April 2003 posts


Previous April 2003  

More April 2003

William's Real Mum or Spike's Demon -- Vulpes, 18:49:23 04/04/03 Fri

I have been pondering......
William sired his own mother in Lie My Parents Told Me.
The night after her death she rose as a vampire.
Were the statements Anne made truely how the real Anne felt about William's poetry and attachment to her?

Or was that the cruel statements of a souless demon he made?

Upon reflection, did Spike, in the end just rationalized that his real mother loved him unconditionally and that it was just the demon speaking to torture him? If so, why would the demon want to torture Spike?

I got the impression from the shooting script that the real woman was speaking. And further more, this demon didn't want to live. And wanted William to kill her.

Any comments?
[> Re: William's Real Mum or Spike's Demon -- luvthistle1, 04:08:55 04/05/03 Sat

I think it's anybody guess. I do not think William mother felt that way about him, just that the demon twist everything around, and play on the fact that William was such a goody two shoes. I think it actually could be a little of both. Part of it was probably true. like her wanted him to marry so she can leave. William mother (before turned) was questioning William about his crush. she wanted him to get marry, or just to have someone in his life, because she knew she was dying and did want to leave her son alone, without no one to love.

Why would a demon want to torture Spike?
because demon in some cases ( remember Angelus treatment of Spike) are like bats, they prey on the demons they feel are weak, or not demonic enough.
.. or it considering his mother wasn't vamp long time, maybe part of her wanted him to kill her, and therefore force/baited him into killing her. that could be why it was necessary for her to be shown converting to human face before turning to dust. to show that she was still sweet and it was a way of forcing her son to let go. something that he had a hard time doing.

Spike in the end , hated himself for all those years because he had turned his mother into a monster and had to kill her. he felt guilty and probably wanted to die. which would explain his reckless behavior, of alway getting them hunted. he also never sire anyone else, until season 7 sleepers. ( he did not sire Ford in lie to me, Dru did).
He come to realize that his mother always love him, and that she forgave him.



It also put insight into why he help Dawn try to bring her mother back in "forever". he wanted his mom with him forever. he knew it was wrong, but he also remember how he felt and realize she was going to do it anyway. so he went with her to make sure , if she did it, she would have done it right. also to keep her safe. that was about Buffy. he did not let Buffy know about it.
[> [> Re: William's Real Mum or Spike's Demon -- Vulpes, 06:13:18 04/05/03 Sat

Thanks luvthistle1
For you insights.....
[> [> Re: William's Real Mum or Spike's Demon -- goose, 21:28:35 04/05/03 Sat

What evidence is there that he never sired anyone before Sleeper? And wouldn't Dru have been too weak to sire someone in Lie to Me.
Inside out:Manipulation of the 7 sins -- luvthistle1, 03:41:12 04/05/03 Sat

In inside out Skip tell the gang at "AI" that everything they had done for the past few years had been the works of others. Fred seem to think that their free will was taken away from them. that they didn't control their own destiny. but although, I agree with Fred on some of it, I do not believe their free will was taken away. I believe they where manipulative, and they all fell victims to the 7 sins. They all had free will ( only the soulless do not, as Buffy pointed out to Andrew on Btvs) it was the choices they made, and why they made them, that was the problem. They all made bad decision base on their egos, or inner feeling of mistrust. Just like it was Connor's free will to chose to rather , or not to let the girl go. Most of their choices can be categorize by , one of the seven sins, , Lust, vanity/Pride, Envy,
Greed, gluttony, Wrath/vengeance, and sloth.


Angel -It was "envy "of Angelus/Connor which made Angel go along with the plan to take his soul out. Cordy compared Angel to Angelus, and point out that Angelus was smarter. so he became Angelus, to impress Cordy- not so much rather it was right or wrong or even logic. She also use Connor against him and Angel "envy " Connor's relationship with Cordy. Which created tension and mistrust.

Cordy -it was vanity/Pride, that led Cordy to believe she was capable of becoming a higher being. It was also Cordy's vanity/pride, that led her to chose being a high being. Skip told her , that she was special, he flatter her. She never really thought rather or not she deserve to be a higher being. she never thought that she hasn't did anything more special than, Buffy,Angel etc. She could have kept refusing. would an higher being, not call and check on the baby she claims she loved? will a higher being not visit her best friends in the hospital, after she found out he had his throat slash?



Wesley -It was pride/envy, that would not allow Wes to ask Fred or Gunn for help with the prophecy "about the father killing the son. Wes envy Fred and Gunn's relationship. he also had a mistrust of them , which led him to take the baby Connor. his mistrust was put into play by his feeling of betrayal by his friends Gunn and Fred, who carry on a secret affair behind his back,. although Gunn knew that Wes liked Fred, he did not let that stop him- which made Wes mistrust him and Fred. he never really trusted Angel. With Cordy gone, he had no one he trusted to talk to.

Connor - Lust. it was lust that led Connor to sleep with Cordy and produce a baby that might bring about the end of the world. it 's lust that allow Cordy to manipulate Connor. He never had closeness with a women before, and he was turn down by a hooker , who's life he saved. so, he was by far the easiest to manipulate .


SLOTH could apply to their too-easy reliance on magic when the need a quick solution, and most of them had committed "wrath/vengeance





They all had their free will, but they was all manipulated by their own sins. The same can be said for Btvs.I sure there are more ways we can connect each of them to one of the deadly sins,but You get the idea. so , lets see if we can connect the "AI" gang, or the scoobies to one of the deadly 7 sins.
[> Re: Inside out:Manipulation of the 7 sins -- Dannyblue, 07:22:24 04/05/03 Sat

Wesley -It was pride/envy, that would not allow Wes to ask Fred or Gunn for help with the prophecy "about the father killing the son. Wes envy Fred and Gunn's relationship. he also had a mistrust of them , which led him to take the baby Connor. his mistrust was put into play by his feeling of betrayal by his friends Gunn and Fred, who carry on a secret affair behind his back,. although Gunn knew that Wes liked Fred, he did not let that stop him- which made Wes mistrust him and Fred. he never really trusted Angel. With Cordy gone, he had no one he trusted to talk to.

While I agree with most of what you said here, I must disagree on a few points.

Gunn and Fred didn't have a secret affair behind Wesley's back. Gunn didn't even really betray Wes by pursuing Fred, even though he knew Wes liked her too.

What happened was that both Wes and Gunn liked Fred. Both knew how the other felt, and neither one said, "Please don't go after Fred because I like her." In fact, in "Provider", each made it pretty clear to the other that he was going to pursue Fred.

The difference was that Wes kept waiting for the "right time" to let Fred know how he felt about her. Fearing rejection, he wanted some sign that Fred liked him back in that way and wouldn't reject his affections.

Gunn, on the other hand, wasn't afraid to let Fred know exactly how he felt about her. He didn't wait. And Fred responded.

I think what Wes felt towards Gunn wasn't so much distrust as envy. He looked at Gunn and Fred getting closer and closer, and thought to himself, "If I'd just taken the chance Gunn took, I'd be where he is now." And I think he pulled away from them as much to hide his own pain and anger (because even he knew he didn't really have the right to feel angry at Fred or Gunn) as because he didn't trust them.

You know, I think anger at his own inactivity concerning his feelings for Fred might have been what pushed Wes to take action when he found the "father will kill the son" prophesy.
[> [> But they didn't tell him of their relationship, until -- luvthisle1, 13:35:43 04/05/03 Sat

..much later. They kept it a secret, that they had been going together for a while before they decied to tell Wes. Wes might view that as "betrayel".

Also it was Wrath/Vengeance led Holtz to go into the futrue and take Connor and Wrath/vengeance, which led Angel to open the hell dimension to try and get him out.( I know some would call it love, but Angel could have found another way, if he wasn't so Angry. he even tried to kill Wes.

They all had free will. but they were each Manipulated by
one of the 7 sins.
[> [> [> Re: But they didn't tell him of their relationship, until -- Shiraz, 16:12:39 04/05/03 Sat

I don't remember that happening.

From my recollection, the advent of the Gunn/Fred relationship happened during "Waiting in the Wings", and Wes was right there when it occurred.

Sure, Gunn and Fred had been having breakfasts together for some time, but that was hardly a secret from anyone. Moreover, neither Fred nor Gunn or even Wes viewed this as dating, much less a 'relationship'.

-Shiraz
Outcasts Recovered? (Angel Odyssey 4.3-4.5) -- Tchaikovsky, 04:52:21 04/05/03 Sat

I get to start off with the Fury episode, which is good as it will clear my general annoyance out of the way nice and quickly.

4.3- ëThe House Always Winsí

One of these days, Fury is going to write an episode which will make me repent of my sins and believe in him again. This ainít it. I think it may not be entirely his fault in this instance- it came across as one of those horrible episodes in TV where the staff blow the budget on the big exciting location, and then attach the flimsy plot on later. At times, this episode felt like one of those do-it-yourself Ikea wardrobes where you put everything together, it doesnít quite look right, and then you realise that you have left two sections off, and fit them wherever you can. In this particular episode, I felt this was true of the Lilah/Wesley scene and the Connor scene. Both perfectly fine scenes, but with no reason to be there whatsoever. Incidentally, as much as I admire Alexis Denisof for being a great charismatic actor of a superbly written character, could somebody please tell him that itís details in America but details in Britain. I have no idea why this annoys me so much, but he repeated it in ëSupersymmetryí. OK, thatís it with the pickiness, here goes with some things I enjoyed.

-Connor replying to the question ëWho are you?í with ëDonít know yetí. Thatís a really rich three words. The character hasnít quite established an obvious niche on the show yet- heís floating enigmatically around the borders. Further, it draws attention to the fact that more than a year after Darlaís pregnancy was revealed in ëHeartthrobí, we still have no real idea how or why.

-It was nice to see Fred smiling a lot in this episode- the heavy grind of losing people being replaced momentarily by entertainment and relaxing. The songs out of Lorneís show seemed excessively long- perhaps they were padding a little, which is something I donít think Iíve ever said of an episode before, so itís quite a harsh criticism if so.

-We have the patriarchy in the Lorne story. Lorne is apparently the big star, the one in control, with the money and the fame and the riches. In reality, he is being controlled for evil purposes. If in doubt in finding anything interesting in an episode, I tend to revert to the old ëLorne is Greenwaltí thing. Here, itís not as entirely obvious as usual. Yet consider the talented writer leaving to produce his own show, only to find that he canít do what he wants because heís tied down to contracts and rules and negotiations. The whole episode looks a little prophetic if we consider the moronic, (Iím guessing, I havenít seen it, but itís a fair bet), decision to cancel ëMiraclesí. Now Greenwalt may well scuttle back to the fold just as Lorne did at the end here- defeated by the nameless suits who appear unimportant but actually control everything that goes on. Itís a rather Greenwaltian message, like ëReptile Boyí and ëWolfram and Hartí, about who is really running the country. A secretive patriarchy are behind everything.

-What to say about Cordelia in this episode? Not a lot really. Obviously she acts as Fate when Angel is playing on the slot machines, making the impossible happen. Are we supposed to believe that this action was somehow wrong of her, and she was expelled, or something else entirely. The final shot of her standing there is one of those shocker endings- although I might have expected it to be sorted out a little quicker than it evidently is being.

