October 2003 posts
Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for Unleashed
-- Rufus, 18:58:49 10/16/03 Thu
Okay Atlas, how about a shrug......
New season, new digs.....new problems. It's Angel season five
and they aren't in the Hyperion anymore. Angel and gang have found
a new playground in the belly of the beast and they are showing
the effects of being in a place that they aren't really welcome.
We see everyone ostensibly at what appears to be a friendly picnic,
but it's not........
Fred: We're clean nobody's listening.
Angel: (to Wesley) You were late.
Wesley: Thought I was being followed.
Gunn: I got that we have to be careful but feels wierd, hiding
from the company we're supposed to be running.
Angel: We're not hiding...we're being safe. There are factions
at Wolfram and Hart. People who want to see us destroyed.
Fred: But still.....it's not like everyone there's evil. I mean
we work with these people. Some of them I see more than I see
you guys...at least lately anyways.
Wesley: And you think you can trust him....them?
Fred: What?
Wesley: These people, the ones you're spending so much time with
lately...Knox for example.
Fred: Uh...we're you know...heh heh..friendly. But, he's under
me....or I'm on top of him......professionally. All I'm saying
is he's not evil.
Angel: I think we're all agree'd that the Senior Partners are.
They put us in charge for a reason. What we need to know is, why?
Gunn: We've only been there a month.
Fred: Turns out running a company doesn't leave a lot of time
for....you know....covert ops.
Lorne: Yeah, I'm up to my horns schmoozing starlets and boozing
hipsters, Angel.
Wesley: What about Gunn?
Gunn: What about Gunn?
Fred: It's, well....what they put in your head. All that Law knowledge
and whatever. Maybe you know something more than the rest of us.
Wes: The alterations to your mental capacity...
Gunn: My capacity's the same it's always been. The good doctor
just rev'd up some idling brain cells, set em in motion.
Angel: It's a legitimate concern. You gave them access to
Gunn: I made a deal...WE ALL DID.....seems like I'm the only one
who's willing to accept that. Everybody here got something out
of this.
Angel: Fear, mistrust....a great motor pool
Lorne: I got the Nancy Sinatra collection...original 45's
Wes: I did get a rather nice pen 'Sterling' has my name on it.
Which is not the point at all.
Gunn: No, the point is what? That I'm some spy for the Senior
Partners?
Angel: Nobody's saying that.
Gunn: Just thinkin it.
Fred: No Charles.
Angel: The point is the Senior Partners have a plan for us, and
if we're not prepared...
Fred: Angel, it's not like we don't want to be ready. We just
have, you know, plates....big heaping full plates.
Wes: Between running our departments, handling clients....dealing
with Spike.
Angel: Spike is a distraction. As soon as he's released from his
ties with Wolfram and Hart....
Wes: That could take years.
Fred: Using the amulet to destroy the Hellmouth, it turned Spike
into...
Lorne: A spook?
Fred: Well, he's more than a ghost. He's something unique.
Wes: Regardless, whatever binds him.
Angel: Can I borrow your pen?
The first part of the show reveals just how uptight, and out of
place the gang is feeling. Gone is the team and in it's place
are people heading seperate departments, no longer getting together
like they would have before, drifting apart. Angel made a deal,
but Gunn points out the fact that they all made a deal for differing
reasons. The one who has been changed the most so far is Gunn.
His brain enhancement has caused the others to wonder just how
many extras the Senior Partners may have installed, and how connected
Gunn may be.
Angel borrows that 'Sterling' pen and dispatches a werewolf with
it. All this while letting the girl the wolf bit get away. We
have yet another monster....and she's a dog.
All the energy the gang has is now channeled into finding this
girl to keep her safe. Cage the monster before it gets loose and
kills people. What is the unintended benefit is saved for the
end.
The werewolf who bit the girl had a life, one he left forever
as Gunn says....
Gunn: I pulled his credit card records, cross checked em with
police reports. He left his wife and kids a couple of years ago.
Kept moving, staying in the middle of nowhere most of the time.
First year of so, a few mangled bodies showed up here and there.
But the last 6 months....guy was leaving corpses like bread crumbs.
Angel: Probobly tried to control it for awhile....and just gave
up. Thought he had to fight it alone, and ended up with nothing
worth fighting for. But this girl, she's not alone....she's got
us.
Angel sounded like he was talking about himself more than the
werewolf he killed. He feels that pull to drift off to the side,
brood and not live. Here in this one girl he again see's a chance
to help someone before they do something they can never come back
from. The girls name is Nina Ash, she lives with her sister and
niece. She doesn't know what is happening to her. Just as she
transforms and goes to perhaps snack on her niece, Angel calls
her and gets her the heck outta there. And this werewolf is no
ordinary werewolf, we have something new......
Royce: Pretty rare breed you have here.
Wes: Dr. Royce is a cryptozoologist on my staff. I brought him
in to tell us what we are dealing with when we find the girl.
Royce: Lycanthopus Exterus....undocumented in North America, until
now....obviously.
Fred: How is it different from a standard werewolf?
Royce: Oh, biped for one thing...walks upright. Canines are a
bit longer than normal...arm span is...
Angel: I don't care about that, all I care about is the girl.
Spike: That's rough cause here on out she's in the kill-or-be-killed
club.
Angel: Here on out, she's under my protection.
Spike: If you find her before she turns, catch her after she goes
all growly won't be easy taking her out. I had a wee spat with
a werewolf myself once...fought for over an hour....brutal, vicious....almost
lost my....
Fred: Angel killed him with a pen.
In helping Nina, Angel helps himself even if he doesn't quite
recognise that fact for awhile. Angel seems to find helping the
helpless he doesn't know better than helping someone closer. Doesn't
hurt that Nina is a very attractive, blonde, woman. Don't even
mention that other bottle blonde that is haunting Angel, to think
that Hamlet got off relatively easy in the apparition department,
too bad the story ends with him dead. Angel talks about the monster,
the one inside, the one he seems to think can be controlled. I
don't know if he means with or without a soul because without
a soul, vampires can only control their evil impulses so much,
and werewolves lose their control with the full moon. Then again
we can consider Harmony who says that human blood is no longer
an issue. Who would have known that vampires could swear off killing
people for an appropriate benefit package?
Angel: Nina it's okay.
Nina: No, it's not.
Angel: You didn't....
Nina: I wanted to rip her (niece Amanda) throat out!
Angel: I wasn't you, it was the thing inside.
Nina: Oh, like there's a difference?
Angel: There is, a big one. I know this is a lot to take.
Nina: Don't tell me what you know, you didn't wake up and find
out you're a monster....you don't know anything.....
Angel: I I'm not a werewolf like you. But I I know what is't like.
I'm a monster too.
Nina: So what? You're like a Frankenstein?
Angel: What? No! Ah I'm a vampire.
Nina: A vampire?
Angel: But I have a soul.....I-I'm not evil, and neither are you.
Nina: Vampires kill people and they..
Angel: Can control themselves if they want to, I do it
every day and so can you....I'll help.
Nina: Can you, cure me?
Angel: No, but I can keep you safe.
Oh dear, every time Angel says he's going to keep someone safe
that is the time they either die or send him to hell. Maybe he
should say "I'll try to keep you safe." While plans
are made to keep Nina comfortable Angel consults Dr. Royce and
is reminded of the phrase "If you don't kill them, they will
make you stronger" meaning Spike drops by again. To Angel
Spike is a distraction that throws him off the hero game.
Royce: They like familiar scents, images. Maybe if you took
her home, let her get a few things....could have a calming effect.
(aka: setup)
Spike: Fetching her blanky's not gonna make a bloody bit of difference.
Fred: Spike, really not helping.
Spike: I'm just saying the girls a killer. Maybe not tonight or
tomorrow, but she will get out of that cage.
Angel: Not if she doesn't want to.
Royce: Oh, she'll want to, it's unfortunate but..
Spike: And when it's not that time of month she'll be wracked
by the quilties, what with a soul and all.....
Angel: Didn't seem to bother you.
Spike: Oh, it's been nothing but a pain in my......(Spike vanishes)
Spike never gets the chance to say exactly where his pain is and
Angel seems to think that Spike never gave his past much of a
thought post-basement in Sunnydale. Funny how Angel is making
some of the assumptions that posters have made in the past. Spike
talks about the cage, and Angel says that it's something Nina
has a choice over. Just how true are Angel's sentiments and is
Royce right about the cage being something the werewolf will always
try to escape, at least when the moon is full? I'm reminded of
the rap in the Angel episode 'Billy'.....
Gorillaz.....Tomorrow Comes Today, CD
Finally, someone let me out of my cage.
Now time for me is nothing, cause I'm counting no age.
Nah I couldn't be here,
now you shouldn't be scared.
I'm good at repairs, and I'm under each snare.
Intagible, bet you didn't think, so I command you too.
Panoramic view, look I'll make you all manageable.
Pick and choose, sit and loose all you different crews.
Chicks and dudeds, who you think is really kicking tune?
Picture you getting down in a picture tube.
Like you lit the fuse.
You think it's fictional, mystical, maybe.
Spiritual hero who appears in you to clear your view and your
too crazy.
Lifeless, to know the definition of what life is.
Priceless,for you because I put you on the hype shit.
You like it?
Gunsmoking, righteous with one token.
Psychic among us who poses you with one go.
This brings me back to family, that one thing that seems to make
the difference in how characters cope with the world. Nina asked
Fred about Angel and if Fred is involved with Angel and Fred talks
about the gangs connection.....
Fred: We try to be there for each other.
Nina: Like a family.
Fred: Yeah, a demon hunting-helpless helping-dysfunctional family.
Nina has a family, Fred talks about her friends as family and
it's the one thing that keeps the monster from taking over and
the subsequent loss of humanity. Again Angel slips into a sulk
over his obsession to help Nina escape what he had become when
he became a vampire. Problem is that when Angel is preoccupied
with the problem he doesn't see what is going on around him.....enter
Lorne.
Lorne: Whoa!....watch it there, just passing by and got splashed
with a heap of grouchy. Got to tell you Angelkins, that extra
weight is not looking so good on you. I'm talking about psychic
pounds, pumpkin. Consider me the Jenny Craig for the soul, huh?
So lets hear it.
Angel: I'm not gonna sing.
Lorne: Couldn't bear it if you did. No, it's talking you need,
or maybe a shoulder....
Angel: I'm not gonna cry either.
Lorne: I was going to a leaning place. Okay Atlas! How about
a shrug? Look, so you've got the weight of the world? It's
a burden sure, but breaking news it ain't.
Angel: Listen Lorne this isn't a good time.
Lorne: No, it never is. Spike showing up your first day in the
Wolfram and Hart saddle, took the jolly right out of the rancher.
But we've been feeling it ever since then, Angelcakes.
