity, fears, and experiementation.

I think it was used as a metaphor for experiementation with sex and drugs more than directly for drugs and sex. The experimentation led to addiction. This happens in college - you experiment with addictive substances for fun - you get addicted. (I mean drugs not sex here). You also experiment with sex in school. Many people I've known experimented with bisexuality in school - some discovered they were in fact lesbians while others realized they were bisexual and others heterosexual. I see Willow doing this in HUSH with the Wiccan group and Tara. Whedon more or less states that
magic was used to show Willow's experimentation with sex and power.

I don't think it was magic = drugs. So much as it was meant to be power = drugs. Many of the scenes with Willow going all dark magicky reminded me of Catherine MAdison in Witch and Amy in Bewitched Bothered and Bewildered. Those characters were somewhat addicted to power. Amy to the extent that like Willow, she lost control of it. Amy also used it as rebellion.

I never saw magic as solely symbolizing Tara/Willow. Yes it symbolized some of their sexual relationship, but it wasn't limited to that. Willow practiced magic outside that relationship and that magic was seen as separate from it. (Amy for instance was not a lesbian and practiced - for Amy we see an addiction to power metaphor as well as a possible child abuse one...but that's another topic.)
Examples: Triangle (where she loses control), The Gift - sending Spike up the tower, WOTW - where she enters Buffy's head and separates Spike and Xander - in those episodes I saw magic = power.

This season magic seems to represent connectedness which may or may not be a true metaphor since that is pretty close to its original definition according to the American Heritage Dictionary. I don't see the sex metaphor any longer. I just rewatched STSP again and I felt the wink
when Anya asks Willow: "Will it be sexy" and Willow shakes her head and says "no" or something negative. Later when Anya suggests it again, wink wink, Willow smiles then frowns and leaves. I laughed out loud. It was obvious to me that the Writers were yanking our chains and I can't say we don't deserve it. I think Whedon got fed up with the over-emphasis of the fan base on the magic metaphor for T/W.
Whedon did however step into that one by utilizing a common film technique - to suggest a sexual/romantic relationship and or chemistry through special effect metaphor such as a rose floating about, a powerful electrical current that pulls a machine across a room. But if you study the effects closely you'll realize they use different ones to symbolize Tara and Willow, to symbolize drugs, to symbolize loss of control or experimentation, and hiding. So it's not magic in a general sense being used as the metaphor here - it's how Willow uses it.

Examples:
1. In A New MAn - W/T try to float a rose and it explodes.
This represents the lack of control - something else is more powerful out there (plot device) and it symbolizes the explosive chemistry between the two women.

2. Who Are You - when W/T do the spell to locate Buffy and Tara grounds Willow, Willow appears to almost fall into an orgasmic state...obvious metaphor there.

3. Choices - when Willow floats the pencil and discusses emotional control - the pencil flies out of her control as she discusses Faith. Outwardly Willow appears calm, but her magic is not.

4. Fear Itself - Willow uses a locater spell or guide, it multiplies into many and they attack her. The magic tries to attack her. It has power over her - just as her emotions have power over her.

5. Wrecked - Willow uses magic to feel better after losing Tara, the magic is a high, she ends up summoning a demon, loses control

6. Gingerbread - Willow uses magic to a) get a protection spell for Buffy (ironic Buffy is the protector and protects Willow - so here Willow is attempting to show her importance - a clear power reference), and b) thrusts it in her mother's face as rebellion.

7. Lessons - Willow pulls up a flower from Paraguay that does not belong. When questioned, she exclaims everything is connected...but does this mean she should be changing the world to fit how she wants it? The flower belongs in PAraquay not England after all.

It's not magic that's the metaphor so much as the individual uses of it. Which is how it's different than the soul metaphor - which tends to be a more general metaphor. I think they use magic in a different sense.

HEre's yet another example:
Family - Tara's uses magic to hide, just as Willow uses it to hide in STSP. In Tara's case it endangers all her friends and makes all the demons invisible. In Willow's case it endangers her making her invisible to everyone in SG but the demons. The spells in both Family and STSP are customs used to ill-effect.

Also in both Family and STSP - the families (Tara's and Willow's) see magic = evil or something shouldn't do.
Dawn says in sTSP, we can do detective work, use Spike to locate stuff, etc - not do anymore spells (Willow in contrast had found the demon far quicker using the spell but the research provided B/X/D with more info.) In Family -- Tara's father tells her she's not supposed to use magic, it's evil, it will make her demonic. Tara says it doesn't feel evil. Her father says evil never does.
(In Family magic puts Tara in danger yet at the end it wins her Willow as they levitate off dance floor. It is used metaphorically for both.)

Some may find the shifting metaphors and symbolism of magic difficult to track in Btvs, but I didn't. PArtly because I sensed they were using the spells or ways/means magic was used metaphorically not magic itself.

One more example. Primeval. In this one - the spell cast is one that symbolizes unity - unified the SG defeat Adam. It's not magic that's the metaphor - although you could argue that magic=Willow's spirit which is later ripped from her in her Restless dream, but I think it's the spell itself that's the metaphor.

Not sure that clarifies or if I've just confused us both more. (Sort of trying to figure this one out myself...)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> More seriously -- Etrangere, 05:22:45 10/12/02 Sat

Yes, my intuition since Grave, and what your posts also makes me think, is that magic is always strongly linked with emotions of all kinds. Of course feelings are power in the BtVS mythos ("My emotions gave me power. They're total assets" What's My Line)

If I look again at your exemples :

1. In A New MAn - W/T try to float a rose and it explodes.
This represents the lack of control - something else is more powerful out there (plot device) and it symbolizes the explosive chemistry between the two women.

It's all about emotions, and there like in Choices, it's from the lack of control / aknowledgment of one's emotion that comes its explosive potential.


4. Fear Itself - Willow uses a locater spell or guide, it multiplies into many and they attack her. The magic tries to attack her. It has power over her - just as her emotions have power over her.

Yes the magic represents her confusion and fear. You can't ask to be guided if you don't really know where you cant to go, if your heart and your head tells you to go in different directions.


5. Wrecked - Willow uses magic to feel better after losing Tara, the magic is a high, she ends up summoning a demon, loses control

The whole addiction metaphore is still tied to emotions. Because that's how Willow uses this drugs/magics : to make herself feel otherwise, to control her state-of-mind. So the magic here, that has taken from an outside source instead of springing from one own's spirit and heart, is artificial emotions.

7. Lessons - Willow pulls up a flower from Paraguay that does not belong. When questioned, she exclaims everything is connected...but does this mean she should be changing the world to fit how she wants it? The flower belongs in PAraquay not England after all.

The flower is Willow. It is her that doesn't belong to England yet is connected to it by need. I think it expresses Willow's feeling of loneliness that we'll see even greater in STSP.

Other cases :

The gypsy curse : obviously it's the power of the feeling of vengeance.
Wild At Heart : Willow's pain she tries to use for magic.
Something Blue : Giles underlines the importance of being emotionnaly stable when doing magic. Like in Choices we see that feelings not well controlled can backlash. It's what Willow says in anger that realises.
Willow wants to control what she feels with magic, but that is impossible by using her own magic, her own feelings.

So what does it say about "good" or "evil" magic ? It seems it's only that "good" magic comes from controlled emotions, balanced and in harmony with the mind and the heart, while the "evil" magics (the one Ethan for exemple always uses) takes adventage of repressed feelings, chaotic and blind passions, forgotten or hidden yearnings.

It's not so much about the metaphores of magic as it is about the metaphysics of the Buffyverse, but those metaphysics are interresting because it is a metaphore :)
What BtVS says is that our emotions are power, a dangerous and chaotic power if it is not aknowledged, but a great asset if we know how to harness it. With what we feel we can impress on the words, help others, give strength to them like Buffy did in STSP's ending, or hurt them, without really meaning it, with lies or abusive control, like Willow did to Tara in s6.
We, any of us, and our hearts are power to be reckoned.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Very well said. Thanks. Agree. -- shadowkat, 09:55:39 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> We can disagree about anything, SK. :) -- Sophist, 11:32:06 10/12/02 Sat

I don't think we disagree about the definition, I think we may disagree about when one is used. That's ok -- as I said above, I think that whether a viewer sees a metaphor is really a matter of personal interpretation. I liked your list because it reaffirmed to me that magic, prior to S4, was not used metaphorically. That doesn't mean you can't see it a different way.

In Something Blue...I'd argue magic is used to symbolize Willow's emotions and inability to control them.

This is a perfect example. I would say that magic in this episode was not used to symbolize her emotions, but to reveal them to us. The first would be a metaphor, the second isn't (or at least isn't necessarily).

I think it was used as a metaphor for experiementation with sex and drugs more than directly for drugs and sex.

You've drawn such fine line here, I'm not going to disagree. Such a metaphor, however, was used in and after S4, not before (which was my only real point).

I never saw magic as solely symbolizing Tara/Willow. Yes it symbolized some of their sexual relationship, but it wasn't limited to that.

I'm not really arguing that it was. In fact, I'm not really arguing so much as observing and thinking out loud. I think the point made by others was that a symbol, once used for one purpose, ineluctably generates that same mental image whenever it's used again, even if it's used to symbolize something else. I think such viewers were perfectly able to separate the practical uses of magic from the symbolic. It was the transition from sex to drugs that caused confusion (or offense). I should re-emphasize that this was not a problem for me. I saw the change to magic/drugs, I just don't care much for it, mostly because I can't retcon it into a power issue like it should have been.

"Will it be sexy" and Willow shakes her head and says "no" or something negative.

What she actually says is something like "You might be surprised."
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Actually, she said "I'd be surprised" as in a negative -- Scroll, 23:39:30 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> Re: magic & addiction -- IVI, 17:36:24 10/10/02 Thu

I DONT THINK IT'S A MATTER OF CONTINUITY, ITS ABOUT UNDERSTANDINDG THAT THE SCOOBIES SAW ALL THE WILLOW ISSUE WRONG, AND DECIDED TO TREAT HER LIKE SE WASS ADDICTED CAUSE IT WAS THE EASY ANSWER TO WHAT WAS GOING ON. GILES IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN MAKE SENSE CAUSE, HE WENT TROW SOMETHING SIMILAR(REMEMBER WHE HE WAS YOUG IN SOME SORT OF EVIL COVE O SMETHING LIKE THAT?)AND HE KNOWS THAT WILLOW WASN'T AN ADDICT, JUST MISLEAD AN MISSUNDESTOOD.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Hon, take off the caps lock. -- HonorH, 09:50:19 10/12/02 Sat

All caps makes your post hard to read. It's like visual shouting. 'Kay?
[> [> [> [> [> agreed -- dream of the consortium, 09:07:15 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> Was it ever an addiction? -- Aislinn, 17:09:55 10/10/02 Thu

I don't think the magic was EVER an addiction. Not the way the Scooby gang saw it. Willow had some addiction symptoms, but I think what Giles was trying to say was that magic is a part of her, and can't be dealt with the way drug addiction is. It needs to be controlled and understood, not abolished.

Maybe what happened when she tried to suppress it was that it actually made it worse--more unpredicatable, more likely to blow up.

Just my 2 cents.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Was it ever an addiction? -- meritaten, 17:23:32 10/10/02 Thu

...I think what Giles was trying to say was that magic is a part of her, and can't be dealt with the way drug addiction is. It needs to be controlled and understood, not abolished.

I would agree with this if it Willow's addiction hadn't been rubbed in our face last season. Perhaps I'm just reacting to a storyline that I hated being essentially "taken back"?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Was it ever an addiction? -- Miss Edith, 17:43:47 10/10/02 Thu

I think the story could have been told as Willow being psychologically addicted to magic and wanting to believe the magic is the problem, she is hooked on it and wants to quit. The story would have made a lot more sense I feel if the physical symptons hadn't been tacked on. E.g Willow has the shakes in Wrecked, and in Gone she has cravings for water. Basically the writers decided Willow was physically addicted to magic. Not to mention Sam talking of knowing others that were addicted, and Willow's magic annoynoumous group.
I feel the story would have played better if it was never implied that plenty of people became addicted to witchcraft. Did Giles just never think to mention it to Willow before? It should have just been Willow rationilising it as an addiction, hence the addiction plot could have been dismissed more easily once Willow accepts its her powers and the way she chooses to use them that's the real problem.
[> [> [> [> [> No, cuz Giles says so! -- Darby, 10:04:28 10/12/02 Sat

One thing about addiction, even with people who work within fields defined by it, it still means different things to different people.

One can validly say that cocaine is not addictive if one looks for particular types of withdrawal as part of your definition. One could say that shopping is not a true addiction, but there may be support groups to help people with the "addiction" anyway.

Let's face it, Giles has a different perspective than any of the other characters - for one thing, he seems to know how the magic has interacted with Willow. If something becomes a part of you, how can it be an addiction? -It's certainly not a stoppable habit at that point.

But I also think that we are seeing some rewriting of history (it had to be done, super-magic is too valuable a tool in the Buffyverse to be discarded that way), but it doesn't have to be a refutation of what we've been shown so much as saying it wasn't what the characters perceived it to be. I say be happy they've dumped an extremely awkward set of imagery, and let's move on!

- Darby, who will eventually be looking for the Buffy 12-step program...but not today.
[> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- Wisewoman, 16:09:10 10/10/02 Thu

(given Anya's response that it was a little sexy yet Willow's ? facial response that it wasn't)


See, I thought Willow's expression conveyed, momentarily, that she did think it was a little sexy doing a spell with Anya, immediately followed by a major wiggins at that thought, which got her out of there as quickly as possible.

;o) dub
[> [> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- Malandanza, 23:55:04 10/10/02 Thu

"See, I thought Willow's expression conveyed, momentarily, that she did think it was a little sexy doing a spell with Anya, immediately followed by a major wiggins at that thought, which got her out of there as quickly as possible."

Me too! When Anya said it did get a little sexy, it looked as if Willow was about to agree -- then a sudden realization hit her and she took off in full denial mode. I bet she avoids Anya for a while.

As for the addictive magic, I think it was abundantly clear that Rack's magic in the early part of the season was addictive (not just Willow -- also Amy, the people in Rack's waiting room and the client Warren bribed). I do think there is something addictive or sexy about the dark magicks -- because the creatures that supply it want their victims to use it as often as possible. Willow's new magic is different -- so no need to tie it to addiction or sex. It's like she was using heroin last season, but now she's using herbal ecstasy.
[> [> [> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic -- stela, 05:10:23 10/11/02 Fri

The way Willow is being portrayed this year regarding magic - it's part of her, rather than an "addiction" she can learn to control - is consistent with last season. If you take the analogy of Willow's use of magic to drug/alcohol addiction, that addiction IS a part of you. An alcoholic or drug addict cannot ever stop being an alcoholic or a drug addict. It is a part of them.