Frankly, I felt like I could have been watching an episode of Friends. Iím not a big fan of Friends. Letís take a second to pray for David Fury.

4.4- ëSlouching Towards Bethlehemí

I like Jeffrey Bell a lot more, although I would be interested to know anything about the politics of him getting the show-runner title ahead of a superior Mere Smith. In any case, anyone who puts a Yeatsí reference in the title has me happy. I remember this being discussed before, but Iím afraid youíre getting it again. Hereís ëThe Second Comingí:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot find the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere 5
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand. 10
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight; somewhere in the sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze black and pitiless as the sun, 15
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reell shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Where vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, 20
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? 22

I include this in its entirety for three reasons. Firstly, I wondered how much I could get of it by heart, (about three- quarters, with a few mistakes). Secondly, regardless of what you think of Yeats as a prophet, or the poem as a vision of Hitler or whatever, the sheer power of this poem makes it one of the greatest of the 20th Century. Thirdly, because I thought it might be fun to do the review in a slightly off- centre way, by looking at some of the lines and free associating. Sometimes this will inevitably lead to non sequiutrs, but it may be occasionally revealing, and certainly sounds fun to write, so here goes:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
Here we have the idea of a gyre which has been used by more intelligent minds than mine to consider the Buffyverse, and which was a recurring symbol in Yeatsí poetry. The idea of the slowly widening spiral gives the idea of repetition, (of course the poem is ëThe Second Coming) in history, but also of the consequences getting larger each time. Lorneís depression in this episode seems to be of that consequence- the idea that the thing coming is something truly dreadful. There is the same tone of threat as in the beginning of the Buffy season- both seem to be heading towards a particularly devastating apocalypse, [cause some are worse than others?].

The falcon cannot find the falconer;
Whoís the falcon and whoís the falconer? I am tempted to associate Cordelia with the falcon- she is the one who has been up in the air all summer, after all, and is now directionless and vague. Cordeliaís re-integration is fairly well-handled, I thought. I loved the different styles of hair being gone through- who doesnít yearn for the days of the simple, long brunette look?- and this represented the confusion about her life. Itís difficult to explain someoneís life to them- and on the level of metaphor for real amnesiacs, the nuanaces of Cordeliaís life seem impossible to breach again. Angelís vampirism, Lorne, the killing of demons- all correspond to the strabgest things that are encountered when trying to allow someone who has forgotten everything to understand their old life. In a way, it may be easier to understand starting from nothing; at least Cordelia doesnít have all the events in her life mixed up, like my Grandfather did shortly before he died. He had a habit of segue-ing instantly from his lunch that afternoon to an important contract meeting with Welsh Glass in Port Talbot that most probably happened 30 years ago. It was horribly simultaneously wrenching and still funny. Cordelia is spared this- but the odd details rarely seem to correlate, until some things are explained by Connor- the truthful narrator. Yet oddly enough, his tabula is almost as rasa as Cordeliaís; his lack of understanding is almost as great- particularly of Angel and Cordeliaís relationship.

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world
This is one of the major themes of the episode. We see at every stage the attempts made by people to stay together as a whole are failing. The causes of this effect are many and various; Cordeliaís return, and her state; the continuing fall-out of Connorís return, and the new story of things to come. Each of them seems to tie into an idea of Fate or Destiny however, and it is encroaching.
-Wesley is of course still isolated from AI, and thus is able to be played by Wesley. At the end of the episode, Angel realises that there can be no proof that it was Lilahís intentions, not Wesleyís that led to Lorne being injured, and thus he becomes less trustworthy. Simultaneously, the way that Lilah plays him destabilises their ërelationshipí a little.
-Angel has regained the two other constituents of his family in ëProviderí, only for them not only to disappear again, lacking trust of him, but worse, disappearing together. The Oedipal parallels start to develop more fully in the next episode, but for the moment it is clear that the two characters who have had their early lives torn from them, (either by Quortoth or by forgetting what has happened), come together in shared experience, as well as Cordelia trusting Connor for his intense honesty, and Connor being attracted to Cordelia, the acting Mother in the Greek myth.
-Lorne does not feel happy with Angel- although he still trusts him to a degree, the way that he was attacked, the fact that he will not do what Angel might, because he is too self-interested, [in an understandable way] to be a Champion and his general pain, isolate him a little from the gang.
Overall, thereís a fragmentation in the characters in the foreground, even before considering the other things that have fallen apart- Cordeliaís mind, Cordeliaís mission, AI as a family. Of course, we see Connor again in the teaser, and he is rather affected by the family strong together in the car. Yet by the end of the episode, the integration of Connor to the fold, that might have been expected in a lighter series like Buffy, has not taken place.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity

Well, thereís the slightly facetious use of the word ëpassioní for the Lilah/Wesley relationship, but the main point is just about Lilah. While Angel is frankly bamboozled by the weight of odd events happening all together, and is wrong in attempting to shelter the new Cordelia from reality, thus making her lose her trust, we see Lilahís plans working perfectly. Her tryst with Wesley has never been anything to do with collusion in life, and of course we see Wesley hiding Justine from Lilah in ëDeep Downí. This is the first time that either has manipulated the other deliberately for a certain end, though- and perhaps we start to see why Lilah is fairly keen for Wesley to be relatively close to AI, so that he can (unknowingly) help her disrupt their plans. Lilah is certainly full of ëpassionate intensityí in this episode. Firstly, there is the obvious mislead that Wesley is the one over-hearing. So Lilahís plan would not work without Wesley being as keen to double cross Lilah as she is to cross him. The scheming of the morally ambiguous characters plays in marked contrast to the general dithering of the ëGood Guysí.

Surely some revelation is at hand.
Surely the Second Coming is at hand!

There are two Second Comings, which interplay here- the second coming of Connor from Quortoth, and the second coming of Cordelia as amnesiac. Of course, the main second coming may be yet to come!

ÖHardly are those words out
When some vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight;

This is the most obvious reference to the poem- Lorneís vision is as painful as Yeatsí ostensibly was.

That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Where vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle
The image of the rocking cradle is an interesting one for Connor, as much as anything. We see how his presence is difficult for Angel in this episode. The baby in the cradle becomes the son tussling for the Fatherís loverís affection. There is the lovely awkward father to son line ëI like what yoíve done with this placeí. Of course, it is a dump, but it becomes a necessity for Angel to continue to act the supportive Father. Furthermore in the relationship, Connorís blindness to the dynamic between Cordelia and Angel the previous year is a key component to the confusion. When Connor says of his past that ëI had nothing to loseí, he is in fact being untruthful, although he perhaps does not realise it. He tells Cordelia she is brave for losing all her memories and being strong. What Connor lost was the sapling family of ëDadí to ëProviderí, with Cordelia as the mother. This is a role that she doesnít understand she had, and Connor certainly doesnít.

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Now come on. Iím not that unspoiledÖ

4.5- ëSupersymmetryí

This is an excellent episode. I donít know whether it aired at a similar time in the US to ëSelflessí, both of which are the fifth episode of the Season, but it has the same kind of vibe going on- characters who we imagine know each other well, trying to tease out the roles between them, how they interact, how they cariacature real, living people in their life. There are a multitude of decisions made in the episode, some arguably morally right but deeply unfair on a perspnís right to choose, some morally wrong but perhaps in the best interests of a characterís self-determination. Iím sure the different nuances of the characterís created a lot of shall we say discussion, (argument is such a strong word) after this aired. I shall try to take each character slowly and carefully, and avoid too much personal identification here.

Basically, there is a very interesting chain being built up here, vaguely along the lines of Lilah-Wesley-Fred-Gunn. It would be simplistic to argue that the line goes from Baddest to Best- although I suppose that in some senses Gunn is the one who has the best intentions, and Lilah the worst. The chain here though sees everybody interpreting the characterís motivations and traits somewhat differently.

Lilah: Exactly how Lilah sees Wesley at the moment is a moot point. There is no doubt that she is physically attracted- but there appears to be a further feeling of slight possessiveness in this episode, as she watches him entranced by Fredís reading of her thesis. This is perhaps the first sign that Lilah really has invested a little more in the meetings than she is happy to let on- she is, as Angel tells Gunn, frankly stalking him, and it is no longer simply the case that the sex is everything. I wonder how much Lilah is enjoying living a clichÈ- enjoying the ëwrongnessí of the coming together of Good and Evil, the idea that the Bad tries to corrupt the Virtuous and vice versa. Does she feel threatened by Fred? There must be an element of that, as well as a feeling that any end to the relationship is going to be worse for her than him- Wesley has the possibility of a place to return to in AI, while Lilahís job would be weakened by the loss of the influence over an opposing pawn, (or perhaps bishop- heís more important to the game than those little pieces).
Wesley: On one side, thereís Lilah. Wesley is to an extent using Lilah, as Lilah is using Wesley. Currently, however, it appears that Wesley may be the one slightly less invested in the relationship. This is an interesting twitch. In the classic path, Good is perverted by Evil, only to be cast aside as evil has other thoughts. Wesleyís intentions, while full of the idea that he can never come back from his deep moral ambiguity, (as he expresses to Fred), seem clear in terms of Lilah- that she is sex and information, and little more.
On the other side- we have Fred. Wesley has been attracted to her since before that conversation at the start of ëBillyí, then let time elapse as he got over his horror over what he said while influenced by Billy, and then lost out to Gunn in ëWaiting in the Wingsí. Here, we see a kind of collusion re-kindled. When Wesley welcomes Fred, she treats her as a woman able to make her own decisions, is clearly impressed by her work, and allows her the opportunity to enact the vengeance she wants. This is perhaps not the correct thing to do- it encourages Fredís emotions to rule her mind- because Seidel hurt her as deeply as she has been hurt in her life- banishing her to a Pylea that seemed to her like hell. Yet Wesley sees Fred as an intelligent, collected woman, and has decided since ëLoyaltyí that Good is harder to have a grasp of than it may seem. His attraction to her seems to be more to do with her intelligence than her faÁade of innocence..
Fred: Fred has been stuck between Wesley and Gunn ever since she finished her complete reliance on her saviour Angel after Pylea. The Fred/Gunn relationship is a fairly happy one with relatively few bumps except the downright silly ëDouble or Nothingí. Yet Gunnís view of Fred is far from completely healthy. I believe he may be using the same brand of pedestal as Xander uses for Buffy, if a slightly different design. Gunn sets Fred up as the more intelligent of the pair, but also the more innocent. This is ultimately why he snaps Seidelís neck at the end of the episode. He is unable to allow Fred to taint herself. He is unable to recognise that Fredís intelligence and innocence do not fit easily together. She is perceptive, and as able to think and commit horrors as any of the other regulars. This is, I believe, the reason why we see Fred and Gunn having sex for the first time in this episode. Fred is not just the genius little girl.
As for Wesley- Fred still admires his intellect, and goes to him as the person more likely to understand her mission. She perhaps sees his actions around ëLoyaltyí as an incidence of moral recklessness on his part, and therefore decides he will help her in doing the same. Fred and Wesley have much in common- academia, their tendency to hide their real selves underneath a visage, their attractions to people they consider as opposite poles, but who are actually much more complex. It will be interesting to see if this relationship is developed any further.
Gunn: As I mentioned above, Gunn does not have the greatest grasp of Fred. He is very perceptive in some ways; notice how he immediately identifies Fredís writing on the wall as being a sign of her insecurity about going back to Pylea. But by committing an act that is morally reprehensible only so that Fred doesnít, he makes the wrong choice on two levels. He doesnít do what Angel would do- save Seidel from the portal. Yet he neither allows Fred to reap what she has sown. He chooses a halfway house that is corrosive to his mutual trust with Fred, his camaraderie with Angel, and obviously to Seidelís future.