Angel: Okay, so it's no secret - I don't like the guy.
Lorne: Like him, don't like him....that's up to you Angel. You're
fighting so many enemies around you Angel, your punches are getting
sloppy. And we've got the bruises to prove it. We're operating
in unfriendly territory Champ....I don't want you to forget about
the people covering your back.
In Conviction, Lorne says a throwaway line about "The Sorrow
and the Pity", it's a French documentary about people who
collaberated with the Germans in WW2. I think you can extend that
to the people working in Wolfram and Hart, even if they aren't
evil, they are working for it....something that Angel should pay
attention to cause he is again forgetting that Wolfram and Hart
use mistrust and fear to isolate people so they will do things
they normally wouldn't have. Then in unleashed, Lorne makes reference
to "Atlas Shrugged".....
"if you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his
shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest,
his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold
the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater
his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders-what
would you tell him to do?" "I . . . don't know. What
. . . could he do? What would you tell him?" "To shrug."
from Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
Remember being in the Belly of the Beast can transform one for
the best or worst depending upon how they navigate their way through.
You folks who know about Ayn Rand can tell me more how her philosophy
can be translated into the Buffyverse.
Nina is kidnapped by some military looking types and the gang
has to find out where she may be.......
Fred: The scariest thing was how organized they were...almost
military.
Wesley: An underground monster-hunting military orgainization....it's
happened before.
I had to mention the above as an obvious reference to the Initiative
and season four Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Finding Nina ended up being easier than the gang thought, they
also found that someone was about to prove Angel's point about
some people not being who they seem to be. A see-through Spike
leads Fred to a discovery.....
Wesley: You're right - it's Calendula, he must've known we'd
have him sing for Lorne.
Fred: So he came prepared to block the reading...it's like taking
valium to pass a polygraph test...I knew as soon as I found the
vial in the trash can.
The truth about Royce is that he is working on the side for a
fellow who likes to have parties with rare meat as the main menu.
Everyone goes to find Nina in time. This isn't a new phenomena,
there have been people around for ages who can't resist killing
endangered species just so they can get together and party. The
situation with Nina shows just how extreme these types can be.
Everyone heads over to the resturant to save Nina....
Gunn: I'm all up in the law - but damn - it feels good to get
my violence on.
Royce: Crane's not going to like this.
Gunn: If I were you I'd just be hoping the girls alive.
Wesley: She has to be, at least through dinner.....once a werewolf
dies it reverts to it's human state.
Gunn: You mean to eat werewolf they got to eat her alive?
Crane: Evan, you've brought guests.
Angel: We're just here to pick up a friend.........Jesus, they
garnished you?
Nina: No get away, just let them choke on me.
Angel: Listen to me, tomorrow you're gonna be home
Nina: This is what I am...I can't go back there - ever - this
is better.
Angel: Nothing better about ending up in a doggie bag.
Crane has some military type friends who up the tension in the
room, but before the standoff gets too far, Nina becomes her other
self. She kills a guest and when Crane insists on keeping her
for next months special, the werewolf bites Royce. Instead of
risking losing any of his friends, Angel sacrifices Royce. They
leave and Royce is taken away. We could argue Angel's actions
but Royce did orchestrate his own end. I guess you could say Angel
shrugged Royce off.
Nina is safe and Angel takes her back to her family....
Nina: How do you live with it, knowing you've killed people?
Angel: Nina, they were going to eat you for dinner!
Nina: I just wanna wake up, you know?
Angel: At some point you'll be at the grocery store with Amanda
and the whole werewolf thing, it'll just be a part of who you
are.
Nina: Next you're gonna tell me you actually like being a vampire.
Angel: Well, being nearly indestructible is cool.
Nina: I can't tell them.
Angel: Maybe, maybe not...that parts not covered in the manual....they're
waiting for you.
Nina: You don't ever think about letting go, disapearing somewhere?
Angel: Look, if you seperate yourself from the one's you love.....the
monster wins.
Nina: You make it sound......simple.
Angel: Well, it's not.
Nina: See you next month.
Now we come to the end of the episode which mirrors the beginning,
except for the fact that the people gathered are there because
of their mutual ties with each other, not just because they work
at the same place.
Lorne: Mmmmm talk about a Rm w/a view...(I thought of that
Cordy ep)
Fred: Wow....is that the Hotel (Hyperion where they just came
from)
Wesley: Where....No, I think that's the Center for Scientology.
Fred: Oh right.....they look nothing alike at all.
Gunn: I was starting to think we were never going to see the inside
of this place.
Angel: I'm sorry, I probobly should have had you guys over sooner.
But I'm trying to get used to the place myself.
Lorne: Look at this.....I'm home!!!! Hey, Cosmos all around?
Fred: Sounds good.
Wesley: Quite luxurious.
Angel: Yeah, it's not bad.
Gunn: Don't mean to talk shop but Crane's Bistro of the Bizzare?
Angel: Out of business.....permenently (guess Nina is safe from
the menu)
Wesley: What if I have a craving for Sasquatch soup?
Gunn: Is that something you English eat like your "beans
on toast"?
Fred: Mmmm you guys are making me hungry....who wants Chinese?
Gunn: Long as nothing comes tar-tar, I'm in.
Wesley: No, I'm too tired to make any decisions.
Lorne: Just order the usual Fredikins.
Angel: I'm buying.
Lorne: Ladies and Gentlemen, hell just froze over.
Gunn: So, werewolf girl? Think you've got a shot?
Angel: She gave me a look.
Wesley: Really? A look.
Fred (on Phone): We moved actually....to a law firm.....uh huh
different...no nice......okay......
The end to unleashed is touching because of how close the gang
became from the beginning of Unleashed. Fear, mistrust, and a
bit of paranoia was causing a rift that may have only become bigger
til everyone became strangers. Meeting in Angels place showed
that Angel was opening up and allowing people into his private
space. At least for now everyone has this night to become a family
again. No Spike, no lawyers, no Senior Partners.....just family.
Replies:
[> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for Unleashed
-- Sgamer82, 19:04:46 10/16/03 Thu
Hey, since Crane's eatery is out of business, does this mean that
Royce is safe too? It did seem a little overly harsh of Angel
to let Royce be carried off like that. I can see Hauser, he was
dangerous and willing to kill a whole bunch of people when there
were alternatives. Royce was a frightened little man who underestimated
Angel's ability to be scary.
[> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for Unleashed
-- Arethusa, 21:52:30 10/16/03 Thu
I don't know a lot about Rand, but I found this quote from Atlas
Shrugged in a Wikipedia article:
"[Sanction of the victim] is apparently original in the thinking
of Ayn Rand and is foundational to her moral theory. She holds
that evil is a parasite on the good and can only exist if the
good tolerates it. To quote from Galt's Speech: "Evil is
impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from
us", and, "I saw that evil was impotent...and the only
weapon of its triumph was the willingness of the good to serve
it." Morality requires that we do not santion our own victimhood."
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concepts_in_Atlas_Shrugged
Which is great, but it is altruism that Rand considers evil, which
I don't think is ME's point. (Perhaps they were just referring
to the mythic Atlas.)
"Man - every man - is an end in himself, not a means to the
ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing
himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work
for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own
happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life." Thus
Objectivism rejects any form of altruism - the claim that morality
consists in living for others or for society."
http://www.aynrand.org/objectivism/essentials.html
In Atlas Shrugged, the greatest minds of the world go on
strike, shrugging off the parasitic masses, and refusing to carry
the weight of their support on the elite's shoulders.
[> [> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for
Unleashed -- lele., 09:25:04 10/17/03 Fri
I don't know a lot about Rand, but I found this quote from Atlas
Shrugged in a Wikipedia article:
"[Sanction of the victim] is apparently original in the thinking
of Ayn Rand and is foundational to her moral theory. She holds
that evil is a parasite on the good and can only exist if the
good tolerates it. To quote from Galt's Speech: "Evil is
impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from
us", and, "I saw that evil was impotent...and the only
weapon of its triumph was the willingness of the good to serve
it." Morality requires that we do not santion our own victimhood."
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concepts_in_Atlas_Shrugged"
"Which is great, but it is altruism that Rand considers evil,
which I don't think is ME's point. (Perhaps they were just referring
to the mythic Atlas.)"
I read most of the Fountainhead a good while ago and know of Atlast
Shrugged. I agree with the last sentence about not sanctioning
victimhood-- in terms of promoting self-reliance and personal
responsibility, but I'm still don't see eye to eye with what Rand
considered to be 'evil.'
"Man - every man - is an end in himself, not a means to the
ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing
himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work
for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own
happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life." Thus
Objectivism rejects any form of altruism - the claim that morality
consists in living for others or for society."
http://www.aynrand.org/objectivism/essentials.html
In Atlas Shrugged, the greatest minds of the world go on strike,
shrugging off the parasitic masses, and refusing to carry the
weight of their support on the elite's shoulders."
This is another area where I find some truth in rand's writings
but disagree with her definition of good/evil and even altruism.
In terms of a person being an end in themself...I can agree. You'll
be disappointed going through life if you expect the greatest
rewards to be external. (IOW, when I save others I save myself)
To some extent the philosophy ignores biology. If rational self
interest is the greatest goal then fine, but as humans we've evolved
to be social. This is important in terms of personal survival
as well as survival of the species. (IOW, to borrow from Nash
in A Beautiful Mind- I have to do what's best for myself AND the
group).
One could describe altruism as selflessness, but I don't think
it is...it's a different kind of selfishness. The internal rewards
of helping others is just as important (and as much a driving
force) as the external rewards.
[> [> [> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers
for Unleashed -- Arethusa, 09:58:23 10/17/03 Fri
Just as helping others can be helping yourself externally, by
improving the world in which you live. I think Rand felt it was
immoral to demand someone repress his or her abilities for the
good of other, less able, people. Which can easily be taken to
ruthless extremes, an "us vs. them" mentality.
I think that in her hatred of collectivism Rand forgot or ignored
that the great often depend on many others to achieve their greatness.
Society supports the schools that educated them, the judicial
system that keeps them safe, the infrastructure that allows them
to achieve their greatness.
[> [> [> [> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug?
spoilers for Unleashed -- lele, 10:30:12 10/17/03 Fri
"Just as helping others can be helping yourself externally,
by improving the world in which you live. I think Rand felt it
was immoral to demand someone repress his or her abilities for
the good of other, less able, people. Which can easily be taken
to ruthless extremes, an "us vs. them" mentality."
Exactly, what happens when you get rid of the "them"
and all you have left is the "us". It seems to me that
there will be weak links within the group that's leftover. Do
they turn into the new "them."
"I think that in her hatred of collectivism Rand forgot or
ignored that the great often depend on many others to achieve
their greatness. Society supports the schools that educated them,
the judicial system that keeps them safe, the infrastructure that
allows them to achieve their greatness.""