It's the same thing with Willow. If you want to get over the addiction to drugs or alcohol you have to accept that it's a part of you, and you have to make changes in your life to be able to do that. It's not simply stopping use of the substance. Willow cannot simply stop doing magic. She has to learn how her abuse of it changed her fundamentally. Wanting to go back to *just being Willow*, is a common reaction in recovering addicts. It takes time, and that's what Willow is expressing in STSP - she's knows she hasn't had enough time to work on who she is now, and wants to hide a little longer. It's not just guilt about what she did.

Wish I could write more, but I've gotta go for now. Shouldn't read this board on my way out to work!
Just want to say I love this board, have been lurking for about 6 months. This is my first post here, so pleez bee kind!
[> [> [> [> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic (Spoilers through Lessons) -- Sophist, 08:25:41 10/11/02 Fri

Welcome. Good point. However, how do you then explain Giles's statement in Lessons that "It's (magic's) not an addiction."? I think it's that seeming inconsistency which is puzzling. That, plus the fact that not many seemed to like the magic/addiction equation.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic (Spoilers through Lessons) -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:37:31 10/11/02 Fri

I'll state this again: Giles said "It's not a hobboy or addiction ANYMORE." The emphasis on "anymore" is mine. This implies it was once a hobby/addiction, but it has transcended that.
[> [> [> [> [> [> I just checked Psyche (Spoilers through Lessons) -- Sophist, 13:51:06 10/11/02 Fri

The word "anymore" does not appear in the transcript. I didn't hear it either.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Anya, Willow, and sexy magic (Spoilers through Lessons) -- TRM, 12:33:19 10/12/02 Sat

Well, I did hear it, so perhaps ASH mumbled something or the trees blew in the wind to make it sound confusing. Regarding this entire thread, I think it would have been hilarious if Giles said: "It's not lesbian sex or an addiction (anymore)." in his still stodgy British fashion.
[> sexy metaphors, spiritual referents -- manwitch, 07:34:45 10/12/02 Sat

I am probably a lone voice in thinking that Anya and Willow would be a great couple, and in thinking that its been lurking there for a while. Anya's spell with Willow "produces", metaphorically speaking, our first glimpse of willow's lesbian side. The bickering between the two in their quests for the attention of Giles or Xander implies to me a stronger relationship than what they are aware. By which I mean simply that they are definitely on each others radar screens in a major way. And of course Anya's, "You can sleep with me," comment in Tough Love. Anya knows what Tara and Willow used to do together, she knows that this sort of thing was part of the relationship between Willow an Tara. I wouldn't mind seeing it, and not just because...well...you know.

That said, I suspect I am also a lonely voice in thinking that all of these metaphors are metaphors for Buffy (which is not to say they are only metaphors for Buffy), and they can be understood that way in the context of where Buffy is psychologically. In that sense, the whole Willow Tara relationship is a metaphor for an aspect of Buffy's spiritual quest in Seasons 4 and 5. Magic/Witchcraft in Willow and Tara is a metaphor for lesbian sex just as both W/T magic and W/T lesbian sex are metaphors for unmediated access to spiritual consciousness, exactly what Buffy is seeking and ultimately finds in each of those seasons, although with slightly different nuances. They are sort of the embodiment of a choice that Buffy has to tap her spiritual source through love without need of any mediating organization, institution or dogma. But they wouldn't be a metaphor for that if they weren't linked themselves.
[> [> Re: sexy metaphors, spiritual referents -- JM, 16:45:04 10/12/02 Sat

I think that there is much support in the world of fanfic. Don't feel lonely.
The opening segments of 7.1 and 7.2 (spoilers for those eps, and some unspoiled spec for future eps) -- Rob, 13:27:02 10/10/02 Thu

I heard rumors that the two girls who were killed at the beginning of "Lessons" and "Beneath You" were actually played by SMG. Anyone heard this rumor or know if its true or false?

If they were portrayed by SMG, these "they're slayers" theories would be given even more credence...and would be really cool.

Rob
[> dunno, but i saw someone on the F train the other day with Lola pink hair -- Sophie, 13:45:09 10/10/02 Thu

[> No -- Tchaikovsky, 14:32:27 10/10/02 Thu

I read a thread here the other day where someone said they had rewound the tape and watched it several times and it definitely was NOT Sarah Michelle Gellar in the visions/funny film homages. The rumour comes from a (probably over-eager) New York news article. On these offhand slips, big, false rumours start circulating. And don't we just love it.

Link to original article:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/story/24730p-23433c.html

Link to thread discussion at voy:
http://www.voy.com/14567/2/67698.html
[> [> About NY Daily News -- shadowkat, 08:29:38 10/11/02 Fri

"The rumour comes from a (probably over-eager) New York news article. On these offhand slips, big, false rumours start circulating. And don't we just love it."

"http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/story/24730p-23433c.html"

If you live in NYC you may already know this...but the New York Daily News is NOT the most dependable newspaper.
Outside of local news and sports? It tends to be pretty tabloidy, often reporting rumors rather than facts. I usually take what I read in most newspapers with a grain of salt, but the NY Daily News and NY Post - I really do, particularly regarding entertainment and celebrities.

NY Times tends to be a bit more dependable on these topics.

I also read the article, looked at the screen shots. And well unless SMG was wearing a body suite, prosthetics and an extreemly convincing wig in the IStanbul scene. That is NOT her. Somehow I think it would be cheaper to hire an extra or stunt woman to do those scenes then to put heavy makeup or use graphics to disquise SMG.

At any rate I wouldn't trust anything printed on BTvs seen in the Daily NEws.
[> Here are some screencaps again. -- oboemaboe, 15:37:16 10/10/02 Thu

Definitely ain't our girl in Instanbul:
www.angelfire.com/tv2/paradox166/buffy/season7/lessons/teaser/PDVD_005.jpg

And neither is the pink one:
http://justimagine.darkspire.net/allscreencaps/beneathyou/beneathyou012.jpg


Amazing what you can find with a search engine.
[> [> And that reminds me... -- Wisewoman, 15:49:20 10/10/02 Thu

What is with that nose ring?!?!

Okay, nice try, but they coulda found something a little better than an earring...not to mention using an actress who actually has the piercing...

:Q)
[> [> [> Re: And that reminds me... -- aliera, 18:48:44 10/10/02 Thu

so speaks one who?....has a piercing?

Fearing the pain...aliera
[> [> [> [> Oh yeah! -- dub ;o), 19:12:27 10/10/02 Thu

Fear the pain! I have felt the pain...

:Q)
[> [> [> To indicate that she was a raver -- oboemaboe, 19:05:04 10/10/02 Thu

she should have been carrying a bundt cake. That would have been funny.
Joss Whendon for the love of god leave poor willow alone -- 110v3w1110w, 16:07:23 10/10/02 Thu

[> Great essay, I'm gonna have to let this one stew for a while... -- JBone, 18:30:48 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> It's posts like these that make this site worthwile. -- Apophis, 18:54:14 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Well I, for one, admire a spontaneous burst of emotion. -- Rochefort, 21:17:59 10/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> If it doesn't provoke and emotional reaction is it worth watching? -- Rendyl, 05:16:50 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> or even 'an' one. ;) -- Ren "oh gawd it -is- morning" dyl, 05:19:49 10/11/02 Fri

[> 110v3w1110w returns, as deep and as insightful as ever. -- Rob, 21:17:20 10/10/02 Thu

[> We do archive threads like these- don't we? Wouldn't want to lose it. -- Tchaikovsky, 06:38:16 10/11/02 Fri

[> Re: Joss Whendon for the love of god leave poor willow alone -- Rendyl, 07:26:06 10/11/02 Fri

Weighing in as the voice of reason here. Fun is fun but this was not a troll post so why all the cutting remarks?

The orginal poster could have meant this as a response in another thread or they could have intended a longer message and (as I often do) got bogged down in Voy's speedy system and stuck with nothing but a title.

Even if the above is the entirety of the message, who says all the postings -must- be essay length? If all the poster wanted to say was, "ACK! Enough with the Willow suffering" then why do they need pages of words to do so?

Finally, not everyone is eloquent and well-written. (or good spellers..cough) Not everyone lurks to determine the feel and general atmosphere before they post. If the poster is trolling then fine, but if they are not can we try not to make fun of them?

Ren -who wanted to say all this in just a title but couldn't think how to squeeze it all in-

[> [> Well said. 110v3w1110w is no troll. -- CW, otherwise known as he who cannot proofread., 09:03:08 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> Actually 110v3w1110w has been here before, and caused some unpleasantness...a few months back. -- Rob, 09:27:55 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> Re: Actually 110v3w1110w has been here before, and caused some unpleasantness...a few months back. -- 110v3w1110w, 11:11:51 10/11/02 Fri

i don't recall causing any unpleasantness. but i do wonder why they seem to be inflicting the most horrific things on willow.

[> [> [> [> An apology -- Rob, 11:46:31 10/11/02 Fri

I retract my earlier statement. I'm sorry, 110v3w1110w. I just looked back in the archives, and you're not the troll I thought you were. I must have confused you with another one from around the same time period. Early last summer we got a bunch of "Spike is an animal" posts, and other character bashings, and for some reason, I thought I remembered you as being one of those trolls. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Rob

[> [> [> [> [> Episode 1 - Rob discovers the secret message cloning lab in the basement of Voyforums. -- Rendyl, 12:33:09 10/11/02 Fri

Yes, yes I am smiling an evil smile.

Ren

[> [> [> [> [> [> I have the power! Mwahahahahahahahaha!!! -- Rob, 16:48:37 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Clones *can* be killed . . . -- d'Herblay, 21:33:18 10/11/02 Fri

. . . though one hates to ruin a good joke in the process!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> My powers...they're gone! Gulp! You're even more incredibly scary than Dawn! -- Rob, 22:49:58 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> Re: Actually 110v3w1110w has been here before, and caused some unpleasantness...a few months back. -- Rendyl, 12:45:21 10/11/02 Fri

Tongue-in-cheek I would answer because it's her turn dude...

(cough)

But for a serious response maybe it has to do with balance. Willow has a history of using magic to ease any pain she feels. This has only gotten worse as she got older. Tara tried to show her that magic has a price for its use and requires a certain amount of responsibility and accountability to use it safely. Willow never understood this. She saw magic as a toy and never understood just how dangerous it (and she) could become.

Most of the "horrific" things that have happened to her are a result of this. Simply put Willow did all this to herself. Even Tara's death may indirectly be her fault if the Buffyverse follows its pattern of never giving something for nothing.

Ren

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Actually 110v3w1110w has been here before, and caused some unpleasantness...a few months back. -- 110v3w1110w, 15:53:52 10/11/02 Fri

willow has used a lot of magic but to be fair they have always looked like fairly low power spells and she has always used them to do good or at the very worse neutral acts. the only bad thing i can think of that she used magic for until she tried to destroy the earth was to make tara forget they had an argument so i think that tara's death would have been out of all proportion as a result of using magic unless you think that the very use of magic its self for what ever reason is a negative thing that will bring misfortune on you. if that was the kind of disproportionate repsonse that using magic brings then i don't think that anyone would use magic at all. also am i the only person that doesn't have a problem with willow killing warren ? after all the things he did and that he tried at least twice to kill willow even when she was chasing him that he deserved to die and he deserved to die in a painful way and that willow used magic to do it matters very little because if someone killed someone i loved for no reason then they better put themselves out of my reach because i will get a gun an a knife and if i caught them they would know what suffering was right up until i killed them. and willow probably would have done the same and the end result would have been the the same magic or no magic.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Actually 110v3w1110w has been here before, and caused some unpleasantness...a few months back. -- Drizzt, 21:39:18 10/11/02 Fri

Hey, been a while.

Okay, NO the death of Tara would not be related to the memory erasure.

Life for a life...
Willow did most of the major mojo to ressurect Buffy. And the spirit in afterlife might not have been the only bad consiquence of that act...several posters have posited the theory that to maintain "balance" in magic or karmic terms...someone Willow loves had to die as 'payment' for Buffy's life. Or it could also be the same deal, but it is the PTB, or forces of darkness, or whatever god/goddess Willow called upon in the ressurection...that chose to take Tara as 'payment'

With this theory; why did Tara not die immediately?
1. God(s) work in mysterious ways.
2. Maby Willow needed to learn accountability in magic; she has been very arrogent throughout different seasons.

Willow has done MUCH worse than the memory erasure; using Darkest Magics, the scene with her and Amy was a major abuse of power, and Something Blue, while the havoc she caused in that ep was not "deliberate" it did get her an OFFER to be a vengance demon. Also aside from the creation of Dawn, and the Superstar ep...the potential power of the spell in Something Blue was...

Dawnie, The Vampire Slayer -- Aislinn, 16:43:28 10/10/02 Thu

Ok, here's what I'm thinking: Dawn is being groomed, not so subtley, to be the new Slayer. She's even getting her own Scrappy gang.

My question is, how does that work out in the Buffyverse? Aren't Slayers destined? How could Dawnie be a destined Slayer if she didn't even exist until two years ago?? (It was 2 years, right?) I think she'd be great without the title, tho. She could develop some "powers" as a side effect of being the Key, and kick some butt as plain old Dawn. Or even better: she could wear spandex and a mask and give herself a goofy name and pretend that no one will ever know her secret identity... LOL

Ah, well, I get ahead of myself. Just wondered what u guys thought of the possibility of slaying running in the family.

Aislinn

[> Re: Dawnie, The Vampire Slayer -- Juliet, 17:21:39 10/10/02 Thu

I think it could be interesting...but my general feeling is that if SMG quits, the show should end. I really love it, but you might as well just end BUFFY the Vampire Slayer when BUFFY ends. If that makes any sense.

And a point that's been bugging me: If spoilers and the opening scenes of 7.1 and 7.2 are correct then something is killing off Slayers in Waiting. And if Dawn's a Slayer in Waiting (but undetected) guess who'll be coming to pay her a visit? And it's not Santa Claus.