Who was right? Who was wrong? Angel seems the most consistent in the episode, but of course heís not caught up in the crazy chain above. In fact, discounting Lilah for a moment, he is on the tip of another triangle: that being set up between Cordelia, Connor and Angel. Cordelia is self- aware enough to explain to Connor that the kiss cannot signal a relationship while she doesnít know who she is. Yet the triangle is confusing, all the more so when Cordelia asks Angel the question that highlights how painful her amnesia really is ëWere we in love?í Angel was, at times, in love with Cordelia. Underneath the displacement of the Groosalugg, Cordelia was perhaps in love with Angel. But without her won angle, how is Angel possibly to answer that question? She is stuc between the two stools of Connor and Angel, desperate not to betray her former trust in the vampire, and yet unsure as to just where she stands in all this.

A couple more bits:
-Fred is the wise physicists to the baffled laymen Lorne, Angel and Gunn early on. A nice gender subversion from ME, in a show that often flees from Buffyís remit.
-Who can resist ëchatty roomsí?
-I was starting to wonder whether Masq was mad with the whole ëThe Voynok demon has nine livesí thing, but now I understand properly. Not a bad metaphor for the crazy, archive monster.
Excellent stuff from the new writing team. Look forward to more from them. And once again, itís turning into quite a Season.

TCH
[> Re: thanks TCH -- aliera, 05:32:31 04/05/03 Sat

haven't mentioned in a while, how much I am enjoying these and happy for you that you're getting a chance to catch up.

Now that you're up to it, here's a link to one of my favorite reviewers in case you're interested in another POV slouching towards bethlehem.
[> [> That's an excellent review -- Tchaikovsky, 11:08:43 04/05/03 Sat

Very intelligent thoughts, and a great understanding of the context of the poem. I'm now going to go and read some other reviews of theirs.

Thanks for the link.

TCH
[> Re: Outcasts Recovered? (Angel Odyssey 4.3-4.5) -- CW, 05:46:05 04/05/03 Sat

It isn't details in my part of America, and I had no idea it's supposed to be the preferred pronunciation here until you mentioned it. But, that pronunciation is common enough I don't notice it in context.

Wesley has lived in the U.S. a number of years, now. We might excuse him because it's not unusual for accents to become 'polluted' after years of immersion in another environment. If he was saying details back in Buffy season 3, though, that's not so good.

Otherwise, all I can say is that 'American' pronunciation in all-British productions can sound very strange as well. Words like 'schedule' are dead giveaways all English speaking actors should be aware of.
[> [> This is what I get for being picky! -- Tchaikovsky, 09:29:04 04/05/03 Sat

I'm always rubbish at being picky because I get my facts wrong! Last time, d'H debunked both my complaints, so I think I'll just stick to the old anlysis thing.

A good point about pollution, backed up by Arethusa below.

TCH- thinking 'You say details, and I say details too/ Let's call the whole thing off'
[> [> british/u.s. pronunciation in show biz: schedule -- anom, 23:41:38 04/06/03 Sun

"Words like 'schedule' are dead giveaways all English speaking actors should be aware of."

You remind me of a ST:TNG episode in which someone must have decided an American audience would be confused by "shedule" & told Patrick Stewart to use the U.S. pronunciation. Well, for some of us it worked the other way--I was taken aback to hear Capt. Picard tell another character that a ship was "skeduled" to arrive in x hours. The word occurred in his lines 2 more times, & 1 of those times Stewart slipped, reverting to his native accent & saying "shedule." Ya gotta wonder who comes up w/these decisions, & how.
[> [> [> That's what you get when you have a Briton pretend he's French on US TV! -- CW, 12:54:14 04/07/03 Mon

[> Re: Outcasts Recovered? (Angel Odyssey 4.3-4.5) -- Arethusa, 06:28:08 04/05/03 Sat

Denisof said he's deliberately Americanizing his accent a little.

I was so uninvoved by THAW that I actually notice I own the stockings Fred is wearing with her showgirl's outfit. Boy, one size really does fit all.

Every time I read The Second Coming, I also think of Shelley's Ozymandias. (Must be the optimist in me.) That great deadly warrior, feared by the world, whose power is destroyed by time, and whose stone visage becomes forgotten in the sand of the desert.

I could feel Connor's lonliness in Slouching, and yearning for family. Holtz really screwed him over by killing himself and making sure Connor couldn't form ties with anyone else. It makes me wonder how Holtz treated his "precious" family.

Gunn seems very attracted by innocence-becuase of all the years he spent trying to protect Alonna? Yet when she was sired and he had to kill her, he didn't become relentlessly bitter, like Holtz. I really like Charles Gunn.

Thanks, TCH. Great stuff to think about.
[> [> Quick response -- Tchaikovsky, 09:26:01 04/05/03 Sat

Denisof said he's deliberately Americanizing his accent a little.

I'll let him off, then. I'm willing to believe the best- he's a great actor.

I could feel Connor's lonliness in Slouching, and yearning for family. Holtz really screwed him over by killing himself and making sure Connor couldn't form ties with anyone else. It makes me wonder how Holtz treated his "precious" family.
Agree on Holtz, although a fascinating character. There was some talk after I wrote about 'Quickening', (not instigated by me, but someone more perceptive), about how Holtz allowed his vendetta against the vampires to take priority over everything, so that he was partly to balme for being carelesss in leaving his family alone to be killed and in one case vamped. He certainly had his problems as a person!

Gunn seems very attracted by innocence-becuase of all the years he spent trying to protect Alonna? Yet when she was sired and he had to kill her, he didn't become relentlessly bitter, like Holtz. I really like Charles Gunn.
 Interesting link back to Alonna, and it was exceptionally brave to stake her so quickly.

And thanks.

TCH
[> A Fury to look forward to -- Masq, 06:48:17 04/05/03 Sat

There's a mid-season episode called "Salvage" that I really liked. Not all of it, of course. There is one character Fury can't get the voice of at all. There is another character that Fury did a better job at than the other writers.

Me liked Salvage.

Comments on 4.3-4.5 coming up!
[> [> Re: A Fury to look forward to -- s'kat, 07:58:20 04/05/03 Sat

Also Awakenings - excellent episode that was co-written by DeKnight and Fury?

Fury does have his moments.

Agree completely on Salvage - loved that episode.
[> Thanks, TCH. I always enjoy these. -- LadyStarlight, 07:17:49 04/05/03 Sat

[> On Greenwalt, gyres, and Gunn -- Masq, 07:30:43 04/05/03 Sat

The House always wins

A filler episode to be sure. But it does bring Lorne back to the fold, and it raises interesting questions about Connor's identity and Angel's destiny, which I've already yapped about in my episode analysis.

Now Greenwalt may well scuttle back to the fold just as Lorne did at the end here- defeated by the nameless suits who appear unimportant but actually control everything that goes on.

Well, if you believe the official behind-the-scenes talk, Greenwalt never quite left the fold. He's still a consulting producer. However, fan behind-the-scenes talk has it that he left because he didn't like the dark direction Season 4 would be taking.

That said, he might be back if there's a Season 5 and it's as different as Joss claims it will be.

Slouching towards Bethlehem

By now, TCH, I'm sure you've read my analysis of this episode and the brief discussion of Yeat's poem. The poem as I understand it is talking about the overthrow of the Christian gyre and its replacement with an equally long gyre of totalitarianism.

Which gets me thinking about the direction that both shows are taking. What I'm about to say is spoilery for both shows. I'll start with Buffy, which you might be able to read.

Spoiler Space







Buffy: Is the First Evil trying to "overthrow" the gyre of the Slayers? For millenia, the slayers have been the protectors of humankind, balancing the evil influence of the First. Is the First now "tired" of the balancing of the scales and trying to start a new "gyre" of evil?






Angel: Likewise with this Jasmine character who's just arrived on the scene. Is this whole thing with mother Cordy and father Connor her way of entering our world and becoming some kind of (anti-)Messianic figure, taking away the era of the benevolent PTB's and human free will and replacing it with interfering PTB's and human slavery "for their own good"?






End Spoiler space


Supersymmetry: Both Deep Down and Slouching Towards Bethlehem speak of certain awkward place Gunn has found himself in in Angel Investigations. The whole "Alpha male" (while Angel is gone) and the "not a sidekick" comments aren't throw-aways. Gunn has always had a somewhat awkward position in A.I., for more than one reason. Race isn't one of those reasons, although there may be an undercurrent having to do with race.

Gunn is about the only character in A.I. who didn't come to A.I. as a loner with no one else. Angel, Cordelia, and Wesley arrived in L.A. alone and friendless and found each other. Fred was saved from Pylea and was afraid to return home to her parents. Connor came back from Quortoth and lost Holtz. Lorne had Caritas, but Caritas got burned to the ground twice and so Lorne imposed on those responsible for a new place to stay. More so after his Vegas gig fell through.

Gunn, on the other hand, had his "crew". And furthermore, he was leader of that crew. He was their general. Then he comes to A.I. and becomes, well, a minion. The hired hand. And for a while in Season 2, Gunn waffles between A.I. and his old group, leaving us to wonder what exactly he sees in A.I. in the first place.

So ME writes "That Old Gang of Mine" to estrange Gunn from his old friends. To give him a reason to think he's doing more good at A.I. than with them. "Angel's got the mission, you don't."

So fine, but Gunn is almost too large for A.I. He's forced into the ranks when he used to be an innovator, a leader. So they (ME) give him another reason to stay. They give him Fred. Fred is a real emotional connection to A.I. that Gunn might otherwise lack. Being with Fred estranges Gunn from his old friend Wesley. Gunn's latent distrust of vampires estranges Gunn from Angel. And Gunn has never particularly been friends with Cordelia.

So what happens when Gunn and Fred commit murder together? It's not the kind of thing you can just go home from. There's going to be trouble, and that trouble, for Gunn, is going to larger than just trouble with the girlfriend.
[> [> My personal view on Gunn (personal not analytic) -- Tchaikovsky, 14:46:56 04/06/03 Sun

Of the main 14ish characters in the Universe in which I sometimes wonder whether I live, Gunn is the character in whom I have perhaps the least interest. Not because he's a bad character; not because he isn't well written; not because he has any deficiency. Purely on personal identification- I don't relate to him at all. Because of this, I often allow him in my mind to occupy a place holder position in Angel- because I'm not that interested, I paint him in relation to others rather than by himself. Having said this, this season is the one in which he has been most interesting for me so far- the surrogate Father to Connor in 'Deep Down', the very important, (as you said) 'I'm not a side-kick line in StB, (ME never repeats lines without reason, except the insidious 'I get that' perhaps), and his wrong and fascinating decision in 'Supersymmetry'. When I skate over Gunn it's because I find it harder than any other character to feel him or be interested by him, even if I think I understand his character well enough.