Yeah, I read enough to know she really didn't like communism and
this might have significantly colored things from her perspective.
[> [> [> [> [> A note on Rand -- s'kat,
23:02:52 10/17/03 Fri
I've read four books of Ayn Rand: Atlas Shrugged (well most of
it - it gets awfully preachy and heavy handed in places), Fountainhead,
The Night of January 16th and Anthem.
I had an English teacher who once said the only book of Ayn Rand's
you needed to read to understand her writing, philosophy, was
Anthem. He's right. Anthem is a futuristic world where the collective
has taken over and it is a world that has a lot to do with Communist
Russia of the 1940s, 50s and 60s.
You've got to remember when reading Ayn Rand that she escaped
from communist Russia or the Soviet Union. Not Russia of the 80s
or 90s or even 70s. But Stalin's Russia with political internment
camps. Rand saw what happened when the ideal of alturisim and
socialism was taken to extremes - the evil social workers in her
books are more reminiscent of that world than of the one in our
society. Rand came from the extreme verison and in reaction to
that extreme created an extreme philosophy of her own - individualism.
It's an understandable reaction if you think about what she came
from. She escaped from a society that suffocated her creative
endeavor. It's a reactionary response yet an understandable one.
Paralleling this with Angel the Series - Lorne appears to be cautioning
Angel against "reactionary" responses. Don't go to extremes.
Don't push everyone away. Similar to Doyle's advice in City of...where
Doyle cautions Angel to live amongst humans not isolate himself
from them. To not reacte in the negative to a few slights and
rejection. Angel in turn passes this advice on to others - including
Faith in Consequences and in Five by Five - Sancturary and to
some degree to Wesely.
Although, having read Atlas Shrugged - it's interesting to note
that no man or woman stands alone - the intellegentsia and business
elite join together. John Gault the protoganist is described as
an everyman. They aren't isolated so much as they demand that
everyone pulls their own weight. They don't carry anyone. Which
isn't exactly anti-alturism per se...it's more the theory of "we
should only help those who help themselves or who are willing
to add to society" and not let them take us down - which
while great in theory isn't necessarily workable in practice.
Is Angel doing the same thing here? Maybe. The male werewolf doesn't
seek help tries to do it alone, yet doesn't help himself he gives
up. Nina - does allow Angel to help her, but she assists she doesn't
rely on him solely. There is a paternalistic attitude that would
grate on Rand, yet at the same time Angel isn't completely alturistic
either, he doesn't help those who don't help themselves, he is
choosing who is worthy which in some ways has a Randian aspect
to it. The philosophy is not really as black and white as one
would think - it has shades of rationalism in it. I know a few
"Rand" fans, so have seen it from more than one angle.
I'm not a fan of Rand's philosophy far from it, but I can see
the underlying logic behind it. An example of someone who follows
Rand is Alan Greenspan.
It's a been a while since I discussed Rand, so apologies if I'm
slightly off.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: A note on Rand
-- lele, 08:48:50 10/18/03 Sat
Thanks for the recommendation of Anthem. I am interested in understanding
Rand's philosophy, but halfway through the Fountainhead I knew
I didn't agree with much of what she espoused or at least I came
to some of the same conclusions she did but in a different way.
[> [> [> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers
for Unleashed -- Miyu tVP, 10:57:16 10/17/03 Fri
I also don't know much about Rand, so can only respond to what
has been said here...
he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself
to others nor sacrificing others to himself
Although this does on a broad level seem to counter most of the
themes of Buffy & Angel... in this particluar ep it seem quite
relevant. Angel is *very* good at focusing on extrnal problems
(Nina)rather than dealing with his own issues (interacting with
his friends). I wouldn't advocate self-absorption, but I think
Angel is using this simple outward situation to avoid dealing
with all the complexities of his own life - never a good idea.
Evil is impotent and has no power but that which we let it
extort from us
This idea is painfully relevant considering their new situation
at W&H. They have *allowed* themselves do be pulled into a
morally ambiguous sitation. They must now on a daily basis *allow*
evil doers to carry about their business.
On an irrelevant side note... the common image of Altas is him
carrying a large globe on his shoulders. In fact his task was
to stand as a pillar *between* the heavens and the earth, keeping
the heavens from crashing down, maintaining the division between
mortal and divine.
[> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for Unleashed
-- jane, 22:32:48 10/16/03 Thu
I tend to think the reference to Atlas is to the mythic Atlas
carrying the weight of the world, rather than Ayn Rand's "Atlas
Shrugged" novel. From what I remember of the book, and her
philosophy in general, Ayn Rand would probably be on the staff
of W&H and not on the side of Angel and friends!
[> [> Re: Okay Atlas, how about a Shrug? spoilers for
Unleashed -- Sgamer82, 15:19:04 10/18/03 Sat
I figured it was mythic Atlas too, especially as the conversation
went one. It seemed to support that.
[> A line that I noted. spoilers for Unleashed -- Rufus,
03:50:18 10/17/03 Fri
The Angelverse keeps getting more complicated, Creepy Bistro's,
biped werewolfs, what will happen next? Something Royce said could
be a possible plotline for Wolfgirl in the future.....
Angel: What do you got?
Royce: Usual suspects. There's the sacrificers, wacko's who want
to rid the world of abominations, and werewolf packs looking for
new recruits, then there's the paranormal sporting groups.
Fred: I'll be.....(she follows Spike)
Royce: Vampire hunting in Eastern Europe...that-that kind of thing.
One of the top things that would make sense would be for a werewolf
pack to come checking out the new dog who can walk on two feet...then
again that pack could decide she is an abomination and try to
rid the world of her. Then the Paranormal Sporting groups could
seek her out....and you thought Slayerfest was fun.....;)
[> Isolation, and not letting the monster win. - spoilers
for Unleashed -- ladyhelix,
17:16:21 10/18/03 Sat
Excellent Rufus! ...and your last line begs the NEXT question:
"At least for now everyone has this night to become a family
again. no Spike, no lawyers, no Senior Partners.....just family".
BUT WHERE IS SPIKE? Oh yea - he's still isolated.
"If you isolate yourselves from the one's you love, the Monster
wins". Truer words were never spoken - regardless of the
monster in question. When it becomes impossible to reach out,
or for us to allow others to reach us, life (or un-life) can become
so painful that it hurts to go on.
After 100 years of isolation - Angel should know that. I continue
to marvel at what Spike has been through, how he's survived -
and even thrived.
When Angel first left Spike (when he got his soul) - Spike probably
felt more abandoned than isolated, but when being abandoned feels
like it's your own fault - it's almost as bad. Embarrassment,
shame, and self doubt breed a weird kind of depression that's
hard to come back from. And let's face it - Angel WAS Spike's
Sire, his Yoda. Not an insignificant relationship to be isolated
from for over 100 years(and counting).
Being chipped was devastating for Spike, since it isolated him
from his true nature, from everything that made him what he was.
And although the Scoobies eventually "let Spike hang around",
they treated him horribly. By accepting their meager tolerance
of him, Spike effectively isolated himself permanently from the
entire demon community.
Now we have Spike chained to W&H - being further isolated by Angel's
hatred and his current ghostlike state. Knowing how much 'sensitive
William' has always been a part of Spike (even before the soul)
makes the pain he must feel all the more acute.
And yet Spike hasn't let the monster win. And I'm betting he doesn't.
I'm a die hard Spike fan because of the strength of this character
- and of his character.
Although many have stated that Spike's role in UNLEASHED was "insignificant"
- I will argue that almost every line & interchange that occurred
in this episode had a double meaning that related directly to
Spike and his situation. (I am tempted to spell these out - but
I'll contain myself). And yes - I would notice that, since Spike's
ability to preserver astounds me, and gives me hope.
Both the mania and the clinical depression of Bipolar Disorder
are devastating and potentially lethal. The beast is indeed horrid,
but it's the isolation it breeds that is the most painful & destructive.
Unexplainable behaviors (if not the stigma itself) keep others
at a distance, while the shame, self doubt, and carnage of past
cycles makes one hesitant to risk, to reach out, or to let others
in. The disorder is the MONSTER (vampire, werewolf, or ghost)
that no one asks for - but has to learn to live with. Isolation
is the ugly flip side.
Just sayin' there's another way to look at this episode, and it's
honest, and hopeful. I openly admit to being "overly sympathetic"
to Spike, and to his fate and his feelings. But misery admittedly
love's company, and leave it to Joss to layer all this in with
the rest of the yummy goodness.
It's been an incredible inspiration (and comfort) to me personally
to have these themes dealt with so honestly, and compassionately.
I only hope Spike can keep fighting, and not let the monster win.
[> [> Re: Isolation, and not letting the monster win.
- spoilers for Unleashed -- Rufus, 18:09:17 10/18/03 Sat
I was very specific in saying no Spike as he is not considered
family to Angel.....but then again what is he to Angel but family?
Angel didn't choose to be the grand-sire to Spike anymore than
he chose his own father. If Angel were indifferent maybe he would
be more open to helping Spike, but he isn't but he also doesn't
kill him...just as he didn't kill him as Angelus in Fool for Love.
Love thine enemies because they are instruments of your
destiny. Joseph Campbell
"By our interactions with each other we redeem us all."
ML Von Franz
[> [> [> Re: Isolation, and not letting the monster
win. - spoilers for Unleashed -- ladyhelix, 22:24:31 10/18/03
Sat
You're right Rufus - Spike isn't one of the AI "family"
- and you're certainly not the one who left him out of the closing
scene!! You just called it like you saw it.
Isn't this fun stuff? As I mentioned earlier... layers and layers!
[> [> [> [> Yes layers....all that and a bag of
breadcrumbs- spoilers for Unleashed -- Rufus, 23:22:41
10/18/03 Sat
Isn't this fun stuff? As I mentioned earlier... layers and
layers!
All that and bag of bread crumbs too....;)
I've noticed the breadcrumbs reference in two episodes so far.
In Conviction this happens...
KNOX
Do you know how to get to your office from here?
FRED
Why, did somebody eat my breadcrumbs?
That episode made the office look like a labyrinth, and remembering
what happened to the breadcrumbs in the fairytale (birds ate them
leaving the children lost/disconnected, in the woods) I think
it's a subtle reference to just how lost our favourite characters
can become in Wolfram and Hart.
In 'Unleashed' Gunn makes this comment...
GUNN
(presses elevator button)
Well, she'll figure it out soon enough. McManus did. The guy you...
killed. I pulled his credit card records, cross-checked 'em with
police reports.
(reads from the folder)
He left his wife and kids a couple years ago, kept moving, staying
in the middle of nowhere most of the time. First year or so, a
few mangled bodies showed up here and there, but the last 6 months,
guy was leaving corpses like bread crumbs.