[> [> Sarah Michelle Gellar speculation... -- JBone, 21:08:02 10/10/02 Thu

I really don't feel that if SMG doesn't continue with the series, that she would be quitting it. She has been the anchor of a show that has run into it's seventh season, where actors on other shows in her position are making much more than she is. And if you've worked as hard as she has, to build the show to this point, she better get paid. Same thing for Joss. Unfortunately, it doesn't have the ratings to justify such a paycheck for the 900 pound gorillas. So, I will hold no ill will to Sarah as she makes a living in Hollywood. I hear that she has a solid fan base.

It is my preference for the show to end if Sarah doesn't continue, rather than have some kind of knock off on the air. Triple that if Joss isn't involved. As much as I love the show, I know it has to end sometime. And I want to see it end as I viewed it. The best damn show on tv.

[> [> Re: Dawnie, The Vampire Slayer -- Nino, 21:08:53 10/10/02 Thu

It's a possibility...but I'm hoping my thoughts (read other post) that this is the big one, and fianl season, are true.

[> [> [> Dawn the Key -- yabyumpan, 04:52:04 10/11/02 Fri

I think to carry it on with Dawn as Vampire Slayer would be a mistake but they could possibly do something creative with Dawn, The Key. If they developed her powers this season to be something other than Vampire slaying then they could have a spin off connected to but not just following on from BtVS.

Just a thought :-)

[> [> Re: Dawnie, The Vampire Slayer in waiting -- wiscoboy, 14:12:28 10/11/02 Fri

Dawn is not a slayer in waiting but an extension of Buffy thru her creation by Buffyblood.

[> Re: Dawnie, The Vampire Slayer -- Dochawk, 00:49:39 10/11/02 Fri

Aislinn,

Read my post about the genetics of slayerdom and why I think it has already been established that Dawn would be a 3rd slayer, outside of the normal method of transmission. its archived from the middle of September.

But, I actually think the point may be mute. The ratings for Buffy this year have been close to horrible (actually the ratings for Buffy have been on a downward spiral ever since Spike and Buffy first kissed). I doubt that anyone would want to make season 8 if the ratings don't improve, but UPN certainly isn't going to pay alot for Buffy minus SMG, no matter what Les Moonves says. So tell your friends to watch, mostly because its vastly more fun to watch this year, but also to get those ratings back up.

[> [> Re: Dochawk & Ratings -- wiscoboy, 14:23:08 10/11/02 Fri

Did the ratings begin to slide downhill with B/S kissage or perhaps because of the dark direction the show took(can you say DOWNER) along with perhaps the worst script writing in the show's history? Personally I'm encouraged by the first 2 Eps in S7.

[> [> [> Re: Dochawk & Ratings -- Dochawk, 14:38:00 10/11/02 Fri

LOL! I expected someone to catch that long before this. of course there is no way to know why viewers started tuning out after OmWF/tabula Rasa. My semieducated guess is that it was a combination of things, including the downer tone of the show. But also the biggest loss was (I believe I may be wrong, the demographic stuff was out 6 months ago and I am doing this from memory) young men. if thats the case, three things that would have been attractive to them were the kick ass sexy heroine kicking ass (exactly how many demons/vamps did Buff kill in the 2nd half of season 6?), the willow/tara relationship (yes its purient but Les Moonves doesn't care why people watch , just that they do watch so he can sell advertising) and finally I think Spuffy turned off a group of people. Only my opinion based on casual conversations to nonhardcore Buffy fans, with no real data to back it up.

[> [> [> [> Re: Dochawk & Ratings -- Miss Edith, 17:20:29 10/11/02 Fri

Spuffy turned off people who were against the heroine having a relationship with a souless vampire. However it also turned off the people looking for a romantic pairing. Marti has said she received so much e-mail from people wanting Buffy to treat Spike better, and see a real romance bloom. The ending of Smashed did put off many of the the Spuffy fans as well. To be honest I can't think of many people that it did please.
People against the idea of Buffy being with a "serial killer" weren't any happier to see her just having sex with him. And scenes such as the dumpster sex in DMP in which Buffy had an expression like she was Jesus being nailed to the cross didn't exactly thrill the romantics. Therefore the Spuffy storyline didn't attract most viewers because of the way it was done, rather than Spuffy itself.
And Wrecked disapointed people who were hoping for more subtelty for the Willow storyline. And many fans off the W/T relationship were lost in the end as well. The unrelenting darknesss and the characters coming across badly was most probably what lost the casual fans, more than anything else.

[> Some thoughts on Dawn show and ratings -- cjc36, 01:50:43 10/11/02 Fri

BUFFYVERSE CONTINUITY: It fits the needs of the story. They usually tweak (bend) the rules with flair. Dawn has Buffy's 'essence' was made from Buffy's 'blood,' according to Buffy's revelation during The Gift's final act. So Dawnie could very well be given the power.

Faith will have to die for that to happen, of course.

RATINGS AND STUFF: Sure, BtVS is down. But a new show with a new cast would cost less than an eight season of Buffy, and will have a semi-built in audience. Now AH and NB may not come along if the money isn't right, and without some regulars from the old show, the reasons to do it decline.

I personally think they should let the thing rest for awhile and not do another Slayer/Hellmouth show until after Angel is retired.

[> [> Considering Angel's ratings -- Isabel, 05:09:39 10/11/02 Fri

That could be next year. Angel's never done better than Buffy. I was looking at ratings this week (Maybe they were for two weeks ago) and Angel was 3rd from the bottom. Not good on an epic scale.

[> [> Re: Some thoughts on Dawn show and ratings -- Purple Tulip, 08:48:42 10/11/02 Fri

I still think that Dawn and Connor should get together and have their own show---I'd watch that

[> [> [> Re: Dawn the Vampire Slayer - Pure Speculation -- Pegleg Pete, 14:31:50 10/11/02 Fri

I would love to see Dawn become a Slayer. I can just see the faces of WC trying to puzzle out how this could happen.

Some old stuff, some new stuff -- Nino, 21:07:16 10/10/02 Thu

I was reading an old essay on the board about "Restless" and some MAJOR stuff was missed...even though its old...its genius and needs to be pointed out. First of all the kitty in Willow's dream symbolizes the coming of Dawn (not Willow). Remember in "Graduation Day Part 2" when Faith and Buffy were in the coma...there was definitly a kitty as they made the bed (and these scenes are obviously foreshadowing the coming of Dawn..."Be back before Dawn" hello!) Also, when Faith said "Little Miss Moffet counting down from 730...) hmmm...the clock in "Restless" said "7:30" abd if what I've heard is correct 730 is the amount of days between "Grad pt 2" and 'The Gift" when Buffy dies...and the crazies call Dawn "Curds and Whey"...Joss definitely knew season 5 completely, by season 3. I have a lot more...but i digress...except to say that when Olivia sits on a grave with Buffy's pram, it's definitely symbolizing her death...come on folks.

New stuff--anyone a "Fray" comic fan? What's the deal with that slayer in the 21st Cent. and this "final battle"? With this First Evil story line in season 7...could that be Buffy? Does Joss know this is the last season and he is just toying with us so we won't expect that kick-ass ending...if you don't know what im talkin about, and would like to, ill try to explain...if u all want me to shut up...thats coming up now...

[> Fray (spoilers) -- Apophis, 21:44:21 10/10/02 Thu

If the mystery slayer is/was Buffy and the events chronicled in Fray take place at the end of this season, then Angel's show is pretty much screwed, since no vampires and no demons equals a pretty boring show about people living in a hotel. If Buffy does manage to rid the world of demons, it probably won't take place on the show; probably sometime in the future, after the show concludes (though I have no idea when and how that will occur). Besides, Joss probably doesn't want his show to be concstrained by his comic book.
By the way, any news on when the Fray series concludes? Is Joss really late or did I miss it?

[> [> Re: Fray Coming Soon? -- Amber, 23:27:30 10/10/02 Thu

I was surfing around on Dark Horse's website today and it says that Fray Issues 7 & 8 are both coming out in December. This is the first time I've actually seen a release date for them and DH is taking pre-orders so maybe it's finally going to happen!

Its Dawnie's Birthday! (Well MT turns 17 today) -- Dochawk, 09:52:09 10/11/02 Fri

[> Happy b-day, MT! You rock! -- Rob, 11:14:45 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> Re: Happy Birthday, MT! Go Teen Power!!! -- Young Fan, 11:37:45 10/11/02 Fri

[> "On n'est pas sÈrieux quand on a 17 ans..." Happy Birthday ! -- Ete, 14:48:44 10/11/02 Fri

Hardcore Lorne (A4.1+spoiled) -- Fluffy, 11:18:19 10/11/02 Fri

Anyone else notice that Hallucino-Lorne was speaking for Angelus?

"If you want to bitch-slap (justine) over there, hey I'm your cheering section."

"The only one who needs killing is that patricidal pup of yours back home. Hell I'd dust him myself if I weren't just a crappy hallucination."

I personally would like to see more of this sort of externalization of Angelus/Lorne. He cracks me up, and frankly I miss Angelus's sick humor sometimes.

***Upcoming Episode Spoiling Speculation Below BE WARNED***
____________________________________________________________


Still here? About the whole "take care of Fluffy" thing. Lorne was just trying to throw his Stage Boss/Manager/Evil Taskmaster off his back, didn't want them to know he was on the phone with LA. I think will find out more in "The House Always Wins."

It is him being in Vegas for part of the season that COULD give us the chance for more Hardcore Lorne!!!!!!

The Watcher's meeting (1st of several wild speculation posts) -- Dochawk, 11:53:49 10/11/02 Fri

One comment from STSP has been bothering me all week. Willow calls Giles and is told he is in a "watcher's meeting". its already been established that Giles feels the watchers are clueless and kinda strange thing to tell someone on the phone (Giles was on Buffy's speedial btw which makes sense, but I couldn't help think of the batphone a direct line from commissioner gordon to batman). Obviously we are told that Giles is in a watcher's meeting for a reason. Could it be that he (and the other watchers) are hearing from two watchers, one in Frankfurt and another in Istanbul, who are reporting about the murder of their charges by monkly garbed assassins? I am getting the impression that this is the best organized season long arc we have had (with the possible exception of season 5 which was fortold 2 years earlier in the Fuffy dream).

[> Once Again I forgot the Spoiler for 7.3 warning above -- Dochawk, 11:55:03 10/11/02 Fri

[> That was my first thought as well. -- HonorH, 12:18:04 10/11/02 Fri

Even the Watchers are comprehending that Something Not Nice is going on. If the girls are, indeed, Slayers-in-Waiting, they would have their own Watchers (per Kendra, "Pretty Girls All in a Row"). Either the Watchers, too, would be getting murdered, or they'd have to notice their charges are. Hence the Watcher meeting with Buffy's latest Watcher sitting in.
[> Small point to add -- Fluffy, 12:19:51 10/11/02 Fri

The voice said Giles was in a "counsel" meeting. Perhaps a) the counsel has a secret and sworn phone-service, or b)phone service in another dimension (Wolfram and Hart have offices in other dimensions, so there must be inter-dimensional telecom of some kind. Or c) perhaps the Counsel runs a front business (which is how they afford to pay their cadre). In which case a counsel meeting could, for all their secretary knows, be just another business session. I for one favor option A. I love to picture Giles with his own personal Moneypenny (not literally mind you)!!!
[> [> I'm confused... -- Wisewoman, 15:06:33 10/11/02 Fri

...yet again. If Giles is on speed-dial at Buffy's house I would think it's his home number in England. Would that home be the tasteful manor where we saw him with Willow, and where he keeps his horsie? If not, what was that building? I can't see Giles living in a Council "motherhouse" (sorry, shades of The Talamasca) given his recent relationship with them.

Was it perhaps the headquarters of the Coven that was healing/teaching Willow? That might make more sense, as there would be someone there to answer the phone and say where he'd gone, but then how come Giles is living with a Coven of witches, when he's not one?

And...if it is his home number, then who the heck answered the phone!?!?

Plus also--Willow wakes up in the morning and calls England from California--wouldn't that mean Giles's meeting was already over for the day? Aaaarrrggghhh...

dub ;o)
[> [> [> remember -- Kitt, 15:44:59 10/11/02 Fri

don't know 'bout the rest, but with regard to the time, rememer dub -
"I suck at Math" Joss Whedon
[> [> [> [> Re: remember -- acesgirl, 16:50:17 10/11/02 Fri

"I suck at Math" Joss Whedon

He really should hire someone to double check the math. Seriously. No, Seeeeeeriously! :)
[> [> [> Maybe Olivia overcame her fear of beasties? -- dochawk, 16:50:25 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> Re: I'm confused... -- Wizardman, 19:40:29 10/11/02 Fri

For all we know, this meeting began in the afternoon. England is only 8 hours ahead of NA Pacific time. So if, say, Willow woke up at 7:00 am Sunnydale time, thats only 3:00 in England.

And for the record, I don't think that the deaths were on the agenda of the meeting. Why? Because if Slayers in Waiting were being bumped off, then there is no way in Heaven, on Earth, or in Hell that Giles would NOT tell Buffy. Unless Buffy decided to keep silent, but I don't see that being the case. Not for something like this. Spike's presense- well, that could have been an illusion, or a trick. Spike's soul- that's a huge thing for her to digest, and as none of the Scoobies were in "Kill Spike now" mode, I can understand if she thought it wasn't really anyone else's business. Robed figures coming after potential Slayers- beings that could conceivably go after her friends to get at her- that is something she'd bring up.
[> [> [> [> Re: I'm confused... (sort of casting spoilers for future) -- Dochawk, 07:44:55 10/12/02 Sat

the meeting wasn't over yet. If Giles is learning about the deaths of the SITs, he'll be calling Buffy very shortly. In fact, he'll be going to Buffy very shortly since she will need all the help she can get and his WC connection will be necessary. Since, ASH is only on 11 of the remaining 19 epis (well it could be more) he may not get there for awhile (or else he'll take a break in the middle)
[> [> [> [> [> That's my thought as well. -- HonorH, 09:48:29 10/12/02 Sat

He definitely wouldn't keep this from Buffy, but it could be that he's just learning of it now. Remember, he's been kinda tied up with rehabilitating Willow. It could be that the Council just gave him a call and said, "Something bad's happening, come to a meeting," and that's all he knew before now.
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy, Spike, and the responsibility not to tell -- Just George, 17:34:25 10/12/02 Sat

Wizardman: "Spike's soul- that's a huge thing for her to digest, and as none of the Scoobies were in "Kill Spike now" mode, I can understand if she thought it wasn't really anyone else's business."