Incidentally, having explained all this, I don't believe there's any racial undertone going on at all in AI towards Gunn. There's perhaps a remote hint that where Gunn came from makes him insecure- the other characters might be considered middle class, him less so ['There's no class system in America. Discuss], but I really don't see his race figuring. Ironically and bravely from ME, Lorne is the person who is perhaps the character most used to explore race.

In any case, a good little study of Gunn's character- and your episode reviews for these three seem even meatier than usual. Oh, and from another post- sorry about the homework thing! But the roller-coaster part of the Odyssey is over as I slow down towards the pace of the rest of the audience.

TCH
[> [> [> Re: My personal view on Gunn (personal not analytic) -- Masq, 16:28:07 04/06/03 Sun

Gunn has been mostly a side-lines character for seasons 1-3. He's pretty much a side-lines character in season 4 as well. But he's one of those characters who you know has a lot of issues, even when the writers aren't writing about them. So he's one of those characters that you suspect might do something vital to the story that comes out of nowhere if you're not paying attention.

I'm not being spoilery by saying this, but I keep my eye on Gunn.

Ironically and bravely from ME, Lorne is the person who is perhaps the character most used to explore race.

I'm not sure how brave it is. It's the Star Trek syndrome. Don't write about race using actual human ethnicities. That would expose you to criticism about how you are dragging politics into your entertainment or shoving politics down the throats of the whinier fans (yes, I have issues with the whole 'there should be no politics in entertainment' attitude. There is always is politics in entertainment, it's just a matter of noticing it. And you usually don't until you see political views that don't agree with your own).

Science fiction and fantasy shows can get away with it more because they use "aliens" and "demons" as metaphors for race. It's less obvious that way and less threatening. But I'm not clear what ME is trying to say by doing this. Sometimes demons are depicted as clearly evil, and not deserving of life or rights. And sometimes they are shown as sympathetic and deserving of respect. Maybe ME is just trying to say "it's complicated", but they aren't saying it very coherently.

your episode reviews for these three seem even meatier than usual

My AtS episode analyses have been huge this season. I usually have 4 files per season per show that average around 50-60 K. I have three for AtS so far and the first two are 80+ K. The third that I'm finishing up today is going to be 90+. This is just a meaty season! Or maybe it's me. I found a way to stretch out my analysis of "The House Always Wins"- -a thin episode if ever there was one--by yapping about Connor's identity and Angel's destiny. But so far, I haven't had any reason to take that stuff out as superfluous, either!

sorry about the homework thing! But the roller-coaster part of the Odyssey is over as I slow down towards the pace of the rest of the audience.

That's the kind of homework that I like! ; )
[> [> [> [> Re: My personal view on Gunn (personal not analytic) -- Rahael, 18:15:50 04/06/03 Sun

Thank you Masq!!!

It's this incoherency I find most unsettling about both shows. Though I feel more comfortable in AtS because Gunn is there. No racial undertones in his character and his interractions? Not for this viewer. I think they are *very* much there at least for me. It's one of the reasons that AtS has become so meaningful for me.

I find it interesting also how often the show depicts Gunn as coming up with the crucial thinking part of getting at the solution, whether it's finding the Svea, or working out how to find Darla or working out the puzzle in Apocalypse Nowish. This is logical, rational problem solving he is doing.

And yet, despite this actual depiction, how fans view his character is......interesting, to say the least.

Gunn's character may be sidelined, but I agree with Masq that his story has a great deal of unspoken depth to it, depth that people like myself add in while we watch.

And, I know that you haven't seen the newest eps, but there is going to be at least one off the cuff remark that alludes directly to Gunn's colour, and to racial/sexual politics. I'll pick it up when you get to reviewing the ep, TCH.

To add to a long running debate here, as to whether the demons/vampires actually depict non-white people in the MEverse, I would say that I would prefer that Lorne and other non human people weren't used to work on issues surrounding race. I hope I shouldn't have to explain why.
[> [> [> [> [> My spoilery guess... (Spoilers for 4.11) -- Masq, 19:42:18 04/06/03 Sun

And, I know that you haven't seen the newest eps, but there is going to be at least one off the cuff remark that alludes directly to Gunn's colour, and to racial/sexual politics. I'll pick it up when you get to reviewing the ep, TCH.

Rah, was that Angelus' comment that when it came to Fred, for the first time in Gunn's life, he "wasnt' dark enough"? Meaning, Fred saw more appeal in Wesley?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Oops, I mean 4.12... I think -- Masq, 19:44:04 04/06/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, and (quote from future ep) -- Rahael, 23:51:26 04/06/03 Sun

Lilah's comment to Wesley during the 'shades of grey' speech that Fred 'preferred Black'
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You know, I've always wondered... -- Masq, 05:55:18 04/07/03 Mon

About the "black and white and shades of gray" metaphor vis a vis the "black" and "white" ethnicities.

Normally, these color codings are kept separate. We know when we're talking about "black hats" and "white hats" as the bad guys and good guys respectively, and we know we're not making any reference or implication about the color of one's skin.

Likewise, we talk about black and white people (although it's something more akin to brown and peach-pink) and we can talk about that and know we're just refering to skin color.

But sometimes I get very bugged about how "black" gets used for "evil"--black hats, black magic, blah blah, because I wonder what "black" people think of that, while "white hats" and "white magic" are good.

So a couple times this season ME has chosen to deliberately run those two metaphors together, "Fred prefers black" in a conversation about good and evil and what's in between. "You're just not dark enough" in a conversation about crossing the line in one's moral actions.

Is is a clever crossing of metaphors that everyone understands isn't really meant to imply anything, racially speaking? Or am I being naive here?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> A point -- KdS, 06:08:57 04/07/03 Mon

If you notice, all the lines this season where the two metaphors get mixed seem to be coming out of more or less evil characters who are trying to be offensive at the time. I don't think we should take that as endorsing a crossover.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: A point -- Masq, 07:50:19 04/07/03 Mon

If you notice, all the lines this season where the two metaphors get mixed seem to be coming out of more or less evil characters who are trying to be offensive at the time. I don't think we should take that as endorsing a crossover.

Oof! If I thought for a moment that ME was in any way endorsing a cross over between these two metaphors, I wouldn't be able to watch the show any more than Rahael. I'm white, but I'm extra sensitive to this sort of thing.

No, I pretty much give ME the benefit of the doubt and assume they are these mixing metaphors deliberately but intending nothing from it (except, perhaps, making their evil characters seem worse).

Not sure, Rah, whether AtS has had a habit of using the "black" and "white" to stand in for "evil" and "good". I know BtVS has done it enough for me to notice--e.g., "white hats", "black magic". I try to avoid those terms on my website, too, since they bug me personally.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> going further into the race issue, and perhaps too far OT -- pilgrim, 09:43:23 04/07/03 Mon

Any thoughts about Wood's race, and whether it matters to the show that he's African-American? I think the only reference, an oblique reference, to his race came when Buffy assumed he'd been raised "in the hood." I remember some posters had a problem with that remark because it tended to show that Buffy made assumptions she shouldn't have, based on Wood's race.

This may be an example of the show tackling race issues more head-on, rather than through metaphor, even though there's no explicit discussion of race. A couple of media scholars recently published a book arguing that in US movies and TV, when black-white relationships are portrayed (say, in buddy movies or movies that more expressly teach about race like Guess Who's Coming to Dinner) the white character usually is the stand-in for the normal and the black character is the one who fits into the "white" "all-American" society.

Wood in some ways reflects this typical dynamic--he's clearly fitting into/trying to fit into the Buffyverse, an almost all-white world. But in other ways, he may subtley be undermining the standard US portrayal of race relationships. He has his own agenda that deviates from that of Buffy's, and it's a controversial agenda that speaks to power relations between employer and employee, between man and woman, as well as between black and white. He's very much an unknown quantity, from Buffy's point of view-- she wonders whether, given that his office is over the hellmouth, is he evil or just in big trouble. Wood's mystery, his creepiness, as we experience him from the SG's pov, the disconnect between his personal agenda and Buffy's, all may play in different ways because he is black rather than white.

I don't wish to read more into this than there is (or, heck, maybe I do), but it seems to me that race so permeates US culture that ME's choice to cast Wood as an African-American man may mean something.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's 'In The Hood' comment -- AngelVSAngelus, 13:22:49 04/07/03 Mon

It seemed to me at the time that perhaps the writer's were trying to illuminate the fact that his character had a background contrary to the stereotypical perception, but by doing this through dialogue coming out of Buffy's mouth only made it appear that she herself carried that stereotypical perception. I personally found it offensive, but considered it well intentioned. Like affirmative action.
I really never believe that race and racism are intended subject matter for ME, but the subtext may exist there on a level that could be called by some accidental and by others subconsciously inevitable. But to address these issues consciously and head-on may undermine a part of the shows' purpose that I enjoy: universality. By taking a stand point that, directly and consciously, at least ATTEMPTS to maintain a standpoint of gender and race not mattering, the show can communicate on a much more ideal and communicatively reverberating level, IMHO.
The unfortunate fact is that we may never know if there's truth or fiction to a racial subtext on the show as far as the intentions of the creators are concerned. We don't know if the reason both shows have a single African American character at the moment is because of discriminatory reasons or just a coincidence of the actors and actresses that auditioned for the colorlessly written roles.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Buffy's 'In The Hood' comment -- Shiraz, 13:45:27 04/07/03 Mon

Unfortunately, race and gender always matter, especially to those whose race and gender put them at odds with those in power.

Its like money, in that it only doesn't matter if you have enough to start with.

-Shiraz

"You've got to face it, all this stuff about golden boughs and the cycles of nature and stuff just boils down to sex and violence, usually at the same time."

-Terry Pratchett, The Light Fantastic
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Use of "black and white" for "good and evil" -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:35:09 04/07/03 Mon

Well, while I have noticed the black=evil thing a few times, the only cases I can recall where white=good was used were in "The Wish" and "Dopplegangland", where there were references to "white hats".

Also, personally, I think it would be preferable to find a new word for describing black people rather than finding a new one to symbolise evil. Because the black=evil thing originates with the blackness of shadows and darkness where evil things tend to happen. As long as horrible things are best done in the "black of night" the connection of blackness to evil will always exist. It would be much simpler to change "black" in regards to race to "brown".

Oh, and on one last note, usually, when the magic is being taken seriously on the shows, it's referred to as dark magic, rather than black magic. The word "black" is usually used when in a mocking way (see BBB: "I'm not the one who had to resort to the black arts to get a date!")
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You know, I've always wondered... -- Rahael, 07:05:52 04/07/03 Mon

KdS is right - Angelus uses Gunn's race against him, and Lilah uses race to taunt Wesley. Which says a lot about Lilah and Wesley, none of it good. Especially if Lilah has hit upon some sensitivity of Wes towards Fred preferring Gunn, a black man, over him.