So far the bread crumb references have come from members of the
gang, not Angel himself. The gang may have signed on, but it was
Angel who did it with full knowledge of what was happening, no
mindwipe. Now, in the fairytale Hansel and Gretel, birds eat the
crumbs leaving the children lost...I wonder who the birds could
be in this situation?
Singing for Lorne (spoilers
5.3) -- Mackenzie, 06:58:02 10/17/03 Fri
So, if Royce knew of a drug and took it before he sang so Lorne
couldn't read him correctly, how many other W&H people did the
same thing? Will that come up? Will they also have to "drug"
screen everyone and have them sing again. It looks like there
is a possiblity that no matter what AI does W&H may be able to
get under their radar.
Replies:
[> Re: Singing for Lorne (spoilers 5.3) -- MaeveRigan,
08:11:59 10/17/03 Fri
Funny! I had the same thought this morning! It seemed like a huge
plothole, but then I had another thought. From what we've seen
of standard operating procedure at W&H, cooperation is not
their strong point. It's every shark for him or herself. If someone
has inside information, she exploits it to gain advantage over
others, she doesn't share it with the others--Lilah was a prime
example. Gavin Park, Lindsey--same approach.
So, I don't see any reason Royce would share his knowledge. OTOH,
it's still unclear how well-known the aura-blocking capability
of the drug is. If it's obscure mystico-alchemical stuff--problem
solved. If it's common knowledge among the Evil, then you're right--Lorne's
work is pretty much wasted. They're going to have to drug-screen
everyone before reading them, and/or reinstate the random mind-readings--which
would mark one more step on the slippery slope toward darkness.
[> [> Re: Singing for Lorne (spoilers 5.3) -- leslie,
13:03:41 10/17/03 Fri
[> [> [> Re: Okay, my brilliant thoughts were devoured
by a Hell Beast -- leslie, 13:09:45 10/17/03 Fri
What I said was that you would expect that if the drug
were well-known, everyone would use it, and then Lorne et al would
become suspicious that no-one at The Most Evil Firm In
This Or Any Other Dimension was actually evil. On the other hand,
Fred recogonized it immediately; does this mean that she is Evil
herself?
The Curse of the Zeppo (post-American
League Championship musings) -- cjl, 09:14:49 10/17/03
Fri
[Dedicated to long-suffering ME/Red Sox fans everywhere]
HOLLYWOOD (AP) - As production shifts into full gear for Season
5 of ANGEL, the supernatural spinoff of Buffy the Vampire Slayer,
the staff of Mutant Enemy productions is hopeful that this is
the year they dispel the specter that has haunted Joss Whedon's
crew since the end of BUFFY's fifth season--the Curse of the Zeppo.
As all dedicated fans of genre TV know so well, the track record
of Buffy creator Joss Whedon was unblemished during the first
five years of the series. The teen-oriented TV show took unheard-of
creative risks and scored on nearly all of them, drawing in a
devoted cult audience, turning Buffy into a worldwide phenomenon.
Whedon rolled the dice again when he spun off Angel, Buffy's brooding
vampire (with a soul) boyfriend, into his own noir-ish series
on the dark and gritty streets of L.A.; but this move turned out
to be a shot in the arm for both the talented cast of the spinoff
and the mother series, which branched out into new and exciting
directions. Whedon hit his peak in "The Gift," the Buffy
Season 5 finale, in which Buffy sacrificed herself to save the
world.
And then, things started to go wrong.
Dedicated Buffy/Angel fans and Whedon aficionados, worn down by
nearly three years of disappointments, can roll off the horrors
as if they were reciting the alphabet: "magic crack"-addicted
Willow, As You Were, the attempted rape, the death of Tara, the
Yellow Crayon scene, the SiTs, Andrew, the incomprehensible plan
of the First Evil, Fox's butchering of Firefly, the Emmy shutout,
and--most painful to many--the character assassination of Cordelia
Chase, a mainstay on Buffy and Angel since the beginning of the
franchise.
Many explain away these creative collapses logically, citing the
pressures of TV production, and the natural ebbing of creative
energies after the first five years of a series. But, appropriately,
some Buffy and Angel fans think there is a supernatural explanation.
They contend that when the Mutant Enemy braintrust stripped key
Buffy supporting character Xander Harris (played by actor Nicholas
Brendon) of his central role in the series' plotlines, Mutant
Enemy cut out the heart of the series--and the franchise has never
recovered. Thus was born The Curse of the Zeppo.
ANGEL executive producer Jeffrey Bell scoffs at the idea: "We've
had a few ups and downs over the past couple of years," says
Bell, "but overall, I think we've put some damn good television
up on the screen. All this talk about a curse is overblown."
But long-suffering Buffy and Angel fans aren't so sure. Time and
again over the past two seasons, BtVS and ANGEL have started the
year with engines roaring, tantalizing their devoted viewers with
intruiging plotlines and characters, building up expectations
for a truly spectacular year of adventures. Then, inevitably,
as the late innings of the season approached, the Mutant Enemy
team would inexplicably fold under the pressure, leaving the faithful
drained and demoralized.
"I loved Buffy Season Six," said spykette, a 23-year
old Buffy fan and devotee of Spike, the roguish bottled blond
British vamp. "I thought it was going to be the best season
ever. But then, they ruined it all with Seeing Red. Spike and
Buffy were completely out-of-character. I almost didn't want to
come back for the next episode."
vampyr65, a fan of the Xander Harris character, echoed that sentiment
and added his own tale of disappointment. "Even after everything
got screwed up with Seeing Red, I thought they had a chance to
pull out the season. Two to Go was a great episode, and all Fury
had to do was clean up after Petrie. But they couldn't do it.
Joss even came in to pinch-hit, and they STILL couldn't pull it
off. It came down to a speech about a yellow crayon." vampyr65
sighed in exasperation. "A yellow (bleeping) crayon."
Joss Whedon could not be reached for comment.
There were similar expressions of frustration about the conclusion
of Buffy Season 7, as well as complaints about the at-times puzzling
management style of Whedon and his cohorts. "I don't get
it," said rashad, a 35-year old investment banker, a self-proclaimed
Buffy maniac. "Joss had so many good characters sitting on
the bench, just waiting to come into the game: Xander, Giles,
Anya, Willow, people who have been there since the beginning,
and gave their souls to the show. But he played losers like Andrew,
Kennedy, and the rest of those freakin' SITs. What the hell was
he thinking?"
drstrange, a 31-year police officer, agreed. "I'm a big Spike
fan, but even I think Joss left him in too long last year. There
was no point to half the stuff they were doing. The torture session
with the Ubervamp? A black hole in the middle of the season."
Nonetheless, no matter how sharp the pangs of disappointment,
the fans of Buffy and Angel keep coming
back, season after season, hoping that this year everything will
come together. "Angel Season 5 is looking pretty good,"
said rashad. "They nearly lost me with all the Evil Cordy
stuff last year, but I think they've got the cast and the writers
to go all the way. Of course," he laughed, "I've been
wrong before."
And what of the source of the curse, the Zeppo himself? Nicholas
Brendon is still living in California with his wife, waiting for
his next job opportunity, just like any other actor coming out
of a long and successful TV series. Brendon declined to speak
on the record, but he did say he thought the idea of a curse was
ridiculous, and that Joss Whedon and Mutant Enemy productions
were doing just fine.
He did say, however, that when his good friend Alyson Hannigan
(Willow) starts shooting her sitcom in 2004, he'd be willing to
perform an exorcism.
Replies:
[> The story behind the "article" -- cjl,
22:46:15 10/18/03 Sat
OK, the discussion didn't take the turn I thought it would.
I didn't write this "article" to complain about Xander's
role in Seasons 6 and 7, or to revisit Seeing Red, or lob another
spitball in Joss' direction about Cordelia. (Well, maybe a little.)
Fact is, I was writing about the Boston Red Sox' "Curse of
the Bambino," and how it translates to Mutant Enemy, and
the "Curse of the Zeppo" just sounded great. The point
of the article wasn't that we as Buffy fanatics can't tolerate
some of the more disappointing twists and turns of Joss' TV series--it's
that we CAN.
I was at Game 7 of the American League Championship Series on
Thursday night. Back row of the left field bleachers, plastered
against the wall with two cops who were scanning Section 37 like
hawks, waiting to bust anybody who wanted to take out their aggression
on the scattered Sox fans who stood out like red neon signs in
the midst of all the dark blue Yankee caps. Frankly, I was a bit
concerned for these folks at the beginning. One particularly crass
Yankee fan brought a blow-up doll that sort of resembled Red Sox
ace Pedro Martinez. He passed the Pedro doll around the section
and encouraged fellow bleacher creatures to give it a couple of
shots. After a few innings, the cops obviously got word from Yankee
management to take away dolly before the abuse got too, uhm, graphic.
Can't have that shown on worldwide TV, you know.
There was a minor scuffle or two, but the Boston rooters, in general,
were left alone. Why? Simple. Because the Yankee fans, in their
infinite arrogance and confidence based on 26 World Series titles,
knew in their hearts that the Curse--in effect since Boston sold
Babe Ruth to the Yankees after the 1919 season--would catch up
to the Red Sox, and the Yankees would win. I must admit that when
the Yankees went down 4-0 in the fourth inning, and Roger Clemens
left the pitcher's mound for what could have been the last time
in his fabled career, I felt a twinge of sadness and despair.
But when Boston failed to score again in that inning, despite
having boundless opportunities to do so, I changed my mind. The
Sox would find a way to blow it. Somehow.
And, of course, the Red Sox did blow it. The Yankees staged a
furious 8th inning comeback, tying the game against Martinez,
and won the game in the 11th. It was a scenario as thrilling and
surreal as anything you would see on vintage Buffy or Angel, with
just as much "magical" thinking at work. Fans were passing
around pictures of Babe Ruth and Bucky (bleeping) Dent (the Red
Sox killer of a one-game playoff in 1978), and asking everyone
to touch it, just touch it, a small offering to the Baseball Gods
to keep the Curse operating for just one game longer. We were
being asked to bring the Yankees all the back to victory as an
act of collective prayer, or collective will. I felt as if somebody
was giving me the amulet or the scythe.
And just as the Yankee fans indulged in magical thinking to bring
about victory, the inverse was also true for the Red Sox fans.
It seemed to me that, the instant Aaron Boone hit the game-winning
home in the 11th inning, the Red Sox--and all their supporters--had
disappeared from the stadium. When I got through high-fiving most
of section 37, I looked at the field, and I thought I saw Red
Sox pitcher Tim Wakefield crumpled on the mound in despair. But
no--it was Yankee reliever (and winning pitcher) Mariano Rivera.
Wakefield was gone. The Red Sox dugout was empty. The red caps
of the Sox rooters had flown away, like night-migrating robins.