A lot of fans have gotten on Buffy's case for seeming to not tell the other Scoobies about Spike's soul. Maybe she has. Maybe she hasn't. We don't know. But let's assume Buffy hasn't told anyone. Dawn and Xander didn't mention it. Xander certainly had the opportunity to mention it in STSP.

Should Buffy have told Xander and Dawn about Spike's soul? Most fans seem to assume the answer is yes. Under this interpretation Buffy would only keep quiet as an extension of her trademark tendency to keep things secret from her sister/friends. I think an interesting discussion is whether Buffy has a responsibility to keep Spike's secret and keep the information from Xander and Dawn (and now Willow).

What if Buffy kept Spike's secret out of respect for his privacy? Spike obviously didn't want people to know about getting his soul back. He obviously wanted his secret kept in BY (when he was rational). Spike tried to beat Anya up to keep her from talking. Buffy only found out because Spike was raving. Once he was raving, Spike was in no position to give Buffy permission to tell others. As a being with a soul, Spike is deserving of having his wishes honored unless there is a damned good reason (like life and death) not to. Spike even had a chance to tell Xander himself in STSP but did not. An argument can be made that Buffy's responsibility is to not tell people about Spike's soul until Spike says it is OK to do so.

I guess I would like to know people's reasons why Buffy should break Spike's confidence and tell Xander and Dawn. I think that telling others might be the bigger betrayal.

-JG
[> [> [> Don't be confused -- darrenK, 12:38:02 10/12/02 Sat

In seasons 1, 2 and 3, Giles can afford to be the librarian at a public high school yet drive a very expensive car. Later, when he's unemployed and fired from the council, he can afford to keep his lovely duplex apartment, continue collecting ancient relics and buy a sporty, convertible BMW.

There's is a reason for this. He must be from a wealthy, potentially aristocratic family. It makes sense. Giles has said that being a watcher runs in his family. He mentions that his grandmother was one, but he doesn't say how far back his family has been watchers.

But this means that his family, at least as far back as his grandmother, has had access to elite education which implies access to great resources. This is especially true since women didn't usually have the educational opportunities men had and for her to be a watcher she must have had private tutors, which was how aristocratic young women were educated during Victorian and Edwardian times.

Being wealthy doesn't necessarily mean superrich. There are a lot of families out there with family houses and money tied up in land and just enough of an inheritance to do and buy what they want. This--and the principal of the thing--would explain Gile's desire for the council to reinstate his salary retroactively in Checkpoint.

It also explains the horse and the manor house and Giles ability to write a big check to Buffy last season and it means that there's probably at least one servant to answer the phone and--no need to speculate--probably an excellent collection of wedgewood china.

dK
[> [> [> [> Same with Wesley -- Scroll, 14:56:19 10/12/02 Sat

From everything we've been told about Wesley and the way he was played up as being the total complete opposite of Gunn (white, rich, educated, "refined" vs. black, poor, streetwise, "thuggish") in Season 2, I think we can assume he is from a wealthy/aristocratic family. Also, considering that Wesley was brought on as Giles the next generation. We can assume Oxford educated, possibly with a good deal of medical training thrown in (considering his knowledge of obstetrics in S3).

When dating Virginia, Wes was clearly quite comfortable blending in with the rich and famous. I'm sure American high society and English high society aren't exact parallels but Wes is probably from a privileged background. Probably one with horsies like Giles'. :)
[> [> [> [> Wedgewood china! I love that! -- Honorificus (The Porcelain-Skinned One), 19:05:51 10/12/02 Sat

Especially the lovely sound it makes when you throw it across the room, shattering it into thousands of pieces!
[> Reinstated? -- meritaten, 22:52:25 10/11/02 Fri

Wasn't Giles reinsated as a watcher when Buffy confronted the Council about Glory (Checkpoint??)

I have been puzzling over this line as well. This was the best I could think of.
[> [> He was. -- HonorH, 22:58:07 10/11/02 Fri

Buffy pretty much told 'em, "I've got you by your (fill in the blank)," and demanded Giles back as her Watcher, at full pay, retroactive. I think that if the Scoobs were using the 'Bot as a cover for the Slayer's death, Giles probably never told the Council she'd died--that could have made things extremely dicey for Faith, among other things. And he had enough dealings with them to know they didn't have a clue about Darth Willow last season.

What he's talking to them about now, of course, is the matter of speculation.
[> I thought of another topic of conversation -- Isabel, 21:13:53 10/12/02 Sat

This hinges on whether the Council knew of Darth Willow. Buffy called Giles from her cell phone or the airport to tell him Willow didn't arrive. I believe she said he was very worried. When I heard he was in that meeting the next morning, I thought he might have been there because of Willow. Giving them the heads up on a potentially evil unstoppable super witch.

Your theory is more likely.
[> [> Considering "Grave"-- -- HonorH, 21:51:55 10/12/02 Sat

--when Giles didn't seem to think the Council would be of much help in the case of Darth Willow, I'd say he'd probably not contact them in case of a relapse. God only knows what that collection of Smug Gits would do.
whats with the princapal -- cthulhu1592, 17:13:51 10/11/02 Fri

this isnt a spoiler but does anyone else think the school principal is a new watcher sent to watch the buffinator(gasp or even dawn) secretly. iwe know that for some reson joss hates principals i think he is slipping one by us this time. if they are killing off potential slayers and Faith is schedualled to make an apperance.....? they work there way backwords through the potential then in a climatic 2 part ep kill off faith leaving the only potential one left
being lil sis . just a thought . i dont search out spoilers and i just have a gut feeling on this one

[> Re: whats with the princapal( potntial spoilage) -- cthulhu1592, 17:16:22 10/11/02 Fri

my theory apparntly counts as spoilers so theres my warning

[> [> Very interesting theory (speculative spoiling) -- Robert, 21:35:49 10/11/02 Fri

Principal Wood definitely seems to be a nice guy, and he appears to be at least partly aware of the goings on. Whether he is a watcher or not, I fully expect Buffy to bring him inside the group before the season halfway point (assuming he's not evil). Of course, to describe him as an evil principal would be horribly redundant.

[> [> [> Re: Very interesting theory (speculative spoiling) -- manzanita, 08:15:05 10/12/02 Sat

An interesting point: according to Xander's blueprints for Sunnydale High, the principal's office is where the library used to be, over the hell mouth.

OK, Am I the Only One Who Loved the Episode "Crush" -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:39:20 10/11/02 Fri

Okay, am I the only one who loved the episode Crush? It's not my favorite, but it's certainly way up there. While it hasn't garnered the vehemence such eps as As You Were or even Beer Bad have gotten, most people I find in the online communtiy consider it a sub-par offering. And I don't just get why.

Crush has many wonderful aspects. It has horror (one of Buffy's most neglected elements, ironically enough) during the discovery of the murders on the train, and the scene where Spike and Drusilla feed off two people at the Bronze is wonderfully creepy.

It has drama. I'm thinking here of Drusilla bringing Spike back to the dark side (ah, good ol' Dru) and Spike's wonderfully written and acted "bloody women" speech. Plus, Spike and Dawn show more of their oddball friendship :)

And, of course, there's the humor. The part where Buffy sits down in the outline of a corpse is a very grin worthy moment. Then there's Spike's ill attempt at a date and their argument over his feelings (am I the only one who found the analogy to a serial killer in prison a well placed touch of the real world in the Buffyverse?) I just have to write down that great dialouge here:

Buffy: Angel was different. He was good. He had a soul.

Spike: I can be good, too.

Buffy: Why, because of that chip in your head? That's not change, Spike, that's just holding you back. It's like a serial killer in prison!

Spike: They marry all the time! (realizes that was a bad move) Look, I can't stop thinking about you. I lie awake all night. . .

Buffy: You sleep during the day.

Throughout the whole episode, delightful one-liners are spouted, many of them coming from Spike as he bemoans women, the chip, and his existence in general. This guy never stops talking, and I love him for it!

Finally, In My Honest Opinion, the crypt scene near the end is high class all the way. How is it that Spike's happy meals on legs speech is known by heart by many people, yet this masterful rant gets little attention.

Anyone disagree? I'm just having trouble understanding the standard feeling of "kinda blah" relating to this great episode.

[> I liked it. -- HonorH, 21:04:04 10/11/02 Fri

Not exactly one of my all-time favorites, but I liked it. There were a few things that didn't quite do it for me, foremost among them Drusilla's portrayal. Juliet Landau wasn't the problem; the writing was. Dru seemed perfectly coherent with the occasional odd phrase thrown in to emphasize her "insanity."

That was my major niggle, though. Overall, I liked it, and I liked the reminder that Spike wasn't "safe" at that point. I think a lot of the ranting and raving came from people who wanted to believe Spike was really a good guy at heart, and they didn't like how easily he was swayed by Dru. Spike's rant about how Buffy said she didn't like being loved by him, but refused to leave his heart really solidified for me that at that point, his love for her *was* very selfish.

I liked Buffy's statement about Spike being "a serial killer in prison." At that point, he really was. Now he's a serial killer who's been granted a conscience. Hence the Crazy.
[> [> Me too -- AngelVSAngelus, 22:26:38 10/11/02 Fri

Shouldn't surprise many, heh. I know how alot of people, around here and elsewhere, feel about David Fury, so it doesn't surprise me that many people don't enjoy the ep, but I did. Fury used the episode to convey how he felt about the B/S situation, as well as the situation of the fans' odd, to him, reaction to it. I enjoyed the fact that Spike was a creepy stalker. I enjoyed the fact that he was totally blind to that fact and thought he had totally good intentions. I liked the fact that it made total sense to him that the way to convince someone else that you love them is to kill the other person you once claimed to love and be completely loyal to.
At that point I was happy with the ep because it didn't leave any room for people to over-romanticize Spike's character and intentions. And that's the way I like him. That and stark raving mad with a soul :)
[> [> Developing Dru -- KdS, 10:14:13 10/13/02 Sun

Thanks to the "buttons" topic I know that some people dislike using AtS in relation to BtVS, yet I think that Dru's story in 2000-1 counts as a full-blown crossover.

Dru's relative lucidity in "Crush" reflects "Reunion" - in both she's ecstatic and metaphorical in her language, yet very pragmatic and clued-in in her actions. By contrast, in "Redefinition" she seems utterly lost in the future and the collective unconsciousness again. The difference is that in S2 and "Redefinition" she has someone to look after her. I think what's being suggested is that Dru's madness has always been in many ways a respite, but when she's thrown on her own devices she can make the effort and achieve some lucidity. How do you think she managed to take over Sunnydale's vampires with Spike helpless? I hardly think it was by sitting whimpering in a corner.

Dru's actions from "Reunion" through "Crush" seem to me to be a very coherent attempt to relive various stages of her life and find a place to relax and escape this world again. She tries to recreate her old nuclear family with Darla & Angel, but Angel tries to kill them and Darla ignores her premonitions (as Angel disasterously ignored Cordelia's) and treats her with contempt. She tries to go back to Spike to find him obsessed with Buffy, but both times she's very quick to recognise that the situation can't be saved.

Character rewriting? I hink it's plausible (re)development. I don't see how Dru as she often seemed in S2 could have plausibly survived alone. If she turns up again I think she'll have created a new protector or be looking for one. Let's see, we need someone capable of nurture and cruelty equally, used to nursing the confused, magically aware enough to interpret Dru's visions usefully, and if "Reunion" is any guide, not necessarily male. I hope her sources below haven't told her about the person Willow's become. Tke her soul away and she'd be Dru's dreamgirl :-)
[> [> [> Egads! -- HonorH, 11:03:11 10/13/02 Sun

I think you're right about Dru's character. The "Crush" writing still rankles me a bit--it's just a bit "off," especially from "Reunion," which was terrific Dru--but her lucidity isn't necessarily out of character. She reminds me of Delirium in Neil Gaiman's "Sandman," who can be sane for short periods of time, but it causes her great pain. To paraphrase Delirium re: Dru, "Her madness keeps her sane."
[> I agree. I think it's a great episode. -- Rochefort, 22:30:57 10/11/02 Fri

[> Me too! Okay, everybody, stop rolling your eyes...I don't love every episode. Just most of them. ;o) -- Rob, 22:46:50 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> Me three! Hi Rob :-) -- Scarlettfish, 03:41:11 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> Hey, Scarlettfish! Glad to see ya came! -- Rob, 09:00:28 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> Your enthusiasm is one of your most endearing aspects, Rob. -- HonorH, 22:41:32 10/12/02 Sat

I, too, tend to fall heavily on the "find something to like about every ep" side. There are but a handful of BtVS and AtS eps I've truly disliked. "Provider," for instance--I can't even think of it as being an AtS episode, but for the Holtz/Justine bits, and I like to think they were misplaced from another ep.
[> [> [> Re: Your enthusiasm is one of your most endearing aspects, Rob. -- Rob, 23:33:58 10/12/02 Sat

I only have four "Buffy"s that I don't like: "I, Robot...You, Jane," "Some Assembly Required," "Go Fish," and "Bad Eggs." And ya know what? Even these episodes have some good qualities. Each has at least one (and actually more) savable scene, concept, aspect, etc., and I'd rather see any of them ten times in a row than just about anything else on television!

Rob
[> Its one of my five favorite Buffy episodes. I loved it! -- JCC, 06:13:49 10/12/02 Sat

[> Quibbles -- darrenK, 06:19:16 10/12/02 Sat

I thought that too much was packed into Crush. The return of Drusilla, her attempt to reclaim Spike and Buffy's discovery of just how intense Spike's feelings for her are needed a couple of episodes to play out.

Not only that, but there were certain things that didn't get enough explanation, e.g. how could Spike feed from a human--who shouldn't be dead considering that Drusilla doesn't seem to go for the kill before handing the "happy meal with legs" over to Spike--without setting his chip off?

At the time, discussion ran that he only pretended to feed so that Drusilla wouldn't realize what was actually happening to him. Because of the chip not going off at the Bronze I found this explanation plausible, but undefined.

My next problem, perhaps my biggest, is how quickly Buffy forgives and forgets the events of Crush. Within just a few short episodes, Spike is again part of the team, nearly sacrificing himself for Buffy and Dawn and, of course, also commiting the forgivable sin of rutting with a Buffy decorated sex toy. How does she let these things pass by? So many people talk about how badly she has treated Spike, but she puts up with a lot from that guy, er, thing.While this point has nothing to do with whether or not Crush is a good stand alone episode, it does play into the grand scheme of how the show is plotted.

Drusilla just sorta of giving up and running off seemed very unDrusilla like and plays into my first problem, how packed this episode seems. Spike is Drusilla's creation, her plaything. Is she really just going to give up on him after a failed night on the town?