But still, you'll have noticed that I have always tried never to use the black=evil, white=good dichotomy. In one of my early posts I tried to overset the black/white/grey set of metaphors with "the Buffyverse is full of colour" post. I've always been uncomfortable with the idea that the darkness inside the slayer (which, you may have noticed is explicitly connected to the black, primitive First Slayer) is evil. Primitive, black, inarticulate and murderous.

So I've always preferred to see the darkness of the Slayer as akin to night, which is black, and beautiful and part of our lives - not evil.

As for the AtS refs this season, the references to Gunn's blackness have all been used as jibes by people who demean themselves, not Gunn. Which is what happens in ordinary life. Someone needs to refresh my memory - does AtS frequently, and with no irony, frequently use the word black to denote evil?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> dark is beautiful, and necessary! -- Vickie, 17:25:25 04/07/03 Mon

Rah said: I've always been uncomfortable with the idea that the darkness inside the slayer (which, you may have noticed is explicitly connected to the black, primitive First Slayer) is evil. Primitive, black, inarticulate and murderous.

So I've always preferred to see the darkness of the Slayer as akin to night, which is black, and beautiful and part of our lives - not evil.

Yes! I always make this same connection, vaguely Jungian and somehow connected to some current research on the "Dark Madonna" and other dark-visaged, numinous women.

In this Jungian approach (apologies to scholars in the audience), the "dark" self is not evil, per se. It is the denied portion of oneself. If I see myself as a good person, the opposite of that, my evil self, is my denied shadow. If I see myself as clumsy, my coordinated and graceful self is my shadow. If HonorH sees herself as a vegetarian (hypothetical, people!), and clings to that image, her repressed Honorificus might burst out for a midnight barbecue.

To truly grow up, one must integrate this shadow self, animus/anima, and become whole. I'm hoping we'll see something like this going on with Buffy. (Come on, guys! Just five more episodes!)

The dark madonna seems to present this shadowy side in a mythic sense, yin to the sun gods' yang, if you will. She is only "evil" in the sense of opposite. She represents the fertile earth, the darkness of blessed restful night, the mysterious feminine power. She is as necessary as the day. Images of this dark lady include the Virgin of Guadalupe, Durga, and Tara.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> black/white, light/dark, & dichotomies (long, at least for me, w/many tangents & parentheses) -- anom, 09:56:19 04/08/03 Tue

First--Masq, thanks for bringing this thread back!

[Note: This post quotes a use of "the N-word." It's in the part labeled "Digression," in case anyone wants to skip over it.]

"I've always been uncomfortable with the idea that the darkness inside the slayer (which, you may have noticed is explicitly connected to the black, primitive First Slayer) is evil. Primitive, black, inarticulate and murderous."

It may be an indication of the complexity of this issue that I'm not sure whether the description at the end of that quote applies to the First Slayer or to the demon-energy that changed a (presumably normal) girl into her. I'd have to object to it as a complaint about the characterization of the First Slayer, whose appearance I understood as reflecting how ancient the Slayer line is--dating back to before any humans left Africa. As such, she would necessarily be primitive & dark-skinned; why she's inarticulate is another question, since the Shadowmen certainly had language (although if they were supposed to be the same men who made the First Slayer, they should've been speaking some kind of reconstructed proto-Bantu rather than modern-day Swahili), & I wouldn't call her murderous unless she were killing humans, something she doesn't even advocate in her tirade in Buffy's dream.

If that description applies to the demon spirit, I consider the objections more well founded. In terms of the problems raised by equating dark/black with evil, it would've been preferable to make the demon-stuff another color--maybe a sickly greenish shade or blood red (might be appropriate by way of the vampire connection). The other qualities are more understandable in a demon: most demons have been presented as more primitive & certainly as murderous. If the demon this spirit came from didn't have speech, it might have been its infusion into the girl that rendered her inarticulate-- which, for me, would make her violation even deeper; imagine having language & then losing it! But it might well have made her more subject to the Shadowmen's, & later Slayers to the Watchers', control, esp. if she couldn't explain to her family & society what had happened to her. (Remember how Giles-the-Fyarl-demon couldn't make Xander understand him, & how Xander reacted? OK, he didn't look human either, but if he could've talked in English, he might've been able to get someone to listen long enough to explain what was going on.)

I think I'm less bothered by the idea that "the darkness inside the Slayer...is evil" than by the fact that the evil inside the Slayer (as evil exists in all of us) is called "dark." But I agree w/Finn's point that the association of darkness w/evil comes from a very natural human fear of the dark. Evil may exist in the light too, but at least we can see it coming! In the dark, not only can't we see it coming, but we can't see well enough to distinguish it from good. This association may have been harmless in social terms before populations of people w/noticeably different skin colors encountered each other. But I also agree w/Rahael about color vs. B/W/grey. I'm trying to remember if I ever posted something w/a line about "I don't believe in shades of grey--I believe in full-spectrum living [&, in this case, undead] color!"

As for whether demons are used on the shows as stand-ins for "non-white" racial & other discriminated-against populations, I think sometimes they're used in a general way as the "other," but often for the purpose of showing that you can't make assumptions about that "other" based on stereotypes. (Well, you can, but it's a mistake to.) And ME plays this both, or maybe >2, ways--in 1 ep, Harry's fiancÈ (& his family) is not as assimilated as he's pretended to be & tries to eat Doyle's brain, & in another, a demon of a type that's supposed to be mindlessly violent is a pregnant woman's protector & has Buddhist symbols in his living quarters. Of course, there are plenty of times when the characterization we're given of a "race" of demons appears accurate for all its members (at least all those we see), but they've shown enough variation in the way they treat this theme for me to think they've overcome Star Trek syndrome. (That's where each planet/dimension is inhabited by 1 species of aliens/demons, all having the same culture & values. Corollary: if there are 2 cultures on the same planet, they're at war. This always bothered me about the original ST series, but eventually I came to understand it as presenting these alien species as standing for given human qualities or issues. It may even have contributed to my being receptive to the way metaphor is used on "Buffy" & "Angel.")

On the other hand, I remember thinking even as I laughed at Angel's complaint about "stereotypes [of vampires] perpetuated by hack writers" that remarks like this pointed up the fact that Angel seemed to be (un)living in an LA that was whiter than Sunnydale. I'm somewhat disappointed that after the introduction of Gunn's gang, he's the only one of those characters we continue to see on a regular basis. When Angel told him "I might need your help," I understood it to mean Gunn and the others.

I'm also bothered sometimes by the use of racist comments (although not so much on these shows) as a sort of shorthand to indicate "this is one of the bad guys." Sure, as Rahael says, such comments say far more about the person using them than about the person being targeted, but it strikes me as too simplistic, & it also requires setting up the "good guys" as having an equally simplistic lack of problems around racial issues. Instead of ignoring these problems totally, it pretends they don't exist among "good" people. Either way, it allows the writers to avoid confronting these issues. (Digression here, because I can't resist citing my least-favorite example: in the movie "White Nights," Gregory Hines has defected to the Soviet Union because his ballet career was stymied by discrimination. The plot contrives to bring him together w/Mikhail Baryshnikov, who defected in the other direction but has been rescued/kidnapped from a plane crash in Soviet territory. Hines doesn't realize he's been a guestage, albeit a willing one, & only catches on when he objects to the force being used to stop the escaping Baryshnikov & his Soviet handler calls him "nigger." OK, that's just stupid. It wasn't part of the culture. Paul Robeson & other black Americans rather pointedly commented about how they weren't treated as 2nd-class people when they were in the USSR. [The Soviets had the Jews for that....] Digression over.)

In this context (um, that would be the one back there before the digression), I'm not sure how to take Buffy's "'hood" comment. Maybe it was just a setup for Wood to say he wasn't from the 'hood in its usual meaning. Is it a wry acknowledgment of how few black recurring characters there've been on the show? Is Buffy being racist? Or is she assuming Wood overcame an underprivileged background? (I keep going off on tangents--anyone else wonder how Wood got from NYC to Beverly Hills, given the backstory we've seen? Was the "'hood" scene written before it was decided Wood was Nikki's son? Did the Watcher's Council have a generous retirement package for members after their Slayers died, allowing Crowley to raise young Robin in a ritzy neighborhood? Or was Crowley's cover job something more lucrative than being a librarian?)

There's probably more I was thinking of putting in this post, but it's late & I can't think of it. I'll just end by quoting Ursula K. LeGuin's line "Light is the left hand of darkness." In this case, at least, the light side is presented as secondary...& even as "sinister"!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: black/white, light/dark, & dichotomies (long, at least for me, w/many tangents & parentheses) -- Rahael, 10:33:22 04/08/03 Tue

Thanks, Vickie and Anom.

I can't do these posts justice because I'm all fevery and non-coherent of thought myself. But I think my discomfort at the First Slayer has come more from being online, than from the show itself, i.e, the reactions of many to what the First Slayer is. So my reaction is very much coloured by others reaction to it and my resulting discomfort. Many in their description of the FS have tended to go with the 'animalistic' inner nature that Buffy has to overcome or get rid of. And I am discomifted by the notion that the FS is less human than Buffy.

Also, as for racist remarks being used to denote badness - well, I'm equally uncomfortable with Fred (and indeed Angel) calling Gunn 'the muscle' of the group - because obviously, Gunn's so much stronger than Connor or Angel! I think we are meant to be discomfited by this, and understand that Gunn's insecurity in the relationship does not come from him alone, but is part of a dynamic between him and Fred, where she gets to have all the intellect, and he gets to be the body.

See, I don't think the inner Slayer *is* evil. And if that is what Season 7 says, I'm going to have feel very very disappointed. Though if I start unpicking the concept of Slayerness, I start realising that it has very many disturbing elements, at least disturbing to me.

But I can remember being drawn to the First SLayer depicted by Joss in Tales of the Slayer, where she is indeed very human, very understadable and empathetic, so that is what influences me. If the end result is that these women are evil because the very first one was chained down and penetrated by the naughty black evil, well!!

Oh, and something I remember wanting to say about black/white - I think AtS played very cleverly with our (and the characters) instinctive assumptions with the whole glowy white Cordy thing. And, there's the white rooms.
[> [> [> [> [> Sorry everyone -- Tchaikovsky, 03:03:34 04/07/03 Mon

To add to a long running debate here, as to whether the demons/vampires actually depict non-white people in the MEverse, I would say that I would prefer that Lorne and other non human people weren't used to work on issues surrounding race. I hope I shouldn't have to explain why.

That was a careless, post-long-day comment of mine. Hope I didn't offend anyone. I'm not quite sure about my line of thought- in the harsh light of day it seems clear to me that, as Masq has wrote, it is not particularly brave to use metaphors rather than tackling racism head on, but an opt- out route.

TCH
[> [> [> [> [> [> Not at all -- Rahael, 06:42:22 04/07/03 Mon

Over the last couple of days I have been having a good long think about ME and its politics, including the politics of its fandom.