It was as if, after the Yankees tied the game in the 8th inning,
the Sox fans KNEW Boston was going to lose, and made their way
out of the stands so they could leave the stadium at a moment's
notice. It was an act of negative collective will--or a sad, resigned
acknowledgement of the unyielding cruelty of the Baseball PTB,
who will never let them know ultimate joy.
So what's the point? Why do the Red Sox fans (and the Cubs fans)
return to the ballpark year after year, take blow after blow,
but keep coming back for more? Surely, there are better things
to do than invest a huge chunk of your emotions into a team that
plunges you into blackest despair on a regular basis. And yet,
even a Yankee fan, who has been spoiled rotten by the Yankees'
record of excess and success, can understand. There are pleasures
to be gained, even if ultimate victory eludes the grasp. Boston's
entire 2003 season exceeded everyone's expectations; their thrilling
five-game triumph over Oakland in the divisional series must have
been immensely satisfying; and watching athletes like Nomar Garciaparra
and Manny Ramirez on a day-to-day basis--and Pedro Martinez every
five days--is a rare privilege for any who appreciates the game
of baseball.
But beyond that, there is a sense of community in baseball towns
like Chicago, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and St. Louis, generations
of fans weaned by legendary victories of heroes past, or--in the
case of Boston and Chicago--epic failures that approach Job-like
levels. The game I saw on Thursday night will be passed down from
parent to child to grandchild, the battle of two talented, evenly
matched teams fighting at the peak of their powers, under unimaginable
pressure, until one finally emerged victorious. Depending on where
you live, the story will have either a sad or happy ending. But
nobody will dispute the greatness of the game itself, a tribute
to the deceptively simple, yet infinitely complex sport of baseball.
And maybe this is how it is with Buffy and Angel fans, as well.
We've all had our gripes about the last two seasons, about how
we're not quite satisfied with the ending or the direction of
either series. But none of us disputes the brilliance of Joss
Whedon's original vision, and how it has affected our lives. So
we keep coming back, year after year, hoping for another "championship"
season.
I'm at the stadium every Wedensday night. Masq is at the gate,
and takes my ticket. See you all in Section 37.
Play ball.
[> [> you lucky dog. Not the same as a bad dog but close
-- sdev, 23:10:43 10/18/03 Sat
[> [> ok, that undercuts what i was gonna write...almost
-- anom, 23:41:21 10/18/03 Sat
Except I'd go a little beyond this:
"But none of us disputes the brilliance of Joss Whedon's
original vision..."
...to say most of us think even seasons 6 & 7 were still better
than most of what's on TV. In other words, whatever the outcome
& whoever you rooted for, wasn't that still great baseball?
But you got that last part covered, didn't you?
[> [> How awesome was that? -- oceloty, 00:40:31
10/19/03 Sun
Baseball, Buffy, Angel, and philosophy, all in one. Thanks.
And this is coming from a Cubs / Red Sox fan, no less.
[> [> A home run of a post! Or is it touchdown? Who can
remember these things? But great work, cjl! -- Ponygirl, 09:18:38
10/19/03 Sun
[> [> [> Re: Thanks, you managed to sooth this broken
heart of a long-time Red Sox fan -- Brian, 14:43:58 10/19/03
Sun
And there is always NEXT YEAR!
[> [> [> [> *hugs to Brian from a life long fan
of the Cubbies* -- celticross, 22:43:11 10/19/03 Sun
[> [> [> I'm with Ponygirl. And I did get the original
intent. -- Rochefort, 20:26:14 10/19/03 Sun
[> [> [> [> When I say "WITH" I mean
I agree with her, not that we're dating. -- Rochefort, 20:28:12
10/19/03 Sun
[> [> [> [> [> What? I'm agreeable but not datable?
-- Ponygirl, 06:50:31 10/20/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> You're very datable, pg.
-- cjl, 07:04:22 10/20/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, cjl! See
Rochefort, you big cootie! -- Ponygirl, 08:15:30 10/20/03
Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hollllllllllllllllld
on...... I said we weren't "dating".... -- Rochefort,
11:02:03 10/20/03 Mon
Not that you weren't dateable...
but now, I don't know. Since you think I'm a big cootie maybe
I won't ask you out. :P
Rochefort
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> *maybe*
you won't? you mean... -- anom, 12:06:59 10/20/03 Mon
...you were thinking about it? And does that mean it didn't work
out w/Rob? And what about Kerry?
Cootie, shmootie, Ponygirl--he's just too fickle! You're
not the one who isn't datable! @>)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I
know, but when Roch flutters his quotation marks at me I just
can't resist! -- Ponygirl, 12:13:41 10/20/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Your commas are kinda hard to turn down themselves. : )
-- Rochefort, 19:49:14 10/20/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
wow, & they're not even the curly kind! @>) -- anom,
20:54:42 10/20/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> that's
kind of true.... -- Rochefort, 19:41:17 10/20/03 Mon
I just got dumped yesterday, to tell the truth. lol. In our parting
agreement, I signed papers that absolved her of any responsibility
and that declared myself "certifiably not dateable".
Actually the exact wording was something like "Although I
am handsome, charming, kind, and understanding, I am also in love
with Kerry Butler, prone to using men to go see plays that Kerry
Butler is in, more concerned with my play than I am with love,
more concerned with my academic career than I am with love, more
attracted to Charlie Chaplin than to most women, and also messy,
skinny, and incoridgably and constantly singing Once More with
Feeling songs."
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Still sounds like a catch! (though the Kerry Butler thing is
a little strange) -- Ponygirl, 06:54:40 10/21/03 Tue
[> [> Sure, now I'm ticket-taker girl -- Masq, 15:11:07
10/19/03 Sun
So I'm either taking tickets, driving the van, or weilding the
mop after a particularly bloody round between posters and the
Voynak demon.
*Next thing you know, I'll be flipping burgers at DoubleMeat Palace*
; )
[> [> [> Ah, Masq. You have surprisingly little faith
in one of your devoted acolytes. -- cjl, 09:30:18 10/20/03
Mon
In "The Rescue" and the baseball essay, you are far
more than just a van driver and a ticket girl. You are the Gate
Keeper, the guardian of realms waiting beyond the facade of the
normal world. You are Charon, guiding your loyal battalion of
ATPers safely across the divide and into Joss Whedon's dark and
seductive universe.
As befitting a Gate Keeper, your faces are many-fold, and your
names are Legion. You are our friend and our Queen, the First
Evil, but ever a source of virtue and clarity. You are changeable
and elusive, but ever a source of stability for those who come
into your realm.
You are the ever-vigilant guardian of the borderlands. You are
the source of our power.
You are Masq.
[> [> [> [> Jeepers -- Masq, 11:12:00 10/20/03
Mon
Now I'm blushing.
How can I wallow in my "I'm just the janitor" self-image
when you go on like that?
[> [> [> [> Hmmm.... -- LittleBit, 11:36:38
10/20/03 Mon
Think we can fit all that on a suitable plaque by, say, July?
:-)
[> [> Beyond the Tragic Vision, or Beautiful Losers
-- mamcu, 19:51:00 10/19/03 Sun
Isn't it interesting that the fans of the teams and shows that
fail are MORE devoted than the fans of the winners? I haven't
ever checked but I wonder if there are discussion boards for ER
(a show I admitted to liking, but....) with anything like the
intensity of this one, just Cub and BoSox fans watch their teams
each year with the great passion of the end of La Boheme. Can't
imagine Yankee fans feel that dark thrill--sort of like the bite
of a vampire, love and death at once.
[> [> [> we have the Mets for "that dark thrill"
-- sdev, 16:07:21 10/20/03 Mon
[> Also sounds like NL to me -- mamcu, 19:43:27 10/19/03
Sun
[> My Favorite Years -- Claudia, 13:03:53 10/20/03
Mon
The ironic thing about that article is that the last 3 or 4 seasons
of BUFFY are my favorites. Especially Seasons 5 and 7.
[> Re: Now, that's entertainment! -- Brian, 10:02:24
10/17/03 Fri
[> Everytime I hear someone say "He was completely
out of character in "Seeing Red"" -- Majin
Gojira, 14:41:36 10/17/03 Fri
I want to ask them "Why" and "How Should they have
acted?".
And when they give their answer (which I can just imagine right
now), I would ask them "You know how badly that would destroy
the flow of the season? the theme that they were reaching for?"
[> [> And that would be a bad thing WHY? -- Doug,
15:55:24 10/17/03 Fri
I mean was there a single redeemable aspect to season 6 after
the musical; any aspect of it where the characters were allowed
to remain in-character, rather than being jerked around into the
required position to pull off the latest mediocre and badly thought
out plot? From Magic Crack to yellow crayons there wasn't much
there that didn't deserve to be destroyed. You want to know how
many of the people I know personally who were watching the show
at the end of Season 5 but had given up before "Grave"?
Let me put it this way: I was the only one left.
[> [> [> I sadly shake my head in pity for your friends
-- Ponygirl, Treasurer, Season 6 Defenders Brigade, 07:14:33
10/18/03 Sat
[> [> [> Notice how he didn't answer my questions
and simply responed with an opinionated rant. -- Majin Gojira,
07:51:44 10/18/03 Sat
The "I didn't like what they did, so it SUCKS" mentality
is very annoying. It assumes divine superiority in ones own opinion
with no resepect for what others think. I've been a conosure of
Bad Movies for years and I always see redeming value in almost
all of them. The ideas in many bad movies are sound, they are
rarely delivered properly (hence, one of the reasons they are
bad).
I can understand if someone understands what the creators were
going for but did not like how they did it. THat's perfectly ok.
But it appears that most complainers of S6 and S7 were not able
to grasp what Joss and co were trying to do (which, could be taken
as "I didn't like how they tried to accomplish whatever they
were trying to do because I did not understand it", which
is also fine).
Example of how to complain about creative media:
"I don't like Britney Spears. Why? Aside from my general
dislike of the style she performs in, her singing is loaded with
nasal intonalities that make most music majors cringe."
See: EVIDENCE! Opinions are not touted as facts. Neither did I
say the singer in question was horrible, I told it as my opinion,
not fact (the fact that I did provide solid evidence to support
my opinion makes it harder to refute).
And, by the way, since you didn't even bother to address my questions:
Concession Accepted. Have a Nice Day.
[> [> Answering your questions -- s'kat, 09:32:30
10/18/03 Sat
Actually there's a huge thread in the archives that shows various
opinions on how and why they should have acted differently. It's
an interesting debate - and I believe can be found in May 2002
archives - Seeing Red.
Most people don't have problems with how Spike acted as much as
Buffy - who they had to weaken in order for it to work. The difficulty
with this is precedent stands against
what they did. It's not like this is the first time some guy has
tried to violate Buffy. Yet in all the prior instances she threw
them off instantly - no crying, no fear, - The Pack, Several scenes
with Angelus in S2, Go Fish, to name a few. Also it's been demonstrated
throughout S6 and S2-Harsh Light of Day, that Buffy can take Spike.