I also have to take a moment to dispute the widely discussed characterization of Spike as an imprisoned serial killer. I think that Buffy, of all people, should know from her wide experience with vampires, that a vampire is more like a jackal or hyena than a secretive, skin-collecting, tongue-eating, Momma's dress-wearing shut-in. The serial-killer analogy assumes a twisted humanity. That isn't the vampire's problem. Vampires are predators whose natural food source is people. They hunt us because that's how their species eats. We're talking Wild Kingdom here, not America's Most Wanted.

Serial killers need to be hunted by skilled experts in forensics who collect evidence and keep little maps with lots of pins in them. They are caught when it's discovered that their pattern for killing just happens to correspond alphabetically to the first 12 angels mentioned in Paradise Lost.

Vampires are hunted with a stake and an axe. To find them, you just have to wait in a graveyard for a while or follow the trail of blood down an alley or listen for the screams outside a nightclub. Vampires don't win many points in the stealthy category.

I've read stories of hyena in Africa dragging people off the platform at train stations or killing farmhands in the field. That's vampire style.

Finally, before I run out of funny things to say, I want to defend Beer Bad. I recently saw it again and while it isn't subtle and most certainly is not Hush or The Wish or even Halloween quality Buffy, it's still funny and makes perfect sense within the context of Buffy's entrance into college. Those of you who've had your freshman year at an American university will know or have known quite a few people who suddenly started drinking his/her way back down the evolutionary ladder, usually with no better results than Buffy. The back-to-caveman metaphor is perfect for that time period and I think the episode was hilarious. At the time it was originally broadcast, I was annoyed with it because nothing significant happened plotwise and it didn't reveal the mystery of those pesky men in black, but 2 years out, knowing how season 4 develops, I no longer care about finding out the plot of that season so a stand-alone like Beer Bad is easier to take.

Finis. dK
[> [> Re: Quibbles -- Rahael, 06:32:20 10/12/02 Sat

"I also have to take a moment to dispute the widely discussed characterization of Spike as an imprisoned serial killer. I think that Buffy, of all people, should know from her wide experience with vampires, that a vampire is more like a jackal or hyena than a secretive, skin-collecting, tongue-eating, Momma's dress-wearing shut-in. The serial-killer analogy assumes a twisted humanity. That isn't the vampire's problem. Vampires are predators whose natural food source is people. They hunt us because that's how their species eats. We're talking Wild Kingdom here, not America's Most Wanted.

Serial killers need to be hunted by skilled experts in forensics who collect evidence and keep little maps with lots of pins in them. They are caught when it's discovered that their pattern for killing just happens to correspond alphabetically to the first 12 angels mentioned in Paradise Lost.

Vampires are hunted with a stake and an axe. To find them, you just have to wait in a graveyard for a while or follow the trail of blood down an alley or listen for the screams outside a nightclub. Vampires don't win many points in the stealthy category. "

LOL.

And I like Beer Bad too. It's very funny, Buffy's cute, Giles is great. "She walks with a kind of sideways limp".
[> [> Re: Quibbles -- Finn Mac Cool, 07:06:50 10/12/02 Sat

Well, I can't contest your feeling that the episode is too packed. It felt just fine to me. However. . .

1) It seemed pretty clear to me that Drusilla broke the woman's neck before handing her to Spike. Hence the unconsciousness and the bite-ability by Spike.

2) You can't deny that Buffy's reaction to Crush was in character. After all, we didn't see much action taken against him after Out Of My Mind where he tried to get the chip out and kill Buffy. In general, after Spike does something evil, Buffy smacks him a couple times and then tries to cut off contact. I think this comes from the fact that she doesn't expect any better behavior from him, so it doesn't shock or mortify her when he does.

3) Your description of serial killers is a bit inaccurate. While some are psychopaths, as you hint at, the majority of known serial killers have been sociopaths: no disorders of the mind or psychotic episodes; they simply lack conscience or guilt and enjoy the act of murder. The idea that all/most serial killers are raving madman is a misconception.
[> I loved Crush. It's one of my favorites. -- shadowkat, 09:52:40 10/12/02 Sat

And one of the few by David Fury that I think is flawless.
Amazing episode. It got us almost completely inside Spike's head and also managed to show us a little bit of what
Buffy and Dawn were thinking.

It contains one of my all time favorite Dawn and Spike moments. And it also has probably the most awkward and cringe inducing first date sequence I've seen on film.
Great episode. What's not to like?
[> [> Hey, and it gives us the roots of Scary!Dawn (spoiler 7.3) -- HonorH, 09:59:50 10/12/02 Sat

She was already fascinated by Spike's horror stories in that ep. Flash forward to STSP, when she's cheerfully researching a skin-eating demon. Scary!
[> I loved that episode -- Miss Edith, 11:08:39 10/12/02 Sat

It had my two favourite characters getting lots of screentime (Spike and Dru), what's not to like? At the time of the episodes airing I think a lot of Spike fans were pissed at David Fury, hence they did not judge the episode on its own merits. They were feeling insulted at the serial killer bit and the comparision of Spike to some character who loved selfishly (can't think who now). Anyway it was one of my favourite episodes from season 5. I love the bit where Dru and Spike stalk the couple on the balcony. And the look on Spike's face before he bites her.
It was also received unfavourably by some of the shippers because it seemed their was no possible chance for B/S, "The only chance you had with me was when I was unconscious!"
[> [> The selfish love comparison was to Quasimodo -- Finn Mac Cool, 12:56:39 10/12/02 Sat

. . . in case you wanted to know.
[> [> [> Re: Thanks -- Miss Edith, 13:04:21 10/12/02 Sat

[> I loved it. -- Sophist, 11:08:50 10/12/02 Sat

[> Hey ! I love Crush ! My first post here was on Crush -- Etrangere, 12:03:00 10/12/02 Sat

Right here if you wanna check
[> [> Nice one Ete! -- ponygirl, 14:01:02 10/12/02 Sat

I've always liked Crush. Great lines, snappy pace, good characterization (though I do agree that Dru was not written all that well), and a heck of a lot of sympathy for Spike. We're in his POV for almost the entirety of the episode, being in his head we can't help but understand his reasons, even if his actions are more than questionable. Deep down I think David Fury has more than a few toes in the B/S camp -- he just likes to talk trash in interviews.
[> Also one of my favorites -- Dariel, 13:12:30 10/12/02 Sat

I loved Crush. Despite my firm position in the redemptionist, B/S shipper camp at the time. I've always liked the way David Fury portrays Spike--no morals, self-centered, and yet somehow sympathetic.

Favorite scene: Spike and Dru in the Bronze. Their grand entrance, so powerful and beautiful together, set to haunting music. Dru wears a lovely dress and looks as human as we've ever seen her. Spike dances with her like he's come home at last. The very image of the romantic couple. Made me want to shout "Spike and Dru forever!" But then, the image falls apart. Dru and Spike on the balcony, Dru in ugly gameface as they make their predatory way towards the oblivious victims. Doubt appears on Spike's face, while the band's lyrics comment on the dissolution of their relationship (you left me, this empty shell...) After Dru bites the boy, her hideous, bloody gameface, and the lurid, suggestive way she sways with her prey. I found her particularly repulsive in that scene, and I think, for the first time, so does Spike. Brilliant!
[> "Do you like the Ramones?" -- cjc36, 05:18:02 10/13/02 Sun

Cracks me up everytime.
[> Interesting that you should have that impression -- verdantheart, 07:23:18 10/14/02 Mon

It's one of my favorites as well. From the Quasimodo allusion, to the recurring Spike/dog theme--particularly featured here, to the Spike's need for some kind of change to his situation (finally ending the Harmony thing and attempting to force a choice--interestingly, Buffy's, not his--between Dru and Buffy), I find a lot to like. And Spike's reaction to Buffy's "Is this a date?!" -- not many actors could pull it off. Definitely a treat.
I just had to share this one.....Petition to Cancel Buffy and Angel -- Rufus, 21:54:38 10/11/02 Fri

I found this link at Baps....I say give me a break..;)

http://www.petitiononline.com/4101998/petition.html

Cancel Buffy and Angel

To: Joss Whedon and the writers and producers of Mutant Enemy Productions and the Executives of the WB and UPN
Anyone who has watched 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' or its spin-off 'Angel' will tell you what a well written and well directed television show it is with very high production value and talented actors. However after the events of September, 11, America has been thrown into the realm of prophecy fore Jesus Christ, king of kings and son of God, will soon walk the Earth again. Because of this we ,who have created this petition, believe that "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and its spin-off "Angel" must be cancelled immediately or it will draw the wrath of Jesus upon us with the show's endorsement of the use of magic and its philosophy of demon worship. From the very depths of our hearts and souls, we beg the staff of Mutant Enemy Productions and the WB and UPN networks to stop the show for the sake of posterity before our Lord scorches the land with plagues like the Land of Egypt.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

[> *cringe* -- HonorH, 22:11:01 10/11/02 Fri

It's things like this that make me feel like I've got to give a disclaimer every time I describe myself as a Christian . . .

[> [> LOL -- Rufus, 22:15:20 10/11/02 Fri

What is the most scary part is that this may be no hoax or joke but the deadly serious thoughts of someone. This also proves that Christianity also exists along a spectrum.

[> [> Cringes with HH -- Ronia, 22:57:32 10/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> Not me -- luna, 19:23:02 10/12/02 Sat

It's things like that that make me glad I'm a Buddhist.

[> [> [> [> That wasn't precisely kind. -- HonorH, 20:26:41 10/12/02 Sat

After all, if a Buddhist said or did something exceptionally stupid and I took the opportunity to remark on how glad I am that I'm a Christian, wouldn't you take that as a bit of an insult? I'm sure you don't mean it that way, of course, but do keep in mind that morons run the gamut of religious affiliations. You should have seen the brouhaha some Hindus raised a few years back over an episode of "Xena: Warrior Princess."

[> [> Re: *cringe* -- MaeveRigan, 06:31:22 10/12/02 Sat

Cringing right along with you, HH. But also LOL with Rufus, because this person is obviously so far out on the fringe that it's hard to take him/her seriously. Hoo boy.

[> [> Re: *cringe* -- Finn Mac Cool, 06:54:42 10/12/02 Sat

Actually, I think you very well might need a disclaimer of some sorts. After all, there are so many different denominations of Christianity with so many different views that simply saying "I'm Christian" tells precious little about what beliefs you hold.

[> I should think Jesus has better things to do than watch TV. -- Apophis, 22:20:15 10/11/02 Fri

Two things I don't expect to come into question on the day of judgement: my diet and my TV viewing habits. And whether or not I speed when I drive ('cause c'mon, nobody obeys the speed limit).

- Apophis, pointing out that Jesus Himself said that we weren't supposed to know when the world would end.

[> [> Here's hoping the same re: Judgment Day. -- HonorH, 22:59:29 10/11/02 Fri

A few mph, give or take--who notices, as long as I'm a safe driver? I mean, really?

[> [> [> Jesus might find TV fascinating -- Sophie, 06:47:14 10/12/02 Sat

Remember the movie "The Fifth Element" (Luc Besson 1995), Leeloo came after 5000 years to save the earth and watched TV with fascination and delight. She had to learn English and the American culture, too.

[> The flaw in this petition's reasoning is that it assumes Jesus doesn't like Buffy and Angel! -- Rob, 22:44:49 10/11/02 Fri

...when, of course, that just isn't the case.

I'm Jewish, so I'm not too well-versed on the big JC (except for the fact that he was also Jewish), but what kind of Messiah wouldn't love "Buffy" and "Angel"? After all, isn't Joss God?

Imagine the WB and UPN listen to this petition and goes ahead and cancels "Buffy" and "Angel." (No, don't snicker yet, wait till I've finished the thought!) Then Jesus returns to Earth, all set to watch his two favorite shows. Boy, would he be pissed!

I would expect that if Jesus were to be offended by anything on television would be by the fact "7th Heaven" and "Touched by an Angel" are still on the air. And getting better ratings than "Buffy"! That must clearly be the work of Satan!

Rob

[> [> HAHAHAHA -- MayaPapaya9, 00:46:19 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> Re: The flaw in this petition's reasoning is that it assumes Jesus doesn't like Buffy and Angel! -- MaeveRigan, 06:41:41 10/12/02 Sat

Of course Jesus loves Buffy. Wasn't she just named "Theologian of the Year"? ;-)

Of course, they may change their minds after season 7.

I don't know about Satan, but the 7th Heaven minister and the Touched by an Angel angels will *never* win The Door "theologian of the year" award. Trust me on this.

Joss is not God, but God believes in Joss.

[> [> I happen to know for a fact J.C. digs Buffy & Angel... -- ZachsMind, 08:55:57 10/12/02 Sat

It's "Charmed" he can't stand. What an abomination!

This petition buttwipe is barking up the wrong flagpole.

[> [> Yeah, these folks need to read the archive because -- Cleanthes, 12:03:47 10/12/02 Sat

as I conclusively proved, Buffy is Christian.

Zeus's hairy armpits! Some people just don't understand Matthew 13:10,11 & Titus 1:12,13.

[> Cough: Are we sure this isn't intended satirically? Language seems deliberately over the top. -- KdS, 04:22:07 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> That's the first thing I thought when I read it......this can't be real. -- Rufus, 15:14:42 10/12/02 Sat

But if it is real, it's a facinating peek into the mind of someone who sees the show very differently than we do.

[> Source -- Darby, 05:51:23 10/12/02 Sat

The writer's origination point is an architectural firm in Oregon. He's not on the architects' list, but that's no surprise. One wonders what sort of backlash this might bring against the company (no one from here would do anything nasty, so I feel okay discussing this) and whether he'll have whatever job he's doing for long...

Has there ever been a time when the prophecies couldn't be read to mean "The End is Near"?

[> [> You are right, the end is near. I mean, yes it will always be read that way -- darrenK, 06:43:26 10/12/02 Sat

People, for some crazy reason, always want to be living in the "end times." Does it validate their faith? Puff them up with importance?
It seems so wasteful.

Being Jewish, much of evangelical Christianity scares me. I read something written by them and it feels so alien and ununderstandable. It makes me feel unsafe. I wonder when they'll spring their Turner Diaries scenario or advocate the forced conversion of the heathen. Over the last 20 years, they seem enboldened. Falwell and Robertson blamed September 11 on Americans who live in sin and are heathen or homosexual and they barely get a peep from the American media. Just a little criticism, but it's all brushed under the rug. How many people feel that way? How many people believe what they say?

dK

[> [> [> Apocalypse -- Rahael, 06:49:16 10/12/02 Sat

And of course, according to Apocalyptic, second coming thinking, the Jews have to convert before Christ returns.