You certainly didn't offend me, TCH, especially because you said something which is feasible. You also didn't offend me because I've heard much stronger formulations of this view from other posters here. It's a view I find very very hard to take. You are certainly more sensitive to why I might not like it than many other posters here. Last time someone suggested that Joss may have been attempting to show muslims as vampires and demons, I really did get offended. A whole lot of posters kept explaining to me why I shouldn't be offended by this, and me being dim (and perhaps I'm still too dim to get the subtleties of this argument!) didn't get why this wasn't an enlightened approach and why I didn't have a knee jerk "ughhh" reaction to it.

On a board where a great many respected posters argue that Vampires are a different species altogether, and not to be considered or judged in human terms, I hope that people who argue that demons are black might understand why I get upset when it is suggested that minorities are shown as this group of largely evil blood sucking parasites preying upon Sunnydale. If this was what the show was showing I wouldn't be able to bear to watch it..........
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> My old post on this issue... -- Rob, 12:13:47 04/08/03 Tue

The Misrepresentation of Buffyverse Vampires & Demons in Academia -- Rob, 14:19:14 12/05/02 Thu

I'm probably opening up a whole big controversial can of worms here--actually, I know I am, since we've had discussions about this before--but, while reading "Fighting the Forces," I became very disturbed by a particular essay, "The Undemonization of Supporting Characters," in which the author casually referenced a source that claims that "Buffy" is racist. She went on to demonstrate how the show was not racist; her examples included things such as the Initiative plotline and Spike, and the overall greying of the good/bad delineations in the Buffyverse. And yet the author still claimed that vampires and demons are symbolic of "race in American society; the characters' successful and unsuccessful attempts to deal with the Other often illuminate the ways in which society may come to terms with differences in race, culture, and lifestyle." Throughout the essay, she continually repeated the idea that the vampires and demons on "Buffy" are symbolic of minority races.

While I will acknowledge that, at times, the treatment of vampires and demons have been used to demonstrate racism-- examples include, from "Buffy," the Initiative arc, and from "Angel," the Scourge from "Hero" and Gio from "That Old Gang of Mine"--I think that to make such a sweeping gesture as to say that all vamps and demons on "Buffy" at all times represent minorities is not only an overgeneralization, but robs other, deeper layers of meaning from this incredibly complex show. Metaphors do not remain constant on "Buffy." Just look at all the different things magic has been used to represent!

An interpretation of vampires as the minority, of course, paints Buffy as an evil figure, wiping out those other races trying to converge on white society. While this is a convenient argument, I think it ignores a great deal, particularly regarding vampires. For starters, "Buffy" is a show about growing up, and all the trials and tribulations the characters go through in the process of growing up. And what are Vampires? Things that will, in the "natural" course of events, live forever. They can be seen as representational of the fears Buffy and the SG have upon growing up--that they will become cold, soulless things also, as many adults in their world seem to be. Principal Snyder is not much different than a vampire. What I've always felt to be the important part of the vampire symbol is that vampires were once just like us, but were changed into demonic things. The "minority" symbol doesn't do justice to this very important part of the "Buffy" mythology, the fear that one day we will give into our darkness as well and also become vampires. Yes, Vampires are societal Others, but they are Others who used to be members in the society. Minorities, on the other hand are considered societal Others from the get-go; they are not members of society who were transformed into something else, as vampires are, but have always been perceived as different, be it because of the color of their skin, the sound of their accent, or their religion.

This also ignores the fact that Buffy and the SG were also shown as societal Others, and that the two groups (Buffy and her friends/demons, vamps) were meant to parallel each other from the beginning. It was again one of the first clues on the show that a souled creature is not necessarily good, an unsouled is not necessarily evil. Buffy and her friends, from the start, were shown in a similar position, in the high school microcosm, as the beings that they fight.

I think that it is easy to find racism in just about any piece of art. If you look for it, you can find it. If you try to find a very surfacey symbol--that because vamps and demons run in gangs and harm people in the society, that they are villainized versions of minorites, done to promote, as propaganda, the idea that minorities are monsters--you can find it. But that ignores so much. I'm very glad that Sunnydale is being portrayed as more multi-cultural this season, because it further hammers home the point that vampires and demons do not = Blacks, Hispanics, etc. A white person, a black person, a Hispanic person, a Jewish person, an Asian person...they all could be turned into vampires. Vampires are not the Other of White Society, but are the Others of the Entire World, feeding on the outskirts of every society. Vampires and Demons are the darkness within Ourselves.

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My old post on this issue... -- Rahael, 14:41:32 04/08/03 Tue

Well Rob, as you'll remember, I believe in much of what you've said - I have made many of these points here before (in fact, it was your annotations thing for WTTH that made me start thinking of this). While these are very persuasive, what troubles me is the inconsistency in which this is carried out, that's all.

One very troubling this season has been the idea of Slayerness as something that disconnects you from humanity, from other people. That it stops you being a 'good mother', a loving, nurturing one, that it makes you think that others are expendable. What I most fear from the finale is that Buffy will give up her power. For so long, I've looked at her Slayer nature as the true 'otherness'. Well, then, what of those of us who can't 'give up' our otherness?

Rather than Buffy's power being empowering for her, we learn that it comes about from the ultimate victimisation, from the first slayer being held down and penetrated.

Let's put it this way. I'm not identifying any more with our 'heroes', for the first time ever. I'm with the 'bad mother', the 'vengeful son' and the 'mushroom who hates his free will'. I don't know if it's intentional, but such is my level of discomfort, I'm feeling so rebellious that I'm intending to identify with everyone that ME doesn't want me to identify with.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My old post on this issue... -- Masq, 15:26:09 04/08/03 Tue

the 'bad mother' = ?
the 'vengeful son' = ?
the 'mushroom who hates his free will' = Andrew
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Nikki/Connor? -- TCH- always one to second guess, even on unspoiled eps, 15:33:09 04/08/03 Tue

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I figured one was Connor, but yeah, I think you're right the other is Nikki. Rah? -- Masq, 15:39:20 04/08/03 Tue

Turning your eloquent heart felt post into a guessing game. Sorry!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Or Robin... -- Masq, 15:41:23 04/08/03 Tue

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh, AtS! -- Rahael, 15:45:30 04/08/03 Tue

I love them all, Angsty Connor, his ex-prostitute, former Vampire mother, his broody dorky father, and Wesley, and Gunn, and Fredlet, and Lorne and Gwen (hushed silence for my once former bad-girl faves, Cordy and Lilah)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That about sums it up for me, too! -- Masq, 15:51:20 04/08/03 Tue

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Nikki and Wood! -- Rahael, 15:39:35 04/08/03 Tue

You know, whenever the discussion of 'bad' women comes up, I get flashbacks to my grandmother's bible readings and my mother's subversive and snarky asides to me.

There's a reason why I love my shiny red ankle boots of vanity and sinfulness.... (well, I like to think sin, but actually they are just cute)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I like to think "sin" too . . . -- d'Herblay, 15:46:17 04/08/03 Tue

. . . but cute does not necessarily exclude sinful, right, cutey?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh, Rahael, I just can't control myself -- dream, 10:15:07 04/09/03 Wed

I just have to say that I really, REALLY, didn't see Nikki being portrayed as a bad mother in ANY way. Yes, I know some people on this board saw it that way. But personally, I think they're nuts. I saw a strong woman who (for all of her twenty seconds of screen time) spoke to her son in a loving, gentle way. I saw that she had taught him to protect himself in an emergency. Heck, I even thought that when the FE appears a Nikki, the line in which she prompts him to say thank you, even if it was creepy in the context, indicated that the ACTUAL Nikki had been the sort of good, loving but firm mother that makes sure her son knows his manners. I just hate the idea that reading posts on this season might ruin these episodes for you.

I also think Buffy's struggle with the slayer side of herself is supposed to be difficult, but that ultimately she will come to terms with what she needs to do - her loving nature will be stronger than her idea of what a general is supposed to be.

I would also caution about reading "Slayerness" too narrowly as "Otherness," and vice-versa. Whether Buffy remains a Slayer or not, she is always an "other." (Unless the series ends with Angel all human and the two of them going off to live in the suburbs with the white picket fence - which I sincerely doubt.) The experiences she has gone through will always make her apart from the world that gets to live free of the knowledge that the things that go bump in the night are real. She's died twice. She is other in a way that goes far beyond racial/ethnic otherness.

I guess I'm just saying that I still have a lot of faith in where this will all end up, and I hope you won't let other's interpretations color your vision of the show so much that you stop looking forward to it.

As for sympathizing with the mushroom, well, I'm right there with you.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Agreed, dream -- ponygirl, 11:42:00 04/09/03 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you, Dream -- Rahael, 13:52:20 04/09/03 Wed

I think that the last couple of weeks have left me embittered. It's really not only this board, which has been fairly moderate. It's the fandom generally. Over the last couple of weeks, I have heard views expressed along these lines:

That Spike did Wood a favour by killing his mother because if she had lived she would have 'f***ed him up further'.

That if Nikki had really loved her son, she would have killed Spike rather than dying at his hands.

That women who are unlucky enough to live in dangerous places are bad mothers, who f*** up their children.

That Spike wasn't tearing Wood apart in that scene - he was doing Wood a favour, helping him in him put right his misguided views that his mother loved him.

THese aren't some extreme views - I've read them all over the place, in the journals of well known fans, in reviews, in posts, in justifications .....

I'm just fed up of a fandom which blames the victim for her death. That sees murder as a favour. That puts the death of a human being as a lesser event than a man's path to greater self esteem. It doesn't really matter what Spike did in the past, (in whatever incarnation) what really really matters is that he knows that his mother really really loved him.

And it's really hard to describe how shattering it is to read a post which bluntly condemns a mother who 'drags her child into a war'. That really hits me hard in so many ways.

I choose to read Slayerness that way, because that's what engages and resonates with me, and I think everyone will have something that resonates with them, that draws them in. At the moment the themes of Season 7 do not speak to me, the characters of Buffy or Willow or Spike do not speak to me, and moreover, the whole season could do with tighter editing and pacing.

Any other season but this one, I would be there, telling a poster like myself to wait and see, to trust Joss, defending the current season. So I want to thank you, I appreciate your effort.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Spoilers for LMPTM above -- Rahael, 13:54:36 04/09/03 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Those people, whoever they are.... -- dream, 14:14:20 04/09/03 Wed

I just have to say, they suck. (I hope I can get away with that much profanity.)

I don't read other boards, so I hadn't seen all of that. No wonder you're upset. Heck, I'm upset, and I don't have the sort of personal stake in this that you would. But that sort of ignorance is very disturbing...Oh, and just because these views are commonplace doesn't mean they aren't extreme. I think those views are VERY extreme...