Plus the injury with the grave? Please, that doesn't work when
we see Buffy take down Glory after falling off a tower, or even
in the episodes that follow seeing Buffy fight when hurt in far
worse ways. The scene was out of character for the show - and
that was what jarred many viewers. Also Spike walking into her
bathroom and her not kicking him out seemed a tad odd.
What should they have done? Well - it may have worked a lot better
if they'd had it happen in the graveyard where she was injured.
Have him bite her, get repulsed by it, then take off. It certainly
was foreshadowed. (Spike in Wrecked saying if you don't stop being
a bitch, I might just bite you?) And the whole biting thing sticks
with the metaphor for rape that they play up in Never Leave Me.
(Spike telling Buffy about draining girls of blood and stopping
at just the right point, so they cry?) Add to that Spike's past
history with Buffy and slayers - the biting would have been perfect
and would have made a lot more sense with his speech to Clem afterwards.
It's more in keeping with the character and the mythos of the
show. And just as horrible as the AR, if not more so. Not to mention
how much more room it would have given the writers to maneuvre
in the next season. Honestly, I think it would have worked far
better storywise if they'd had it happen in the graveyard and
had him bite her. Just as I think their original idea for Tara's
death - in a coffee shop would have worked better.
But for production and budget reasons they decided to simplify
things and do both in Buffy's house. For many fans - what they
did pushed suspension of disbelief to their limits, and they bailed.
Seeing Red had the lowest ratings that season 2.9 national average.
Rumor has it ME should have been prepared for the reaction - since
they used Buffy Cross and Stake as a focus group. BC&S was spoiled
on it and went crazy - they hated the spoilers.
But ME did it any way. Was it a good decision? Did it work?
That depends on your point of view. Many posters on this board
actually enjoyed Seeing Red, appreciated the themes.
Many hated it. Both sides make very good points. Most of the people
who disliked it - were not upset so much by the themes addressed
or the darkness, what upset them was the execution which they
felt lacked something.
[> [> [> See, now that's a proper response! --
Majin Gojira, 10:38:43 10/18/03 Sat
Well put. And well thought out. I'm sad I missed the big discussion
on this and will now search the archives for it. If half the posts
are as good as this one, it will be well worth it.
[> [> [> [> Thank you ;-) -- s'kat, 21:54:05
10/18/03 Sat
[> [> [> Precedents cut both ways -- Rook, 17:21:30
10/18/03 Sat
The problem is , that there's as much evidence that indicates
the SR scene was "typical" for Buffy as there is evidence
that it was "out of character":
"Also it's been demonstrated throughout S6 and S2-Harsh Light
of Day, that Buffy can take Spike"
And there's also evidence that he can take her: School Hard and
OOMM.
"Plus the injury with the grave? Please, that doesn't work
when we see Buffy take down Glory after falling off a tower"
Maybe...but it is very similar to the hit she took in WttH when
Luke threw her against the coffin, and would have subsequently
killed her if not for Angel's cross.
Buffy's powers, strength, etc. are very inconsistent: In The Harvest,
she can't beat down the door to the Bronze. In OMWF, she kicks
it in with ease. In Sleeper, a group of vamps easily captures
Buffy and holds her for Spike. In Into the Woods she easily defeats
a similar ambush.
I could go on with the examples, both with Buffy and others powers,
but suffice it to say that the fact that the show has always had
these raging inconsitencies leaves me puzzled as to why these
other episodes don't draw similar ire from the people that have
a problem with SR.
And as for this bit: "Seeing Red had the lowest ratings that
season 2.9 national average." would logically be more of
a reflection on Entropy than SR. For an accurate judge of SR's
effect on viewrship, you should look at the ratings for villains,
which raise to 3.2 and continue to increase for the remainder
of the season, indicating that the buzz from SR actually cause
people that had left following Entropy to tune back in.
[> [> [> [> Re: Precedents cut both ways --
s'kat, 18:20:40 10/18/03 Sat
I could go on with the examples, both with Buffy and others
powers, but suffice it to say that the fact that the show has
always had these raging inconsitencies leaves me puzzled as to
why these other episodes don't draw similar ire from the people
that have a problem with SR.
Re-watch the scenes if you get a chance and note the difference
in filming, editing, color. In the other scenes there's a sort
of cheesy techno-color schematic, it's not realistic so much as
surrealistic. This film technique announces to the viewer in big
bold letters - "suspend your disbelief" - "don't
take this seriously".
For instance in School Hard - Spike's in vamp face, we have the
shadows, lots of color and a comedic edge. Same with Harsh Light
of Day. Same with Luke in Harvest, vamp face and in a tomb. It
has a pseudo-comic book quality that indicates to the audience
that we aren't supposed to take it too seriously - that it is
metaphorical.
In Seeing Red - the writers stripped away all the metaphors. Spike
wasn't in vamp face. Buffy's not in a cute outfit. Both wear no
color at all. We suddenly were no longer watching a vampire slayer
and a vampire. The metaphor was stripped away. Completely. So
were the surrealistic tones. It was a white room stripped of color
not unlike someone's bathroom in their home. It wasn't a grave-yard
or a cheesy school hallway. Instead of watching Buffy the Vampire
Slayer - we were watching a tired drab Buffy fight off a sexual
assault from her boyfriend, Spike. If you had never seen BTVS
before and came into that scene - you would have thought it was
Law and Order or any other more realistic mainstream show. The
big neon - "Don't take us seriously" and "suspend
disbelief signs" were removed.
By doing that they ask you "not" to suspend disbelief,
they are being real, you are being told to take this seriously,
that it's not just a show - you can't do that and then switch
to supergirl turning over an armoured truck and throwing a boy
across the room the very next scene. It is jarring to your audience.
By removing the suspend disbelief sign - you allow the audience
to question everything on the screen - so that the scenes that
are supposed to be cheesy or humorous suddenly seem stupid and
inane or campy. That's why people reacted to SR differently than
Harvest. Harvest maintained the same tone throughout - it did
not shift from real world to supernatural Buffyverse. Another
way of looking at it would be if you are reading a post and someone
suddenly shifts their tone from conversational to academic in
a sentence. Or they go from prudish saying things like dang to
suddenly using foul language - you get jarred, you stop trusting
them.
In S6 the showrunners did something incredibly ambitious and risky
for a cult tv show, something I applaud them for and have never
seen anyone else try (and after seeing them attempt it? I think
there is a very good reason others haven't tried it or if they
have didn't do it again). I think this attempt caused problems,
in attempting to strip away the metaphors of the show while keeping
them at the same time - they confused a high percentage of their
audience (not everyone, but a good majority).
The problem with changing tone like that is you confuse the viewer
- the viewer who isn't in on your game plan can only go by what
they see on the screen and when they are getting metaphors and
comic book images one minute and stripped of metaphor reality
the next, in the same episode, not more than fifteen minutes apart,
some viewers balk. Not all viewers. Some viewers don't have the
patience to suspend disbelief long enough to watch the show at
all - vampires don't exist, etc. Other viewers will suspend disbelief
but only if there's some semblance of continuity - to this group
the introduction of scenes like the attempted rape/bathroom scene
and the magic bullet that killed Tara - are too distracting. They
find themselves asking questions like - why didn't she push him
off immediately? And how is she a victim, she knocked him across
the room? And excuse me, he's not even in vamp face which means
he's weaker there than she is, technically.
They can accept the other episodes where she seems weaker -b/c
Harvest? Luke's in vamp face, Harsh Light - vamp face, School
Hard - vamp face. The viewers who don't mind as much are the ones
who can suspend no matter what and are more interested in film
risks and lightening and how it reflects story structure. Then
there's the group who is into all the film risks, etc, but still
is jarred by the switches and feels that the same thing could
have been done in a different way and be far more powerful and
add far more to the story, without jarring the audience. As one
group of critics put it (Entertainment Geekly) at the time - when
did SMG get replaced by MEredith Baxter Birney? (A short hand
way of basically stating what I stated above.)
You May Have Your Own View on this. OR Your Mileage May Vary.
All I'm doing is presenting the other views. I don't expect you
to agree with them necessarily - I'm just stating they are valid
points and the reasons that many fans did not like that episode
and had troubles with the season.
Sorry for not addressing the other points. I don't want to get
into another debate on SR - I feel I've beaten this dead horse
one too many times already as many people on this board, I'm sure,
can testify to. ;-) (Check the archives for all of our debates
- we had one every three months since the episode aired. The latest
was this summer I think.) All I wanted to do was explain the point
cjl made in his essay a little to Majin. (ie. Why many people
had that view.)
For the record, my thoughts on Seeing Red are sort of murky at
the moment. I sort of fall within the fans who found the episode
ambitious and risky yet at the same time poorly concieved for
reasons stated above.
Hope that made a modicum of sense. ;-)
sk
[> [> [> [> [> I agree (RE: S6 in general)
-- Rook, 18:56:48 10/18/03 Sat
While I like S6, and generally come to its defense, you've touched
on the one area where I think it went wrong.
One of the great things about BtVS was always the mixture off
mood/genre/tone/whatever. The ability to smoothly switch from
something campy and silly to something deadly serious to something
touching without missing a beat was a hallmark of the show. It's
something that's brought up by fans and in many of the writer/director/actor
interviews and commentary.
The biggest problem in season 6 is that they pushed everything
to an extreme. The grim scenes were starkly hopeless, and the
surreal or comedic scenes were beyond absurd. This really reaches
it's crescendo in smashed, with the utterly ridiculous Amy/Willow
sequence in the bronze is contrasted with the grim brutality of
the first Spuffy fight/sex sequence. Occasionally it works well
(most notably in the Katrina/Trio rape scene in Dead Things, which
switches from silly-stupid to horrifying more smoothly than any
other such transition in the entire run of the series, IMO) but
often it just doesn't. The transitions are too jarring, or the
metaphors too thin to support the change from the absurd to the
realistic.
However, in spite of this, it really only seriously bothers me
in a few episodes (Smashed, Wrecked, As You Were, Hell's Bells
and Tabula Rasa), while in other episodes it works well (Dead
Things, OMWF, and Life Serial), And in some it either isn't present,
or if it is, I really don't particularly notice it either way.
SR fits into that last category, and I never felt that it was
inconsistent with the way I understood Spike's character, or with
the the relative powers and abilities of Buffy.
[> [> [> [> [> [> No. No. No...you misunderstand.