Be scared!!!!!!

When I was at University, the evangelical Christian group actually started making efforts to try and get Jewish students to convert.

Rahael, who suddenly has a feeling that 300 years has done nothing to dim the purple prose of Revelations.

[> [> [> Reassurance on the motives of Christians -- Apophis, 07:03:38 10/12/02 Sat

The only reason that people like Jerry Falwell represent Christians to the world at large is that they're the loudest. I've often found that the loudest people are also the most ignorant. Don't worry. The majority of Christians don't listen to non-sensical gibberish like this. There will be no more Crusades, Inquisitions, or shouts of heresy. Besides, can you picture Jerry Falwell getting off his ass long enough to do any damage to the "heathens?"

-Apophis, wishing he didn't have to clean-up after members of his own faith so often.

[> [> [> [> Re: "Forgive them, for they know not what they do" -- Just another Christian, 07:36:40 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> Amen, brother! -- HonorH, 09:29:40 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> From your mouth to God's ears! -- Scroll, 14:59:51 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> AARRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHH. -- The Second Evil, 08:06:44 10/12/02 Sat

People, for some crazy reason, always want to be living in the "end times." Does it validate their faith? Puff them up with importance? It seems so wasteful.

I always find myself wanting to say...

How many more thousands years must go by before you admit HE'S NOT COMING BACK? He's not PINING FOR THE FJORDS! He's a LATE MESSIAH!





Bwahahaha.

[> [> [> Since you mentioned Falwell..... -- Rufus, 15:26:15 10/12/02 Sat

Yahoo.com

Falwell remarks prompt Hindu-Muslim clashes
(AP) - At least five people were killed Friday in Hindu-Muslim rioting and police gunfire after riots broke out during a general strike to protest remarks by a U.S. religious leader calling the founder of Islam a terrorist. Forty-seven others were injured. The rioters attacked each other with knives and stones during the one-day strike called to protest what the Rev. Jerry Falwell said on CBS early this month. More...

This story shows me just how careful we have to be about using our words and being careful about hitting someones hot buttons. Killing each other over the words of a fellow a world away makes no sense to me. But Falwell doesn't often hit my buttons because I ignore him.

[> I'd bet money that this is a joke. -- Dariel, 12:05:05 10/12/02 Sat

I can't see anyone praising the "high production value and talented acting" on these shows and then expressing such hackneyed religious sentiments. Sounds like it was written by a bored 14-year old.

[> [> I'm seriously hoping it is. -- HonorH, 19:03:35 10/12/02 Sat

OTOH, I wouldn't put it past some of the weirdos out there. Some of them are so obsessed with end-times eschatology that they probably *do* think BtVS portends the Apocalypse.

Which, let's face it, it does--yearly. But only on TV.

[> *mumbles* Americans are crazy... -- Ete :p, 12:06:35 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> Il vaut pas le Pen de disputer Áa... -- TRM, 12:16:38 10/12/02 Sat

You French have your fair share (approx. 17% if I'm not mistaken).

Yes, I know, it's not exactly like that; I'm just poking fun at you for all the Frenchmen/women who raised their eyebrows at American election policies when I was there.

[> [> [> I didn't want to insult anybody -- Ete, 12:24:24 10/12/02 Sat

As I was saying that jokingly. Should I have added a smiley ? Because I feel insulted by your post.

Don't think I didn't regret laughing at your elections when we had ours.

[> [> [> [> Apology -- TRM, 12:42:39 10/12/02 Sat

Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you, which is why I appended my second sentence of just poking fun.

I was more or less aiming for a solidarity-type feeling since I think all societies contain their little cache of people of whom we would rather not speak. My intention was rather to tease you and not put you down -- to show you that I understand where you're coming from by mirroring your playful jab with one of my own. Unfortunately I guess I'm a bad jabber.

Regardless of which, I do want to sincerely apologize since I really never intended to be insulting. So... sorry! sorry! sorry!

**looks for a sock to stuff in the mouth... er... keyboard...**

-TRM

[> [> [> [> [> I'm sorry -- Ete, 12:54:45 10/12/02 Sat

Oh, I didn't get that you were joking, sorry. I'm gonna blame my sickness and fievre, I'm in no state to interprete anyone :)

It is true that we all have those people we don't want to talk about *sight*.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm sorry -- Dariel, 13:31:02 10/12/02 Sat

For some Americans, "those people" include our President and Congress at the moment. So I'll join you in a "sigh"!

[> [> Like I've said (several times) to my German pen pal-- -- HonorH, 17:37:43 10/12/02 Sat

That's one point upon which we'll never disagree!

Episode preview vs episode in reality (spoilers thru 7.3) -- Cydney, 06:04:50 10/12/02 Sat

I went back to my tapes to check, and yes indeedy. UPN's preview of STSP (after BY) showed a clip of Spike saying "I mean -- who doesn't like skin." But this line wasn't part of the actual STSP episode, at least not where I live.

So - does anyone know - is this deliberate or just a goof?

Cyd

[> Simple explanation... -- ZachsMind, 08:48:07 10/12/02 Sat

It's painfully obvious upon reviewing the episode that STSP suffered from excessive editing in post production. Moreso than usual, because parts of it are just choppy and a little hard to follow from a directing perspective. Things that probably made sense in preproduction just didn't fly when they actually had the dailies in front of them. The storyline was one of those creative ideas on paper which didn't get executed very well.

There's more to that scene between Spike & the Scoobies than we get to see. They probably experimented more with the interplay between Spike & the Scoobies that don't can't see one another. We just don't get to see any of it. Maybe in the DVD.

If you look closely at that commercial, you'll see that the scene with Spike saying "who doesn't like skin?" comes from the set of the school basement. It's probably in or around the time when Willow mentions the body at the construction site and Spike said "is there blood?" There's more dialogue there in the shooting script which didn't get broadcast.

Remember, the original version of last year's musical was over an hour and ten minutes long but got cut for subsequent performances. My guess is there's a lot of times when Whedon's production crew have enough material to make two hours of an episode but what we actually see is just about forty-two minutes long sans commercials. The stuff that ends up on the cutting room floor any given week could probably choke a moose.

[> [> Re: Simple explanation... -- Sophie, 12:42:30 10/12/02 Sat

"choke a moose"? nevermind.

I started off writing a bit about 7.03 - the cutting, frames, colors, etc. I haven't finished it - not sure that I will.

I was particlarly struck by the ep because the cuts that change the scene between Buffy/Xander/Dawn to Willow are exagerated - you can't help but notice.

You may have put your finger on why. The ep is very forced - though for film this can be useful. The past twenty years making cuts to smooth that you forget that the movie or TV show is not real - you forget that you are watching.

Whedon has experimented occasionally with more film-ish techniques in the past, but he seesm to adapted such artistry all out this season, which I personally, like. Then again, I adored the French new-wave movement of the 1960's.

This seasons seems to be heavily about "seeing", so artistic use of the film medium to frame the viewer's view is clever.
Just a thought.
Sophie

[> [> [> And a very good one, Sophie... -- Kiera, 12:47:16 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> Re: Simple explanation... -- shadowkat, 14:41:38 10/12/02 Sat

"I was particlarly struck by the ep because the cuts that change the scene between Buffy/Xander/Dawn to Willow are exagerated - you can't help but notice.

You may have put your finger on why. The ep is very forced - though for film this can be useful. The past twenty years making cuts to smooth that you forget that the movie or TV show is not real - you forget that you are watching. "

I noticed the same thing when I re-watched the basement scene. Which in order to make sense of it I ended up rewinding and rewatching four or five times. It's a weird scene and does make me appreciate the acting abilities of Marsters because the weight of the scene acting wise is literally on him. But what's weird about it, is we see the scene from literally three perspectives film wise:
1. Willow. 2. Spike. 3. B/X (although I'd still argue mostly Xander but we already engaged in that debate ;-) )

So Spike's lines in the scene all have double and at times triple meanings depending on the perspective.

Example: "you take your heart out and put it back in...wall off the bad stuff, think you're finished, but your worse off than before" - Spike is really talking about himself, but Willow perceives it as being about her, B/X think it's about Spike - since they don't see Willow.

I think you're right they edited this scene oddly. The perspectives in it are more skewed than the others, because there is a point that we are in Spike's pov and neither W or X/B (or X) and that doesn't happen any other time. Throughout the episode we stay firmly in X w/B(D) or W.

Very experimental episode - and ambitious considering the fact that Whedon neither directed nor wrote it. Usually he handles the experimental ones himself, which may be why it doesn't seem as smooth as other episodes. On the other hand an argument could be made that it wasn't supposed to feel smooth and the choppy feeling added to the sensation of things being out of wack - putting us more firmly then ever inside the head of Willow. Interesting tactic - Willow is a tough character right now for the writers to get us to re-accept (well not all of us, but a good majority) - so what they want to do is make us see how it feels to be Willow as much as possible and I think everything in that episode was engineered to do just that - make us feel like Willow.

Would be interested in seeing the Shooting Script - to see what they left out. Is it up at Psyche yet? Or do we just have a transcript?

(PS: Would love to see your take on the shooting colors
etc on STSP Sophist...sounds really interesting. )

SK

[> [> [> [> Oops meant Sophie...sorry for the typo -- shadowkat, 14:43:20 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> Re: Simple explanation... -- Kiera, 18:23:29 10/12/02 Sat

Transcripts, only and not from pysche yet. Unless someone's found something I haven't.

SMG to host Saturday Night Live today. Or so says TV Guide. -- Dariel, 13:15:31 10/12/02 Sat

[> It's okay; everybody else says so, too. -- Apophis, 13:46:23 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> Okay, so I have trust issues! -- Dariel, 16:30:09 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> Don't worry; you can trust me... hehehehe.... -- Apophis, 17:26:08 10/12/02 Sat

Hey, Ete, I hope I didn't upset you -- Brian, 13:56:11 10/12/02 Sat

If so, please accept my apologies.

[> Absolutly not it's my #@$µ# of computer that wouldn't let me connect -- Ete, 16:20:21 10/12/02 Sat

Asim Ali's Buffnography -- Wisewoman, 17:18:50 10/12/02 Sat

I imagine that everyone but me has already read this paper by UMaryland grad student Ali, produced for his ethnography course three or four years ago, but I just discovered it while doing research for my Buffy panel presentation tomorrow, so I thought I'd post the url in case anyone missed it. It's an academic ethnographic study of The Bronze linear posting board, and it's fascinating:

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~asimali/buffnog.html

dub ;o)

[> Oops, forgot the title... -- dub, 17:20:22 10/12/02 Sat

"Community, Language, and Postmodernism at the Mouth of Hell."
[> Re: Your Buffy Panel? -- luna, 21:05:31 10/12/02 Sat

Where is your panel?
[> [> Re: Your Buffy Panel? -- dub, 22:07:22 10/12/02 Sat

It's at a local Science Fiction and Fantasy convention, V-Con 27 in Vancouver, tomorrow at noon. I'm speaking on Buffy Internet Fandom(!)

dub ;o)
[> [> [> Good luck, dub! -- Scroll, 22:18:01 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> Thanks! -- dub, 22:45:50 10/12/02 Sat

I'm supposed to speak initially for only about five minutes and then answer questions along with the other four panelists. So, I prepared my presentation and then sat down with a stop watch to see if it was long enough...half way through my introduction I realized the stop watch said 9:51 minutes. My original presentation was probably about an hour and a half long! LOL

I've got the whole thing down to about 4:49 now, which really only gives me time to say Hi! and how great all you guys are...

;o)
Bro, Wes is a Dog... Word. (spoilers for Deep Down AtS 4.1) -- JBone, 17:43:06 10/12/02 Sat

I finally re-watched Angel.

What hold does Wesley have over Lilah and Justine? Lilah, I can almost understand. Almost. They got some kind of relationship that they both have made a point of keeping work out of. It's almost intimate, if not for all the lying to each other. But she keeps coming back, it is his place after all. And even if she is not intentionally misleading Linwood about Wes, she is protecting him. Or maybe she just protecting a source for future exploitation? Naw, I don't understand it.

Justine is also a head scratcher. A majority of the episode she is chained or handcuffed, but there is a substantial amount of time that she is "free", including the time underwater where she finds Angel. What is to stop her if she comes back up to announce that it was an old fridge or something? Did Wes have her drag every piece of junk up to the surface that they found to this point or was she free to report anything? I kind of doubt the later, but to drag up every shopping cart off the ocean floor, well, that seems like a huge waste of time.

I'm just wondering out loud about this stuff. If you got some Angel insight, I'd love to hear it. But please, no future spoilers.

[> Re: Wesley (spoilers for Deep Down AtS 4.1) -- Robert, 18:22:15 10/12/02 Sat

>>> "What hold does Wesley have over Lilah and Justine?"

I think that Lilah is just as lonely as Wesley is. Unfortunately, I believe that both are now equally amoral. The only difference is which side each works for. My difficulty is that it is not clear to me that the Powers-That-Be are any better than Wolfram and Hart, or at least not any better for humanity. Humanity appears caught in the middle of a cold war and, whichever side wins, it may spell the end of humanity. My cheery thought for the day.

It is easier for me to understand Justine. Wesley said as much in the episode. Justine is a prisoner whether she has chains on or not. She always has been, ever since her sister was killed by the vampire. She is so beaten down that Wesley's threat of taking away her chamber pot was enough to halt her. Now that is sad.

[> poor Justine -- lulabel, 19:42:01 10/12/02 Sat

I'm guessing that Wes told Justine that he would let her free once they found Angel. That would explain the deliberate cruelty of her imprisonment - the more horrible her living conditions, the greater her motivation for helping him find Angel. This doesn't really make it less disturbing however. Wes' comments about Justine being a slave just brings to mind how cruelly she was treated by Holtz - and she loved him (Holtz) for it. Will she become dependent on Wesley now to dish it out?