And I would agree that this season could use some tighter editing. The beginning of the season was great, but I got bored in the bogged-down middle. I have great hopes for the end, though. Hope you will enjoy them more than you expect.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I sincerely do too -- Rahael, 14:24:43 04/09/03 Wed

I say, as I look at all the Buffy video box sets I own, and the DVD duplicates of the very same, which probably exceed £500 easily altogether. I have a stake in loving this series, LOL! I had very very high hopes. Maybe that's my problem, it's a long way down to disappointment! Maybe now I'm in the right mood to be pleasantly surprised. I was very amused by Potential, which was the last ep I saw.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I second your profanity, dream -- The Webmistress/Board Moderator, 15:16:49 04/09/03 Wed

And am glad, for one, that I didn't have to read those posts as written by their original authors. Very disturbing.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I was thinking about your issues with this... (well- known casting spoiler) -- Rob, 11:52:46 04/09/03 Wed

"One very troubling this season has been the idea of Slayerness as something that disconnects you from humanity, from other people. That it stops you being a 'good mother', a loving, nurturing one, that it makes you think that others are expendable. What I most fear from the finale is that Buffy will give up her power. For so long, I've looked at her Slayer nature as the true 'otherness'. Well, then, what of those of us who can't 'give up' our otherness?"

...and I think that perhaps we will get some real answers about this when Faith returns to "Buffy." Because my prediction is that Faith being there will prove that it is not being the Slayer that is separating Buffy from everybody else, but herself. I can't see Faith being as disconnected from her humanity as Buffy is. Perhaps, ironic as it may seem, Faith will end up being the one to remind Buffy that she does not have to be cold and does not have to push everybody away in order to do her Slayerly duties. In many ways, I think Buffy is imposing her current "Otherness" on herself. She always before found a way to be Other than everyone else, but still part of the world, close to her friends, etc. Interestingly, right now, Buffy is in danger of the same separateness that Doyle warned Angel against in "City of..."

And re: the bad mother thing, I'm not so sure we are actually supposed to feel that way about Nikki. Remember, Spike was psychologically tearing Wood apart at that point, and I'm not so sure that ME or we as an audience are actually supposed to endorse that viewpoint. Issues such as these I think we really need to see the whole story before judging.

But again, if I'm right and it's proven that the "Slayer" isn't driving Buffy away from her friends but what her own perceptions of how she should be as a Slayer is, then that point may be moot.

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Absolutely on the WKCS part, Rob (unspoiled spec for next BtVS) -- Masq, 12:54:12 04/09/03 Wed

I think Faith's arrival will really shake things up. She's not the person she used to be. If she goes against Buffy's wishes on anything, it will be for a good reason.

Ever since the First showed It's face(s) and the Potentials came to town, Buffy has been dealing with the enormous pressures of her job by doing the "I'm the only one" thing-- I'm the only one who can save the world from the First, I'm the only one who gets to make the big decisions here, it's my job, everyone stand back and let me do my job."

She knows she needs others helping her--she makes that very clear by how far she'll go to keep Spike on her team--but she doesn't really want any other co-generals. She believes it's Her Job, she's taking all of the pressure on her own shoulders. She's forgetting the first lesson she learned in Sunnydale--her greatest strength is her friend's strengths. Part of her knows that, but she wants to tell Willow, Spike, etc, what to do and how to do it and when. She wants to micro-manage everything.

And I think she's doing it with the best of intentions. She wants to fight this war right and get the job done. But she's taken on all the weight of it herself and turned herself into a little tyrant in the meantime.

So here comes Faith, fresh from the Angel pep-talk, fresh from the successful Angelus salvage-operation that she lead, depending more equitably and clear-mindedly on the strengths of Wesley, Gunn, Connor, Fred, etc. than Buffy has on her troops.

I can just see this scene where Buffy is doing another one of her inspiring speeches to the troops, going on a tangent about how "she's the Slayer, she's gotta make the tough decisions," blah blah blah, and then Willow walks in the house with Faith.

And Faith says something like, "I think you're forgetting one thing, B."

Faith's status as a real Slayer just like Buffy, Faith's status as the end of the line (the one whose death will spawn the next Slayer) will directly challenge Buffy's authority in a way Giles can't. In a way Wood and Spike can't. In a way Willow can't.

Or not. Either way, I'm really excited to get more FAITH!!!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oops, I mean unspoiled except for the WKCS part ; P -- Masq, 12:57:13 04/09/03 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Absolutely on the WKCS part, Rob (unspoiled spec for next BtVS) -- Rob, 13:38:22 04/09/03 Wed

"And I think she's doing it with the best of intentions. She wants to fight this war right and get the job done. But she's taken on all the weight of it herself and turned herself into a little tyrant in the meantime."

Totally agree. I still love Buffy besides her current 'tude, because on the whole that's a role she's playing, a costume she's putting on because she feels like she has to. But we get flashes of the Buffy we know and love in scenes such as when she strokes Dawn's hair after she fell asleep, her sadness and shock at first discovering Chloe, etc. I want Buffy to realize that to fight the First she does not have to lose her love and compassion. And I think Faith may help her see that.

"Faith's status as a real Slayer just like Buffy, Faith's status as the end of the line (the one whose death will spawn the next Slayer) will directly challenge Buffy's authority in a way Giles can't. In a way Wood and Spike can't. In a way Willow can't."

Absolutely. I am chomping at the bit to see their reactions to each other at this point in their lives. They are both very different than the last time they met. And there's no way I can see Faith putting up with Buffy's "I'm the general. You must obey my every word to the letter"- iness!

"Or not. Either way, I'm really excited to get more FAITH!!!"

Oh, yeah!!! :o)

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> The New [WKCS] heads to Sunnydale (more unspoiled spec for next BtVS) -- Masq, 14:13:37 04/09/03 Wed

I'm going to be curious to see the reactions of others to the new Faith as well. Buffy was there in L.A. when Faith gave herself up to the police. Buffy knows a little about where Faith is and how she got there (prison, voluntarily).

Of course, she hasn't seen how prison changed Faith, and how working with Angel has changed Faith.

But what about the other Scoobs? Thinking back on it, Willow was very blandly accepting of the new Faith. So much so she made no comment on it. It was like, "Oh, hey, Faith, how's it going? We need all the help we can get back in Sunnydale." No lingering issues around "Faith sharing my people" that Willow used to have.

Would have liked to have seen that Faith-Willow conversation after Faith came out of coma #2. I imagine it started out more awkwardly than that.

But how about the other Scoobs? Xander--how will he react to the woman he lost his virginity to? How will Anya react? What are Dawn's "memories" of Faith? What are Faith's "memories" of Dawn?

How about Spike? Faith remembers "buttering him up" in the Bronze. As far as Spike's concerned, they never met. Plus, hey, she's a Slayer. Spike and slayers, well, you know..

How will Giles react? He kind of thought of Faith as screwed up at best, psychopathic at worst.

The reaction I'm looking forward to, though, is from the Potentials. Should be interesting.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I hope... (WKCS spec) -- Rob, 14:24:07 04/09/03 Wed

...that we get to see a little peek at the ride home between Willow and Faith. While she may not have wanted to bring up any issues in front of everybody else, the two of them alone in the car for that long drive...I'm sure both of them had a lot of um catching up to do! I really don't want to miss out on Faith's reactions to discovering about Willow's walk on the dark side. Now that they have so much more in common than they ever did in the past, this could be a very interesting dynamic (if there's time enough to explore that, with only 5 eps left!).

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Maybe that explains Willow's reaction -- Masq, 14:50:38 04/09/03 Wed

She was not nearly as judgmental as one might expect because she doesn't have the moral high ground anymore. She killed someone, just like Faith, but unlike Faith, she didn't pay society's dues.

Heck, I could see those two gals bonding at this point....
[> And one tiny detail from "Slouching Towards Bethlehem"... -- Rob, 07:41:48 04/05/03 Sat

...didja notice how Cordy sang "The Greatest Love of All," Queen C's theme song from Buffy Season 1, "The Puppet Show"? While doing all that heavy analyzing, just wanted to make sure you didn't miss that little moment of continuity brilliance. ;o)

Rob
[> [> Totally missed that, Rob -- Tchaikovsky, 09:04:16 04/05/03 Sat

That's superb continuity- six seasons later- and of course penned by the relatively new Jeffrey Bell. Kudos to him for that.

TCH
[> [> [> The Lyrics -- Arethusa, 09:58:08 04/05/03 Sat

Here's the lyrics to The Greatest Love of All. I won't comment because I don't want to say too much.

I believe the children are our future

Teach them well and let them lead the way

Show them all the beauty they possess inside.
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier

Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be.

Everybody's searching for a hero

people need someone to look up to

I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs.
A lonely place to be
and so I leamed to depend on me.

I decided long ago never to walk in anyone's shadow

If I fell
if I succeed
at least I lived as I believe.
No matter what they take from me

they can't take away my dignity.
Because the greatest love of all is happening to me

I found the greatest love of all inside of me.
The greatest love of all is easy to achieve

Learning to love yourself
it is the greatest love of all.


I believe the children are our future
. . .
I decided long ago never to walk in anyone's shadow
. . .

And if by chance that special place that you've be dreaming of
Leads you to a lonely place
find your strenght in love.

From lyricsfreak.com
[> [> [> And also cross-show continuity! -- Rob, 12:54:34 04/05/03 Sat

[> Some thoughts on THAW and the others (Angel Odyssey 4.3- 4.5) -- s'kat, 21:42:56 04/05/03 Sat

Finally got around to reading your essay tonight. Great job.

Completely agree with your assessment on THAW. A weak episode in an otherwise stellar year. (At least so far) Believe me - this is the only episode in Angel all year that I would rank beneath a 7/8. Angel Season 4 has rocked in my humble opinion.

There is something in THAW that I thought was incredibly dull and lame the first time around and now I'm beginning to wonder isn't maybe important? It's Angel losing his destiny and the whole reliance on destiny and fate. When I think about it - it sort of goes counter to some of the themes of the Whedonverse - about how we may have a destiny, but it is important to set our own path and choose it for ourselves. And no higher power is going to help us?
In THAW - we have Angel lose his destiney and the higher power Cordelia appears to help him get it back and save his friends. Seems to be sort of a contradiction to the whole Whedon mantra, doesn't it? So, maybe...we were supposed to see the whole episode as a bit of a satire? Making fun of Angel's reliance on higher powers and destiney? The idea of going to Vegas - gambling on fate, relying on it? When the house is rigged and you aren't in control?

The House Always Wins after all. We go to Vegas - gamble, believing luck or fate or our own skill will give us winnings. When all our winnings are rigged. Angel can never win the slot-machine but feels compelled to keep playing.
Thinking sooner or later he has to. Then whammo, a higher power comes down and makes him win, snapping him out of his cycle. Whoa. This reminds me oddly enough of Angel in the gutter in Becoming where Whistler comes to him and snaps him out of his haze and takes him to Buffy, because she's his destiney. Or when Doyle finds him in LA and gets him out his morose haze and back to helping folks in City of. Or Fred tells him that he and Cordelia are destined to be together?? Could THAW be ME's and Fury's way of making fun of or metanarrating on Angel's reliance on the PTB and others to find/set his own destiny? And that's the reason he is so dull and useless for a good majority of the episode, because without a set destiney, he feels has no will or purpose? If so, the episode suddenly got a lot more interesting and maybe I should rank it higher than a 4 after all.

Another thing in that episode - Fred and Gunn believe they are destined to be together. Angel believes Cordy is destined to be a higher being. Lorne - everyone is mislead into believing is happy. Very ironic when it plays out.