-- s'kat, 21:37:56 10/18/03 Sat
The grim scenes were starkly hopeless, and the surreal or comedic
scenes were beyond absurd. This really reaches it's crescendo
in smashed, with the utterly ridiculous Amy/Willow sequence in
the bronze is contrasted with the grim brutality of the first
Spuffy fight/sex sequence. Occasionally it works well (most notably
in the Katrina/Trio rape scene in Dead Things, which switches
from silly-stupid to horrifying more smoothly than any other such
transition in the entire run of the series, IMO) but often it
just doesn't. The transitions are too jarring, or the metaphors
too thin to support the change from the absurd to the realistic.
However, in spite of this, it really only seriously bothers me
in a few episodes (Smashed, Wrecked, As You Were, Hell's Bells
and Tabula Rasa), while in other episodes it works well (Dead
Things, OMWF, and Life Serial), And in some it either isn't present,
or if it is, I really don't particularly notice it either way.
SR fits into that last category, and I never felt that it was
inconsistent with the way I understood Spike's character, or with
the the relative powers and abilities of Buffy.
No, no, no...I didn't mean changes in mood. I'm not talking about
emotional reactions to the episodes. That's a whole other topic.
I was talking about something else entirely. A film technique.
Dropping metaphors. The difference between how something in BTVS
and ATS are filmed in contrast to something in Law and Order,
ER, or NYPD Blue. BTVS uses a very high color, dark undertone
in its stock, also has lots of metaphorical images and makeup,
the vampire makeup for example.
You're talking about tone in silly to serious which the show always
did do well - when it didn't strip away the metaphors. While Smashed,
Wrecked, As You Were, Hell's Bells and Tabula Rasa may have had
plot problems that were jarring or inconsistencies - their inconsistencies
weren't in filming/editing/production color and tone or even costume
or makeup in the sense of going from surreal to realistic to campy
surreal again. They didn't go from Buffy the Vampire Slayer style
to Law and Order style.
How to explain this. Okay, let me try this:
Smashed doesn't strip away the metaphors anywhere in it.
The whole Spuffy sequence was about a building falling down, hugely
metaphorical. The two characters were super-strong. Neither hurt.
Buffy throws Spike through a wall, he gets up. He throws Buffy
through a wall, she gets up and throws him through one. They have
sex, smashing walls down and fall through the floor still going,
they are clearly vamp and slayer, even if he's not in vamp face.
We got the long coat/cape, we got her in pretty clothes. She's
on top the whole way. Huge neon sign - suspend your disbelief
- this ain't real, it's fantasy, it's surreal and its metaphorical.
Same with Willow and Amy, which was hardly silly or funny - actually
I found Willow's scenes far more disturbing than Spike/Buffy.
But that's beside the point. How you reacted emotionally to these
episodes or the "emotional" tone - ie. silly or grim
isn't what I'm trying to discuss here. (My mistake was not being
clearer on what I meant by tone - I don't mean emotional tone,
I mean tonal qualities in respect to use of color in film stock
or use of metaphor. What I mean is how you'd feel if you jumped
from BTVS to an episode of a starkly realistically filmed show
say Law and Order in mid-reel. Not how you'd feel if you jumped
from Friends to ER. But how you'd feel if you jumped from BTVS
to Friends. Not drama to comedy, fantasy to reality. A good example
is what they successfully did in Normal Again - where we jumped
from colorful Buffverse to white/black/drained of color realistic
Asylumverse. They did the same thing in Seeing Red, except they
didn't have a device or gimmick like Normal Again did - they didn't
give the audience a clear idea of why the flip was happening.
They intentionally didn't give the audience that flip - so you
would reacte emotionally to the attempted rape the way you did.
Note very few people reacted negatively to Xander's similar attempt
to rape Buffy in The Pack or Faith's attempt to rape Xander in
Consequences, or Spike's attack of Willow in The Initiative, or
any number of these scenes. Why? They didn't flip you into reality
like they did in Seeing Red.)
In Smashed - there's huge neo signs throughout the episode that
it's metaphorical. We got magic. We got superstrength wrestling
and sex with walls falling down. I mean honestly what's realistic
about someone being thrown across the room into a wall, the ceiling
falling on them and surviving?
You have to suspend disbelief in Smashed. No where in Smashed
do we switch to reality. The film color, the music, the fantasy
trappings stay intact throughout. Seeing Red in contrast - had
no music, no background cords, and was filmed in the same film
stock/color as the Asylum scenes in Normal Again. Stripped of
color and music. Real film style.
Wrecked - we have Willow on the ceiling. Bright, pretty colors,
lots of music. She magically enhances a dress. She's being chased
by a monster. Buffy asks Spike when the building fell down. He
says she has the hots for vampires and threatens to bite her if
she's a bitch again. Loads of metaphor. Nothing stripped. Doesn't
look "real" like the Asylumverse at all.
Tabula Rasa - that has huge neon signs of Suspension of Disbelief
and Metaphor. Yes it jumps from tragedy to silliness and the changes
can be jarring, but the metaphors are intact throughout. But we
got music, we got background noises, we got pretty colors.
The Body - it strips some of the metaphors away but when the vampire
appears in the morgue, we expect it, so it's not jarring, although
some critics disliked that and said it was since went back to
metaphor and suspension of disbelief, but it didn't bug me because
even the vampire scene stuck within the same color scheme and
film schematics. The Body may not have had music - but it didn't
have it all the way through. It kept the same film style througout.
Even the vampire in the morgue fit the same color scheme, the
same no background music scheme. Also it kept subtle metaphors.
It switched to comedy and tragedy, it changed mood. But again
it's not mood I'm discussing exactly - it's film technique, style.
Like Normal Again, the Body stayed consistent. Normal Again set
up two consistent realities - but we always knew where we were
because both were linked with a device that made sense to us.
Same with the Body - it set up a film style that affected mood
but it was set up in the beginning and stayed that way througout.
As You Were - bad plotting. But the color scheme and metaphors
were consistent throughout. They never stripped them completely.
We had background music in every scene, we had colors, the film
stock stayed the same. Dark with color. Buffy is on a very dark
film stock by the way, I often have to turn out the lights to
see it. The AR scene in Seeing Red - was the brightest film stock
I'd seen in a while. The rest of the episode was on darker stock,
only that scene was on light stock.
Hell's Bells - same thing. It stayed consistently metaphorical.
The demons at the wedding. The mood may be jarring but the metaphors
are there. Also we got music, we got pretty colors, the film stock
tonal qualities never really change.
See the problem with the bathroom scene is how it was filmed.
Not how it was written. They filmed it on realistic film stock,
almost white-washed, gritty - similar to the film stock you see
on Homicide Life on The Street or NYPD Blue, Documentary film
stock - where the colors if they are there are muted, everything
seems stripped of color. There are no music chords or background
sounds outside of the actors voices. Actors makeup is muted. Buffy
has almost none on. Both actors appear smaller, diminished somehow,
more real, less like fantasy characters. It's a brilliant work
of film. The directing uses field of illusions to show the actors
being closer than they are. It is probably the most terrifying
attempted rape sequence I've seen on TV in quite a while. And
it's all done through the film techniques I mentioned above. Highly
manipulative. And I'd applaud it if it happened on Law and Order
or NYPD Blue or ER or Homicide or Sopranos. If it appeared on
those shows? It would have probably been nominated for an Emmy
along with the two actors who pulled it off. But it wasn't. It
was on Buffy. Worse - it was on an episode of Buffy, where in
the scenes that bracketed it, actually every other scene of the
episode we do have bright colors, background music, darker film
stock. It was like jumping from Homicide Life on The Street back
to BTVS in minutes. So what we have is big neon sign "suspend
disbelief" to "don't suspend, this real kids" back
to "suspend disbelief". I had whiplash.
Normal Again does the same thing - but it does it all the way
through the episode, it is explained. Seeing Red only did it for
the Attempted Rape scene. Highlighting it.
That was the problem many people had with that scene and episode.
Not the switch from comedy or silliness to grimness, that didn't
bug them, it was the filming switch from "harsh" realism
almost documentary style to "fantasy".
Hope that's clearer. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
sk
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> ugh typos. Sorry.
Keep getting kicked off my service. -- s'kat, 21:45:47
10/18/03 Sat
I've been kicked off every ten minutes, three times in writing
above post, so didn't take time to read through and edit.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: No. No. No...you
misunderstand. -- Rook, 21:52:59 10/18/03 Sat
Ok, I get your point now. I never really noticed that, but then
again I've only seen SR on a medium quality VCD on the computer
(the same is true for all of S5 and 6) so it may be more obvious
when I eventually get the DVDs.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Ah. That really
does make a difference.. -- s'kat, 22:00:38 10/18/03 Sat
I never really noticed that, but then again I've only seen
SR on a medium quality VCD on the computer (the same is true for
all of S5 and 6) so it may be more obvious when I eventually get
the DVDs.
Makes a huge difference. Things are more muted on computers. I
just watched several VCD episodes on my computer tonight and it's
not the same. One was the unedited version of Smashed. The original
I saw on TV, actually I now have DTV so it's even clearer with
even more vivid color and sound.
Television is such a visual medium, particularly these shows -
Whedon from the get-go made a point of emphasizing the visual
qualities over the other qualities, making the show almost "film-like"
in how it was produced. It really would make a difference. I'll
be curious to know if you notice a difference when you get the
DVD's.
[> relieving the Champion -- sdev, 19:58:13 10/17/03
Fri
Can you blame viewers if they see hubris when after many innings
of exemplary pitching Angel wouldn't come off the mound and allow
a relief Champion? Will hubris affect his outcome as it did some
after him?
Reply to Sophist's Just-archived-message
-- Rahael, 09:40:15 10/17/03 Fri
I've written it, so I might as well post it.
Snerk, re Season six. And re Hell's Bells, my attitude was: "but
you don't deserve Anya! She had a lucky escape!"
There's a reason why I'm a Giles/Anya shipper.
I think Xander was less 'wrong' than Wood and Giles were shown
to be. For instance in Season 2, Angelus actually killed Jenny.
Giles didn't let Angel into the house without pointing a crossbow
at him after that, and I certainly didn't go "tut, he's being
so unfair to Angel!". There was more power in Giles' stinging
rebuke to Buffy. In fact, the only time Xander was clearly in
the wrong was when he sicced Faith on to Angel, and then kind
of regretted it. And Angel certainly didn't threaten Faith or
Xander as a result.
In fact, as an unspoiled viewer, I was in tenterhooks all the
way through, and I was always afraid that Xander would get proved
right (and as an example of how unspoiled I was, when I heard
that Angel was getting a spin off, I was like: "oh, so we
get to see all the stuff he gets up to when he's not with Buffy?"
and was most surprised when he Went And Left Sunnydale!
Looking back, I think Angel did need to leave. The proposition
was creaking. AtS is much the better vehicle for him. He gets
to express all his ambiguity without the soul being the be all
and end all of morality. Because it isn't, and Angel, with his
soul, can still do the most terrible things.