[> Re: Bro, Wes is a Dog... Word. (spoilers for Deep Down AtS 4.1) -- Miss Edith, 20:00:48 10/12/02 Sat

Justine wants to be a slave, even Wesley pointed that out. She let Holtz master her and nail her hand to the table with an ice pick, yet still fell in love with him. She has some very twisted ideas and it seems to me she is the sort of person who only feels truly alive when they are suffering pain. Justine even told Holtz that she welcomes pain because, "Feeling something is better than feeling nothing".
Justine valued her twisted relationship with Holtz, and if Wes had cast her aside who did she have left? Her life was pretty much empty and maybe she figured being chained up in a closet was better than being alone and feeling nothing at all. I imagine she feared and hated Wesley. But she may have also respected him deep down, and if she had taken the chance to run she knew she would have no interaction with other people at all.
Some people do get off on pain and feel they deserve it. Justine is so screwed up who knows what she was thinking. I'm betting she did enjoy the power Wesley had over her. She has always been into power games, and pain from what I can see.

Wesley and the Big Picture (spoilers up to "Deep Down") -- beast916 (formerly Sam Gamgee, 19:10:52 10/12/02 Sat

Wesley: Damn it, you listen to me! This box is the key to the Mayor's Ascension. Thousands of lives depend on our getting rid of it. Now I want to help Willow as much as the rest of you, but we will find another way.

Buffy: There is no other way.

Wesley: You're the one who said take the fight to the Mayor. You were right. This is the town's best hope of survival. It's your chance to get out.

Buffy: You think I care about that? Are you made of human parts?

Giles: Alright! Let's deal with this rationally.

Buffy: Why are you taking his side?

Wesley: You'd sacrifice thousands of lives? Your families, your friends?

Oz has been sitting through all this. He gets up and walks behind Wesley.

Wesley: It can all end right here. We have the means to destroy this box.

Oz picks up the pot for the box-destroying ritual and throws it into a display case, smashing both to shards. Everyone looks at each other.

-- "Choices"

It's a common trial: the live of one versus the live of all. It's not very often in popular media to actually have this choice settled, of course. In "Choices" they choose Willow, but are able to save the all. In Spiderman, Peter Parker is able to save both the girl he loves and a busload of innocent children. In an episode of Early Edition, the protagonist, Gary Hobson, chooses to save a child rather than a plane full of people, but is saved from the agony of that decision because the child's father, ta da, also happened to be the pilot of the plane. By the way, if you ever think your friends are unsupportive, find Early Edition in syndication-that guy has the worst friends ever.

Wesley chose to sacrifice Willow for the greater good, while those who knew and loved Willow felt there was another way to handle the situation. What mattered to them most was the immediate danger Willow was in. Thinking back, at the time I agreed with them. I mean, seriously...it's Willow! How can you not want to protect Willow? Wesley obviously had no friends at all to make such a decision. Of course, none of us really knew Mr. Wyndham-Price at the time, so all we had to base him and his choices on were the presentation of his character and the reactions of other to him. In the third season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Wesley doesn't come off too well. He seems like a Council lackey, all rules and regulations. And the Scoobies obviously didn't appreciate him-he was just a second-rate replacement for Giles. Never mind the Gang is reticent to let anybody new into their lives.

We have had time to get to know Wesley, though. And the first impression is just that, a first impression. There are many layers to Wesley. But for the most part he is defined by his ability to see the big picture and his emotional attachments. His view of the big picture is shown in "Graduation" when he comes back to help Buffy, when she had in a sense gotten him fired.

It wasn't too long after he became a member of Angel Investigations Wesley began to show how far his emotional attachments would take him. Although to that point we had pretty much seen bumbling Wesley, in "The Ring" we saw him ably extract information from a bookie about Angel. This is no bumbling Wesley. But when we see him around Angel and Cordelia, he is still the same old Wesley. It seems when he is around people he either wants to impress or cares about (both of which apply to his father) he cannot be take-charge, competent Wesley. However, he does grow over time, as he becomes more a part of the family.

His view of the big picture does not change much. After surviving Faith's torture (a far cry from the Wesley panicking before Balthazar), he is approached by underlings of the Watcher's Council. Although he makes them think he will work with them, he casts his lot with Angel. Part of this is the emotional attachment he has formed with Angel and Cordelia, but an equally important factor is the amount of good he can do with AI, compared to what he can do with the Council. The Council has already proven itself to be a bureaucratic mess, out of touch with the modern world. Wesley would be accomplishing greater good with AI, so he stayed with them.

Season 2 of Angel showed more of Wesley's view of the big picture. Although he was hurt by his friend's firing of Cordy, Gunn, and him, he decides with the others to go on, because Angel is not the big picture-the mission is. The only time his view of the picture is tainted is when he has a conversation with his father, which brings back the bumbling, can't-make-decisions Wesley. But, almost immediately, he is back to big-picture Wesley. When Cordy goes through the portal to Pylea, it is Wesley who goes about researching the correct way to enter the portal, while Angel just wants to leap through, damn the consequences. And, once in Pylea, he chooses to sacrifice some of the rebels in order to win the battle. Wesley doesn't want to either abandon Cordelia or lead the rebels to their deaths, but he understands that planning and sacrifices have to be done.

In Season 3, we see Wesley move away from his emotional attachments, first because of his actions in "Billy", then by the relationship of Gunn and Fred. It would seem his actions are motivated by jealousy. While I agree he does feel jealousy, I think it is his need to move away from his emotions that cause his actions. He does not want his jealousy to rule him, so he throws himself into his work. Unfortunately, his work points him toward a prophecy that seems to state Angel will kill Connor. He can't tell Angel until he investigates and his "strictly business" policy prohibits him from telling Gunn or Fred. And Cordelia is not around to talk to. Although he is wooed by Holtz, Wes makes the choice to remove the child himself (we do not know what he would have done, but I get the feeling he and Connor would have simply disappeared), after attacking Lorne, who realizes Wes's plan. Here we see his big picture view overcoming his emotion. He realizes Lorne will try to warn Angel, so he does what he feels he has to and knocks Lorne out. I wonder what the present-day Wesley might have done in this situation.

Of course, Wesley's plans do not go as he wishes, and all he ends up is in the hospital with a slit throat, almost smothered by his friend, and alienated from everybody he cared for and who cared for him.

This brings us to present-day Wesley, who will not go out of his way to help Angel Investigations (he provides the treatment for Fred, but does not check to see if it works). When Lilah shows him Justine about to be attacked by vampires, he does not get the opportunity to warn her (and we cannot be sure he would-and neither can he, as Lilah's goal was mainly for him to doubt himself), but he also does not show much desire to bring vengeance on the person who slit his throat.

The Wesley we have seen since that time is one who will have sex with Lilah, a woman who is high up the ladder in the admittedly evil Wolfram & Hart. However, he is also the person who saves Angel. It is hard to tell whether he does this as repayment for his earlier transgressions or because he knows Angel still has a part to play. He is willing to spill his blood to save Angel, but not to spend any time with AI. That time is behind him.

Wesley is a completely different person than he was when we first met him. He is the same person. He came in with his view of the big picture and his concern of how people saw him. Then he began to become attached to Angel and Cordelia, and later Fred and Gunn. However, now that he no longer has an emotional attachment to anybody (or maybe, just possibly a small one to Lilah), what does he have: the big picture. But what is his big picture now? Lilah thought it should be Wolfram & Hart's; Fred thinks it should be AI. Wesley isn't sharing his thoughts. There might be some hope in the fact he did not kill Justine, that he gave her the keys to allow her the opportunity to better her life. Or maybe he just doesn't care. He could just as easily have killed her if she didn't do as he wished. After all, he put her in a closet for hours on end, an ironic little punishment reminiscent of what his own father did to him.

I have said before Wesley makes the show. I think this is true more than ever. After all, didn't Lorne say the English boy had a part to play? But what part? Giles was willing to murder a man whose crimes were the equivalent of harboring a criminal. What is Wesley willing to do for the big picture? And how will that affect his friends...former?

[> i need to process the data... -- Juliet, 19:34:10 10/12/02 Sat

that's a WOAH kind of message...gonna take a while to figure out what to make of it.
[> Being a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- Scroll, 20:00:23 10/12/02 Sat

Thank you, wonderful post! Your points about Wesley are right on target, IMO, and I agree with almost everything you wrote except:

Wesley chose to sacrifice Willow for the greater good, while those who knew and loved Willow felt there was another way to handle the situation. What mattered to them most was the immediate danger Willow was in.

While I agree that the Scoobies (except perhaps Giles) cared only about the immediate danger to Willow, I don't think Wesley was arguing to completely abandon her, either. Instead, he was cautioning Buffy that she should not simply hand over the Box of Gavrok without considering other possibilities. Wesley believed Buffy should have put the thousands of lives before Willow, but I never got the impression that he would've ignored Willow altogether.

This aspect of Wesley has always struck me as one entirely in keeping with his Watcher heritage. Just as Giles would have most certainly killed Dawn if it meant saving the world in "The Gift", Wesley would have held hostage Justine until he could rescue Angel, a major player in prophecy and apocalypse, from the bottom of the ocean.

Robert says in the thread below this one that Wesley has become amoral. I'm not sure I agree, totally. Certainly, I think ME is being deliberately ambiguous about whether he cares for anyone or not--Lilah, Angel, Gunn, Fred, and Connor included. Still, considering Wes freed Justine and tried to set her on the right path at the end of "Deep Down", I can hope somewhere deep down (hehe) he still cares about people. But I got the sense last season (and this could just be me) that Wes must be incredibly exhausted from caring. He's trying to cut himself off emotionally, and AD portrays a coldness/numbness that fits this.

But I think Wesley still cares in spite of himself. While we can argue that Wesley was wrong to keep Connor's betrayal a secret from Fred and Gunn, I can see a Gilesian attitude coming into play.

From Psyche's transcripts:
GILES: I imagine you hate me right now.

Same angle on Buffy with Giles in the background, her back to him. She sighs but doesn't answer. Giles takes a few steps closer.

GILES: I love Dawn.
BUFFY: I know.
GILES: But I've sworn to protect this sorry world, and sometimes that means saying and doing ... what other people can't. What they shouldn't have to.

My take on Wesley's actions in "Deep Down" is that he felt he was the only one capable of locating and rescuing Angel. Perhaps that is hubris, but I can see how Wesley's Watcher attitude -- that he is sworn to do terrible things like psychologically break down Justine so she'll co-operate with him -- is also an attempt to keep Fred and Gunn innocent. Like Giles says when he kills Ben: Buffy is the hero (Champion). She doesn't murder. Giles believes that he himself isn't a hero. He's a Watcher, and does what he must.

I'm also interested in the deliberate parallels between Willow and Wesley. Both fear that they're not wanted, but quite possibly will be needed. At the end of "Same Time, Same Place", Willow says she can't heal herself anymore, she's too tired: "That's all I had left." At the end of "Deep Down", Wesley says that "I'm done here" and that "I'm fresh out." Both are at the end of their strength, but whereas Buffy reaches out to Willow to share her strength, Fred and Gunn won't look below the surface to see that Wesley still does care. Hopefully Angel will be the one to reach out to Wesley now.
[> [> Re: Being a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- beast916, 20:11:11 10/12/02 Sat

You are right about Wesley's motives in "Choices". I should have stated that better.

I agree with you about that Watcher mentality. Also, I write an Angel review for another board, and I did mention how despite the things he said to Fred and Justine, his eyes seemed to be saying something completely different. His words and actions portray an indifference (despite the fact he rescued Angel--he made it seem like a task that needed to be done, not one that he emoted about), his eyes seem to show how much he still does care. If anybody has a tape, I would watch as Justine berates him. His eyes betray him. But he doesn't let anybody get close enough to him to let them see it. Except for Lilah, who likely can't read him well enough yet.
[> [> [> Buffy becoming a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- Scroll, 20:35:10 10/12/02 Sat

His words and actions portray an indifference (despite the fact he rescued Angel--he made it seem like a task that needed to be done, not one that he emoted about), his eyes seem to show how much he still does care.

Yes, that's it exactly! Wesley is definitely cutting himself off because, while we the audience can see that he still cares, the only thing his former friends can see is indifference. Fred and Gunn might've gone to Wesley for help a couple of times, but he doesn't seem very eager to help (it's not clear if he doesn't help them or if he helped but didn't want to).

But as to being a Watcher, I think Buffy in STSP showed a glimmer of that Watcher attitude. She suspects Willow even though she hates the idea Willow might be killing again. Later, Buffy admits to Willow that she doesn't want to be the kind of person who would suspect her best friend of killing again.

Fortunately Willow understands that, as the Slayer, Buffy doesn't have the luxury of pretending danger doesn't exist, of pretending that someone who has killed before--but claims to be better now--will never revert back. This seems to speak directly to Wesley and the fake prophecy that Angel would kill his son. Fred, Gunn, Cordy, and even Angel all seem to believe that Angel could never kill Connor. But how can anyone be sure? Just because Angel says so? Like Willow says, he's the Do That Guy.

I do hope that Willow will regain everyone's trust but I think it's also very believable that Buffy had to consider Willow as a potential danger. If she had ignored the possibility, she wouldn't be a very good Slayer. In the same way, I don't blame Wesley for trusting the prophecy and the Loa about Angel killing Connor. As Watcher and Slayer, neither Wesley or Buffy have the luxury of ignoring very real dangers.
[> [> [> Re: Being a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- Vickie, 04:55:27 10/13/02 Sun

Please give us the links, as you post your reviews. I would love to read them!
[> [> [> [> They can be located -- beast916, 06:34:47 10/13/02 Sun

on the Yahoo Spoiler Trollops Board and also on An Angel's Soul Spoiler Board.
[> [> [> Re: Being a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- Rattletrap, 12:40:13 10/13/02 Sun

Wesley's actions in "Deep Down" remind me a little of Angel in "City Of . . . " When AtS began, Angel was a loner anti-hero helping people because someone had to. Doyle pointed out to him that by seeing them only as potential victims saved, not as actual people, he was in danger of sliding down a very dark path. Fortunately, with the assistance of Doyle (later Wesley) and Cordelia, he was brought back with ties to the world. He briefly departed from those ties in mid-S2, but got back on track. Wesley's position seems similar to me--he has cut most of the ties that hold him to the world, he is doing things simply because they need to be done, and it is taking its toll. While he may be showing a glimmer of affection for Lilah and for his old AI companions, even that glimmer may be fast fading. It may take Angel's intervention to pull him back, just as it took Wesley's to rescue Angel.
[> [> Re: Being a Watcher (spoilers for 4.1, 7.1-7.3) -- meritaten, 16:21:37 10/13/02 Sun

...but whereas Buffy reaches out to Willow to share her strength, Fred and Gunn won't look below the surface to see that Wesley still does care.

I got the impression that Fred and Gunn did not want Wesley to leave the hotel after bringing Angel back. To me, it seemed that they were upset that he didn't stay. While they were understandably upset that he had kept Conner's involvement from them (having learned nothing from the prophecy fiasco), I think that, at that point, they were willing to try to work through their problems with Wesley. However, his walking out of the hotel inidicated to them that he didn't really care.
[> Great analysis of his progression -- lulabel, 20:14:17 10/12/02 Sat

I think you've outlined really well here the ways in which Wesley has grown and changed, and also the ways in which he remains fundamentally the same. This is a really interesting topic which I've been thinking about quite a bit. I agree that his story/character is the best part of this show.

I agree in large part with most of what you've said, but I think there is one issue that hasn't been touched here - LOYALTY. Yes, Wesley is very much a big picture man, he is the only one who repeatedly demonstrates the capacity to step back and make the hard decisions. I recall when he first took over leadership of AI, I thought "huh?" and then later came to see it as the obvious choice.

The ability to place big picture issues over personal sentiment can indicate an emotional hardness, indifference. Yet I think Wesley is quite caring, and I would argue that he still cares very much about Angel, Cordelia, Fred, etc. How difficult must it be for a person to make dispassionate choices when they actually DO care? What gives him the strength to stay on this path? I think it his deep-seated sense of loyalty to Angel and the rest of the AI "family" Loyalty is so important to him that he is completely destroyed by the lack of understanding he gets from AI over his well-intentioned but oh-so-wrong attempt to save Connor from Angel.

He doesn't decline to help out AI because he doesn't care anymore, but because he cares too much. It is too hurtful, too shattering to interact with those whom he has betrayed and whom have betrayed him so thoroughly.
[> The Big Picture -- Rufus, 20:15:43 10/12/02 Sat

Hmmmm remember another Big Picture guy...his name was Holland Manners. I wonder if Manners had been more flexible about his Big Picture, what would have happened?

Wesley and Giles are trained to support the same Big Picture, but is that picture still adapted to fit each person? Wesley has gone against the Council numerous times, first on Buffy when he fought with them in G2, and in ATS, when he misled his former comrades about handing over Faith. Wesley tends to be very loyal but that loyalty is being challenged all the time. He broke up with the Council...he was able to cut Angel loose...so what is his vision of the Big Picture that has him playing games with Lilah (he outright lied to her about knowing where Angel was)...and he doesn't seem to anxious to make up with the gang....so what is his Big Picture now, or is it just the same old same old, protecting the "sorry world"?
[> Re: Wesley and the Big Picture (spoilers up to "Deep Down") -- Miss Edith, 20:19:25 10/12/02 Sat

I have a small quipple. Were all saved in Graduation Day? I imagine quite a few students were killed by the vampires. The ones that we know for a fact died at graduation were Larry and Harmony. Presumedly some unknown students also lost their lifes trying to defend themselves. Without the box the Mayor would have been unable to ascend. So the scoobies did not get off scot-free and their choice did have consequences.
I agree Wesley has always tried not to let emotions interfere with doing the right thing as he sees it. I would not say he is immoral. By saving Angel I would say he is still on the right side. He is simply very much an anti-hero who will make the tough choices and have questionable morals. He is certainly determined to distance himself from the world, and I have to agree with you about Wesley making the show. I have always thought he is by far the superior actor, and his character is just fascinating to me at the moment. I can't wait to see where the writers plan to take him. I have a feeling his journey has only just began.
I missed SNL. Were there any Buffy sketches? -- Rochefort, 21:24:40 10/12/02 Sat

[> Nothing worth mentioning. SMG was great, but the material stunk, which is usual on SNL. -- Rob, 22:23:24 10/12/02 Sat

[> [> Unusually bad, in fact. -- Apophis, 22:42:21 10/12/02 Sat

I was stunned by how bad this episode was. I felt like crying. None of this was SMG's fault; it just seemed that nothing was working. It was like the writers were high while writing the script and the cast had given too much blood before going to air. Wasn't impressed with Faith Hill, either.
[> [> [> Re: Unusually bad, in fact. -- Quentin Collins, 22:46:38 10/12/02 Sat

Even most of the bits in the Weekend Update segment seemed to flop. Even when an episode is particularly poorly written, that segment is usually funny. The kid from the Dell commercial and Michael Jackson are targets that are just too easy to snicker at. And isn't the Dell commercial phenomenon a bit past its expiration date to be relevant? Aside from some bitter and mildly amusing bits regarding Bush and the Iraq situation, the episode was terrible.
[> [> [> [> Re: Not skanky enough -- JBone, 06:00:27 10/13/02 Sun

Another easy target was the Christina Aguilera video skit. And they somehow messed that up.
[> [> [> [> I actually met the Dell Dude...Not j/k! -- Rob, 12:40:48 10/13/02 Sun

I go to NYU, as does he, and I met him on campus at the busstop once! He was actually a really smart, nice guy, and sounds nothing and talks nothing like he does on the commercials. He's currently studying Shakespeare at Tisch School of Drama at NYU! Which I found quite hilarious...Stephen the Dell Dude studying the Bard! Actually Stephen's not his real name, but I can't remember now what it is.

Rob
[> [> [> Re: Unusually bad, in fact. -- MaeveRigan, 04:11:50 10/13/02 Sun

"None of this was SMG's fault..."

Or was it? I kept asking myself (when I wasn't averting my eyes). Sometimes the hosts just play along (in which case, SMG is the world's best sport), sometimes they actually help shape the sketches, in which case--it's too gruesome to contemplate.
[> Neither Written nor Directed by Joss Whedon -- Buffyboy, 01:31:13 10/13/02 Sun

Last night, as penance for sins too horrible to contemplate much less mention, I watched Saturday Night Live. I could have read a book. I could have watched my tapes of BtVS. I could have gone to bed-well, not that early. Instead I wasted a perfectly good one and a half hours of my life watching a show for the first (and hopefully last) time in many many years. Whenever I think, "Gee, television's really not so bad after all," all I have to do is watch almost anything that not produced by ME. No, not just the seven season of Arliss promises guaranteed bladder control (you never laugh so there's no chance of peeing in you pants--in joke for those who suffered through SNL), but so do nearly any of the episodes of the twenty plus season of SLN and this latest addition to the pantheon is no exception.
[> [> Re: Neither Written nor Directed by Joss Whedon -- wiscoboy, 07:58:55 10/13/02 Sun

I have to agree with all of the above posts. The only reason I wasted my time with it was the memory of the first SMG hosting of SNL, which is one of the best SNL shows of the past 5 years. What a difference time and casting changes make to a show. Time for Buffy to put a stake into the heart of this tired and worn out concept.
[> [> [> Another flaw besides the writing is... -- Rob, 08:20:55 10/13/02 Sun

...that this year, almost all of SNL's great performers are gone: Will Ferrell, Molly Shannon, Ana Gasteyer, and Cheri Oteri. Even when the writing was bad, these guys were still great. But this year even some good people do not make up for a lack of balance in the cast. As for SMG, I don't blame her for the quality of the skits. She was enthusiastic, plowed her way through all of them like a trooper, and did, here and there, get a chuckle out of me. I thought she was very funny during that "Be Safe" skit, and delivered that "genital diabetes" line perfectly. I don't believe for a second that it's her fault the show stunk...How about Matt Damon last week? He's a great writer, and he certainly couldn't have shaped that mess! Besides the fact that her first appearance on SNL was a true classic, the high point IMO being the Buffy/Seinfeld crossover.

Rob
[> [> [> [> Re: Another flaw besides the writing is... -- Dariel, 09:03:00 10/13/02 Sun

this year, almost all of SNL's great performers are gone: Will Ferrell, Molly Shannon, Ana Gasteyer, and Cheri Oteri.

Yes, it was a much better show with this group--they all worked together so well. The show has declined a little bit more as each has departed. Jimmy Fallon, Chris Kattan, and Tracey Morgan (sometimes) are the only ones worth watching any more, and they can't always rise above the crappy material.
[> [> Maybe, but I'm buying Swiffer Sleepers for the grandkids -- Cleanthes, 12:11:13 10/13/02 Sun

[> [> [> Hell, how about adult sized...imagine the floorspace that could be cleaned with that...;) -- Rufus, 02:26:00 10/14/02 Mon

I went to Yahoo and actually suffered through the "real" Christina video.....I liked the SNL one better....then again maybe if Christina tried out the baboon's posterior.....nah....;)
[> I Still wait for a Simpsons Halloween Special - Buffy Parody. I will not be happy till that happens -- Majin Gojira, 08:22:55 10/13/02 Sun

Because Frankly, every other Buffy Parody has fallen flat.

Case in Point - both Times a SMG character appeared on Celebrity Death Match were Horrible. I mean, besides the rule that any CDM using any celebs who are currently 'active' will suck, these matches sucked more than normal. I'm not kidding. in the second appearance, Sarah was killed by one of the most annying and stupid Vampires I've ever seen. and both had not a one funny joke.

(Explitive Deleeted) I've written Funnier Buffy Death Matches! (Thank God for Fanfiction).

So, Until the Simpsons do a Buffy Parody, I will not look at any lesser attemps.
[> People still watch SNL? Wow! ..uh, why? -- ZachsMind, 14:09:49 10/13/02 Sun

Saturday Night Live in its present incarnation is like an undead zombie thing that doesn't know it should just curl up and die like a good little zombie. It hasn't been worth watching since it devolved into "The Murphy & Piscopo Show." It's been totally unremarkable since those two guys left, and even then it wasn't SNL. I mean when the original "Not Ready For Prime Time Players" left SNL to go into movies, SNL became a shade of it's former self. A spectre. A ghost. In fact, SNL as a whole should make a cameo appearance in Sunnydale so Buffy can put a stake in it and call it done.

Even Billy Crystal couldn't save SNL, and that's BAD. Crystal has saved awards shows in the past, but he couldn't save SNL. Nobody can save SNL. Certainly Sarah Michelle Gellar doesn't have the chops to save it. Saturday Night Live is DEAD. It's undead. It's a slack vampire. Have I made my point?

If people would just stop watching it, maybe it would finally go away and rest in peace like it should have over ten years ago.
[> [> Actually, SMG did save it once. -- Rob, 16:24:16 10/13/02 Sun

A few years back, SMG singlehandedly made her first appearance on SNL the best episode of the year. It was the only one of the entire season that was laugh-out loud funny. Almost every sketch was spot-on, and it was really quite a surprise.

Rob
[> [> I Like SNL -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:38:44 10/13/02 Sun

Granted, a number of their sketches are just kinda dull, but their political sketches and weekend update are usually pretty great. And, whenever they brought out a Celebrity Jeopardy sketch, it was a real treat. Of course, with Will Farrel gone, the Jeopardy sketches will most likely be no more, and they'll have to find a replacement for George W. Bush.

Last night was a below par episode. But don't judge all SNL just by that.
[> [> [> Re: I Like SNL -- Purple Tulip, 22:39:15 10/13/02 Sun

I too am a fan of SNL. I love Jimmy Fallon and watch the show mainly for him and to see who the host/musical talent is. I think last night was awful, but I don't think that it was representative of the show as a whole. What I think that problem is, is that they are dealing with a relatively brand-new and inexperienced cast. Aside from Chris Kattan and Tracy Morgan, most of the people on the show are new and haven't really gotten their feet wet yet. It seems kinda dull and bad right now for us, but think how it's gotta be for them and for the writers to put out the type of calibur material that we were used to seeing from the days of Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, Chris Farley, and even more recent, from Will Farrel, Ana Gasteyer, Cheri Oteri and Molly Shannon. I think we may just need to give them a break and allow them to find a voice with each of the actors. I respect very much what they do each week and will continue watching the show, no matter how week it may seem right now.
[> [> [> [> Ugh... -- ZachsMind, 23:59:51 10/13/02 Sun

ANYTHING that SNL has churned out in the past decade pales in comparison to "Land Shark" or "BassOMatic" or "Cheeburgah Cheeburgah Cheeburgah!"

I'm sorry but nothing SNL has done in a long time matches its former glory. SMG or no.
[> [> Re: People still watch SNL? Wow! ..uh, why? -- parakeet, 01:59:29 10/14/02 Mon

I didn't watch it this week, as I almost never do now (sometimes I turn it on with the same morbid fascination that occasionally compels me to turn to MTV). I'm currently "reading" (a bit reading, a bit skimming, and a lot of pacing with semi-sane monologues) the new oral history of SNL (Live From New York). It's actually fascinating. I, at least, am finding it to be an honest account (though, of course, a bit contradictory) of the lifespan of the show, from cool and popular to uncool and unpopular to uncool and popular.
The first part of the book is great. The next part (after the original cast leaves) is darkly fascinating. Then things get sad. I don't mean to say that the cast and writers weren't talented after that; it's just that...Well, it became what it was originally meant to overcome. Career over artistry, convention over experimentation, safe over potentially dangerous.
I can really sympathize with the emotionally-imbalanced, but brilliant, Michael O'Donoghue's pleas to have the show go down in flames. It might have freed up a lot of talent to try to create something new or, at least, less safe.
[> Fascinating -- verdantheart, 07:54:03 10/14/02 Mon

I found this all very fascinating. First, it's kind of hard for me to see SNL because KSL won't air it, so it is run on our local WB station: ergo, no promos, so I never know who the guest host will be ahead of time. Too bad! I would have tuned in! Could someone send up a flare if James Marsters or Jennifer Garner (OK, I know it's OT) guests? But, hey, KSL wouldn't run The Tonight Show last week when Jay had the guys from Puppetry of the Penis on, and they were fully clothes and didn't use foul language -- unless you consider "penis" foul language (yes, the WB picked that up, too). (And KSL has no problem with Law & Order: SVU? Hm; but that's another topic.) Anyway, it's interesting to hear something about it.

We used to watch SNL a lot. I grew up with it. Gotta agree with ZachsMind that it's hard to beat the early Ayckroyd/Belushi sketches. But I also loved Dana Carvey and Phil Hartman (damn, I miss him, God rest his soul!). But a while back, as one of the performers mentioned--the cast began to move from improvisational actors to performers with a background in stand-up. I think that may have made a difference in the program. Perhaps it was Phil Hartman who mentioned that as one of the reasons for his departure.

However, as I said, I've hardly seen it for probably 10 years now, and I can't say I've missed it terribly because I thought it had gone downhill drastically. I'd heard that it had improved since then, but perhaps with the most recent departures, that was a temporary thing.

Anyway, thanks for the thread!

Current board | More October 2002