Replies:
[> Darla as Angel's Soulmate -- Sara, 10:04:27 10/19/03
Sun
Angel, with his soul, can still do the most terrible things.
We've been rewatching the first two season's of Angel and I was
struck by how connected Angel was to Darla, even before she decided
to accept her soul. My theory is that Darla is as much of his
soulmate as Buffy is. What we've seen of Liam shows us a flawed
person with potential for good. His father brings out the worst
in him, his little sister shows there is a capability for love
and affection.
Buffy resonates with the side of his character that wants to be
good and he loves her for that. Darla resonates with his dark
side attracted to pleasure and his own needs, and he can't help
loving her on some level. Angelus would not have been as evil
without Darla as tutor. Angel would not have been as good without
his relationship with Buffy. I think that Buffy and Darla are
two sides of the coin that make up Angel.
When he goes after Darla, even while still fighting evil, it becomes
all about how he feels and what he needs, instead of about what
is right and who needs to be helped. Thats why he fires the rest
of AI - they wouldn't be willing to make the big decisions based
on what will give Angel the satisfication he craves.
The Angel fighting alongside of Buffy doesn't let demons kill
people, even if they are bad, lawyer type people. The Angel that
relates to Darla doesn't just allow lawyers to be fed on, he facilites
it by locking them in.
Just something that came up during a walk Darbs and I took. This
seemed like a good place to insert it.
- Sara, who loves all the layers and levels and moral complexitiy
[> [> Angel/Darla -- Rahael, 14:59:02 10/19/03
Sun
You are talking to the converted. I'm nuts about Angel and Darla
- and it dates back to season 2. For a long time, I didn't really
see the point of Darla. I got put off of Season 2 because she
played such a major role. But Season 3 blew my mind, and I went
back and realised that I missed something the first time round.
When I rewatched the Angel/Darla conversation where she declares:
"God doesn't want you....but I still do!" Shivers!
There really is an incredibly connection and I totally agree with
you about Buffy and Darla being two sides of the same coin. One
drew him down to hell, one toward the light. Yet sleeping with
Darla saved him, and Buffy had the opposite effect. It riffs nicely
of the happiness clause. Angel finds his greatest, hardest truths
in pain (in Amends he declares to Buffy that it's the man, not
the monster that needs to be killed - Angel's first great speech).
Darla seems to own Angel, man and monster. I guess she made him.
In Darla is the answer to why there's such a blurred line between
man and monster. Every time she appears, she makes him look more
interesting, more complex, more epic.
[> [> [> Re: Angel/Darla -- Sara, 16:55:54
10/19/03 Sun
Oh boy - I just looooved that comparison between the effects of
sleeping with Darla vs. Buffy - that one went right by me! Fascinating
point!
[> [> [> [> Why do you think the two eps were called
"Surprise" and "Reprise" -- Masq, 22:15:54
10/19/03 Sun
[> Re: Reply to Sophist's Just-archived-message -- Sophist,
10:39:20 10/17/03 Fri
I'm not sure how we lost the thread when it was still so active.
My response to sdev is above.
I certainly didn't go "tut, he's being so unfair to Angel!".
I must have a weakness for souled vampires, because I sure did.
I first started getting angry with Xander in Passion, felt more
strongly in Becoming, and had given up on him by the end of Revelations.
I think this all gets back to our metaphysics: are the souled
vamps different creatures than the unsouled? They are to me. But
I can see how those who disagree would see the events of LMPTM
in a very different light.
[> [> Are unsouled vamps different than souled? --
s'kat, 15:37:38 10/17/03 Fri
I think this all gets back to our metaphysics: are the souled
vamps different creatures than the unsouled?
Herein lies the crux of many a board arguement. But is it one
about metaphysics or about subtext in the show itself?
Is it actually more an argument about the actual structure of
the story? I honestly don't think Whedon believes in souls per
se - but sees them as a plot device or contrivance if you will
to distinquish the "good" vampire from the "evil"
vampire - so that Buffy doesn't become a murderer. If we did not
have this contrivance, if there was "no" difference
between souled and unsouled vampires than the vampire slayer's
role becomes incredibly murky and we end up with cjl's snarky
rendition of testing each vamp as he rises from the grave. Whedon
has started the story with the hypothesis that all vampires are
evil, Angel was not meant to last more than a season and Spike
no more than ten episodes if that. Unfortunately or fortunately
depending on your pov - ratings went up when Angel and Spike were
on. So Whedon came up with a tactic to distinquish them. With
Angel is was the soul. With Spike a chip and gradually the soul.
Because otherwise it would make no sense story wise to keep them
alive.
Regardless of your views about souls or conscience - the story's
structure requires a tad more black and white view on it - in
order to work. Therefore while the soul does not make Angel or
Spike necessarily good, it gives them a second chance, they are
no longer the purely evil vampire that Buffy must kill on contact.
They can choose to be evil or good. Without a soul they could
only be evil.
[> [> [> Re: Are unsouled vamps different than souled?
-- Dlgood, 10:24:52 10/19/03 Sun
So Whedon came up with a tactic to distinquish them. With Angel
is was the soul. With Spike a chip and gradually the soul. Because
otherwise it would make no sense story wise to keep them alive.
-------------------------------------
See, right there, I think something's missing.
"Becoming" set up a clear argument as to why certain
Vampires might be kept alive.
1) Whistler's comment that not all demons are devoted to the destruction
of life
2) Spike's claim that he liked the world
A case could be made that Buffy might have to make certain deals
with certain monsters. She could kill Spike, knowing he would
otherwise keep killing humans. But she let him live, because he
was useful in stopping an apocalypse. Just as Spike could try
to kill Buffy, but might be motivated to leave her alive because
she could stop the world from going to hell.
In the effort to show Spike become a good, souled creature - ME
had lost that storyline. Namely, would it occasionally make sense
for the slayer and demons to ally in the face of greater threats.
That people can fight with you without being on your side, or
fight opposed to you without actually being against you. How would
Buffy deal with those sorts of situations? By chipping Spike so
that he couldn't hurt humans, and having him fall in love with
Buffy - it's a possibility and ambiguity the show ignored in favor
of a more simplistic viewpoint.
I would have found S7 far more interesting if included in Buffy's
army against the FE, were some human citizens of Sunnydale, and
some demons opposed to the FE. Neither of which liked each other,
but recognized as helpful in pursuing a congruent aim. It would
have put forward a far more interesting stufy of alliances than
what S7 presented.
[> [> Yes, I agree -- Rahael, 08:25:57 10/18/03
Sat
I think that's at the crux of our differing perspectives.
In the early seasons, I was pretty blind to most of the characters
except Buffy and Giles. So Angel was pretty much, like the other
characters the source of drama and tension and humour, but not
someone I really thought a lot about. I was really surprised when
I went online that everyone kept talking about Spike and how goodlooking
he was. The character hadn't registered that much on my radar!
And as for Angel, I remember thinking "what a pity he isn't
that goodlooking" Hah! I obviously reversed that judgement
significantly, but only when he got his own series and I started
going "wow, he had depth".
So until then I was pretty heartless toward the souled vamp thing.
I would be really interested in how I react to Spike if he got
his own series.
Future Spoilers for Spike
and Angel for Shanshuing? -- deathdealer, 10:10:25 10/17/03
Fri
From one of the spoiler websites it says in the 8th or ninth Spike
will contend with Angel to become human. Spike wins because he
wanted it more than Angel. I think the Senior Partners want Angel
a vampire forever purpose that is. They would need Spike out of
the way so it would make Angel's final fight even harder because
of what one Vampire with soul needs to do than two.
Replies:
[> No question...DEFINITE FUTURE SPOILERS ABOVE -- dub
10:34:50 10/17/03 Fri
[> Re: Future Spoilers for Spike and Angel for Shanshuing?
-- lele, 10:35:17 10/17/03 Fri
According to the summary I read neither spike nor angel become
human and although spike wins a shanshu related fight it's not
resolved who's really 'supposed' to shanshu.
I think spoilerslayer.com has some info and bubonicplague wrote
a summary for ep8 on the spoiler thread at www.sparklies.org
[> Re: Future Spoilers for Spike and Angel for Shanshuing?
-- skeeve, 12:54:09 10/17/03 Fri
Why do they need to fight about it?
Angel knows how to become human.
[> [> Re: Future Spoilers for Spike and Angel for Shanshuing?
-- leslie, 16:44:40 10/17/03 Fri
"Why do they need to fight about it?"
Possibly there is oil involved?
[> [> [> Re: Future Spoilers for Spike and Angel for
Shanshuing? -- jane, 17:00:07 10/17/03 Fri
ooh,yes - let there be oil! ;)
Thought on symbolism in "Once
More With Feeling" -- Finn Mac Cool, 21:14:24 10/17/03
Fri
Last week I taped "Once More With Feeling". This is
the first time I've done that for a Buffy episode. I haven't gotten
into the practice before since I'm not exactly rolling in blank
tapes. However, I made an exception for this episode, since I
have found it to be the most rewatchable episode of Buffy the
Vampire Slayer. And, as I've rewatched it several times over the
past week, I think I began to pick up one of those little symbolism
things. So, here goes:
"Into the Fire" is a magnificent song, no doubt, but,
on repeat viewings, you begin to realize the level of depth it
has. While it is a group song, the singers are divided into three
distinct groups (not counting Sweet). Buffy, Spike, and the rest
of the Scooby Gang. Each begins in the Magic Box, and each ends
at the Bronze. But it's how they get there that's telling.
Giles, Xander, Anya, Willow, and Tara walk through a residential
neighborhood. There are almost identical trees and white houses
lining the street they walk down. It's practically a portrait
of suburbia.
Spike walks through a series of alleys. They are filled with crates
and garbage cans, and, where there aren't shadows, there's an
eerie, blue light. Definitely not the good side of town.
Meanwhile, Buffy walks through a commercial district. The buildings
around her are stores made of brick, lit up by large, neon signs.
So, what's my theory about all this? Well, Buffy is torn in two
directions in Season 6. One is to her friends and family; the
other is to Spike. "Into the Fire" manages to symbolise
this quite well. The commercial district Buffy walks through is
a middle ground, not quite as comforting as the Scoobies' stretch
of houses, nor as foreboding as Spike's alleyways. She does not
yet walk the same path as Spike or her friends; instead she's
stuck in the middle, just as she seems to fit into neither world.
Which makes it all the more poignant when, just before the curtain
drops, she follows Spike back into the alley. Once again there's
that eerie mix of shadows and blue light; you can even hear a
siren in the distance. Buffy entering the alley is symbolic of
her going to Spike, of her flirting with the darkness, as she
will continue to do for most of the season.
Of course, it could be I've just been watching that song too much.
Current board
| More October 2003