Something to keep in mind about David Fury - the man has the most satirical sense of humor I've seen in a writer. He reminds me of Swift at times. And he is brutal about it. Knocks you over the head. You either like him or hate him.
Me? I go either way.

Completely agree on Slouching. Not much to add, except loved the analysis of the poem. Clearest one I've read yet.

Also agree on your rating of Supersymmetry. This is one of my all time favorite episodes. Absolutely loved it. The new gal team - is an excellent addition - they haven't failed once.

When it first aired, I tended to see Wes in the right. (see my essay on Little Girl Lost: Fred and Cordelia). Now I don't think any of them were. This is what happens when you get an epiphany. My epiphany on connections and forging own path with those connections as a main theme - has literally turned all my readings of the episodes upside down.

From one angle Wes's help of Fred seems right on. He appreciates her views and lets her empower herself. She forges her own path. But and a huge but here - his advice and help only serves to disconnect her from everyone and to disconnect him. What were Wes' other options here?

1. He could have told her no and not given her the information.

2. He could have gotten hold of Gunn and Angel and let them know what she was up to.

3. He could have insisted on going with her.

4. Do what he did in the episode.

5. Gone after Seidel himself.

Honestly? I think option 1 or 2 would have been the best, but that would have been out of character for Wes, who a) has a major crush on Fred and b) feels disconnected from everyone and doesn't trust a soul, except himself well sort of. And desperately wants Fred's approval and love.

Gunn - unfortunately also made the wrong decision but, I can see why he did it. For exactly the reasons you state above. Poor Gunn - in some ways he was in exactly the same place Wes is. Afraid of being disconnected from Fred.
Your analysis of Gunn, I believe is right on here. Same with Fred.

In retrospect, I feel much more positive about Gunn in this episode than I did originally. Odd.

That's what I love about Btvs and Ats - no matter how many times I rewatch or re-examine, I always discover a new angle, even in the lackluster episodes.

Great reviews.

SK
[> [> Again, not understanding the general dislike of "The House Always Wins" -- Finn Mac Cool, 08:12:51 04/06/03 Sun

It seemed to me to be a very funny episode, and running from the bad guys was done very cleverly. No, it's not a really deep, "gee, thinking about this is going to keep me up all night!" episode. But, personally, it's sometimes nice to get some lightness and comedy without having to switch away from ME quality writing and acting. Plus, I've seen TV shows before that try to make every episode deeply philosophical; I've yet to see one show like that that actually makes it work. Sometimes you just need a lighthearted filler episode.

Also, I didn't see the episode being about Angel's reliance on destiny and higher powers. Note how he keeps avoiding having Lorne read him, which would reveal at least part of his destiny. Rather, I think he was nervous about what a Lorne reading might reveal, given all the trouble prophecies caused back in Season Three. Also, keep in mind, Angel was still able to fight the bad guys even without his destiny, because his friends/family were in danger.

Though, my rating of it may be a little higher than some because I wasn't too fond of "Deep Down" or "Ground State", so "The House Always Wins" had an easy act to follow.
[> [> Congratulations on a blood from stone performance! -- Tchaikovsky, 15:03:47 04/06/03 Sun

Loved your take on 'The House Always Win'. When you put it like that, it does become interesting. I wonder whether this isn't more your genius than Fury's though!

Something to keep in mind about David Fury - the man has the most satirical sense of humor I've seen in a writer. He reminds me of Swift at times. And he is brutal about it. Knocks you over the head. You either like him or hate him.
Me? I go either way.

That's a significantly different angle from me- I'm with Sol on the whole Fury Fury thing, mostly. Actually, I'm not furious with him- his episodes rarely leave me feeling annoyed with what he's written, ('Disharmony' a mini- exception), but just consistently underwhelmed. He is kind of satirical; I personally admire your bravery in comparing him to Swift, but can't see Jonathan being that impressed. Setting aside whether Fury is anywhere near the same league as Swift, there is another key difference. Swift is writing from within to his own personal worldview, sometimes mistakenly- the horse story at the end of Gulliver discounts some of what is essentially human I believe- sweat, vulgarity, lust and a temptation away from reason. If Swift makes mistakes, we blame him, love him for his dead-on accuracy in the rest of the book, and move on. When Fury does his satire, he imposes his own ideas without full blame on an established Universe not created by him. I personally find his tendency to spin out on his own limb a problem with his later work. It was fine while he was the new writer on a tight leash- think 'Helpless', 'Choices', both good. Now with his Producer-ness his crazy subversive things sometimes grate too badly for me. Just personal opinion. As you so beautifully used in your review of 'Storyteller', SK, your orange is sweet, mine sour.

Agree entirely on 'Supersymmetry'- and off to read your essay!

TCH
[> [> [> Re: Congratulations on a blood from stone performance! -- s'kat, 16:26:50 04/06/03 Sun

Thank you.

Actually, I think you are right - comparing him to Swift may be giving the man far too much credit. Swift, of course, wasn't hemmed in by the boundaries of tv writing and someone else's universe. But Swift also was a master of satire and satire IMHO is something that is very hard to pull off well, without being too heavy handed.

I agree - one of my problems with Fury is his tendency to impose his own view of things on Joss' verse. What's amusing about it is watching Joss use what he gives him and flip it around later.

While I loved Crush, Helpless, Fear Itself, Choices,
LMPTM, Disharmony (which may be more Goddard than Fury) and Awakenings and Salvage....Fury was admittedly off at times and I don't like the heavy handedness of his writing. The serial killer lines - and he's the only one who uses them btw, always get to me. It seems a little heavy-handed and out of place. The lame jokes - he does them with rat pack in THAW - grates. But...there are times that he nails it and I think sometimes he writes better when he is co-writing the episode, almost as if the second writer is somehow tempering the work. All in all? I prefer Fury on Angel as a writer than Btvs, he seems to have a better feel for that show somehow. Not sure why.
[> Preserving this thread -- Masq, 06:38:01 04/08/03 Tue

Buffy the Vampire Slayer Song used Early One Morning Lyrics -- Charlene Skluzacek, 08:18:37 04/05/03 Sat

I liked the song Early One Morning and have found the music but I would like the lyrics they used from the show. April 5, 2003 and I haven't any luck finding the words. Are they the same? Here are the words the traditional song used:Anonymous
Traditional English Folksong

Early one morning,
Before the sun had risen,
I heard a bluebird
In the fields gayly sing,
"South winds are blowing,
Green grass is growing,
We come to herald the merry Spring."

One Autumn afternoon,
Just as the sun was setting,
I heard a bluebird
On a tree pipe a song,
"Farewell! we're going;
Cold winds are blowing;
But we'll be back when the days grow long."

Thanks for all the help in finding the words.
[> Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer Song used Early One Morning Lyrics -- CW, 08:30:32 04/05/03 Sat

Early one morning, just as the sun was rising,
I heard a maiden singing in the valley below.
Oh, don't deceive me, Oh, never leave me.
How can you use a poor maiden so?

from Folksinger's Wordbook, Silber and Silber, 1973.

This is the version of the folksong I'm used to. There are five more verses.
[> [> Spike's Mom actually screwed up a little... -- dub ;o), 11:55:55 04/05/03 Sat

She sang,

Early one morning, just as the sun was shining...

That might be an accepted adaptation, but I've never heard it before.

;o)
[> [> [> Re: Spike's Mom actually screwed up a little... -- leslie, 16:08:44 04/05/03 Sat

This was something I found rather odd about the song being a psychological trigger. As I understand it (and I am not particularly well-versed in brainwashing so I could be wrong), the trigger has to occur exactly as it is programmed, yet not only does Mrs. William the Elder sing a variant of the words, but there are also some slight melodic variations among the people who sing the song, timing variations (FE!Spike jazzes up the rhythm), even what you might call orchestration variations--an accordion player seems to set it off with just the tune, no words. I don't know whether that's deliberate and meaningful, a comment on the variant-ing nature of folk song, or what, but it struck me as interesting.
[> Re: Buffy the Vampire Slayer Song used Early One Morning Lyrics -- Lynn Jepsen, 15:12:08 04/05/03 Sat

Actually, a different version was used on the show... These are the lyrics I learned to sing, and they match all the snippets I heard on the show.



Early one morning, just as the sun was rising
I heard a maid sing in the valley below
"Oh don't deceive me, Oh never leave me,
How could you use, a poor maiden so?"

Remember the vows that you made to me truly
Remember how tenderly you nestled close to me
Gay is the garland, fresh are the roses
I've culled from the garden to bind over thee.

Here I now wander alone as I wonder
Why did you leave me to sigh and complain
I ask of the roses, why should I be forsaken,
Why must I here in sorrow remain?

Through yonder grove, by the spring that is running
There you and I have so merrily played,
Kissing and courting and gently sporting
Oh, my innocent heart you've betrayed

How could you slight so a pretty girl who loves you
A pretty girl who loves you so dearly and warm?
Though love's folly is surely but a fancy,
Still it should prove to me sweeter than your scorn.

Soon you will meet with another pretty maiden
Some pretty maiden, you'll court her for a while;
Thus ever ranging, turning and changing
Always seeking for a girl that is new.

Thus sang the maiden, her sorrows bewailing
Thus sang the poor maid in the valley below
"Oh don't deceive me, Oh never leave me,
How could you use, a poor maiden so?"
Yipe! -- Cactus Watcher, 08:58:15 04/05/03 Sat

I've been keeping track now and then of the numbers which follow /14567/ in the internet address of our individual posts. We were getting close to 100,000 which would mean we've had that many posts, and we'd have something to celebrate. Now, that darn Voy has started counting over.
[> why not celebrate anyway? :) -- Alison, 11:44:20 04/05/03 Sat

[> I noticed the sme thing. -- OnM, 19:07:24 04/05/03 Sat

As best as I could tell, we left off at about 97,349. Anyone know for sure exactly where the re-numbering took place?
[> [> But there isn't a message 97349! -- Solitude1056, 09:57:40 04/06/03 Sun

[> current numbering, post #2661 = original numbering, post #100,000 -- Solitude1056, 21:08:13 04/05/03 Sat

[> [> Sounds good, Post #2661, here we come! -- CW, 06:42:31 04/06/03 Sun

[> [> [> Or Post #2651, here we come! Since OnM's count looks better. -- CW, 07:19:01 04/06/03 Sun

Then again, we've had all those double posts... Sigh!

The witching hour seems to have been 22:00 Pacific time on thursday. Other than that, I'll let someone with more patience track it down. I couldn't find post new-style #1, but did see Rob's post #4 at 22:02, and Masq's post #97348 at 21:50.
[> [> [> [> New post #1 was by Honorificus at 22:01:02 04/03/03 Thu -- OnM, 08:33:50 04/06/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> [> Yes! I am the First! -- Honorificus (Always The First), 13:24:52 04/06/03 Sun

I knew it! I knew there was nothing more evil than myself (except perhaps Ryan Seacrest's wardrobe, but that's another show)! All of you bow down.

Cool! Gotta go change my clothes!
[> [> [> [> 97339 was the highest I could locate. -- Solitude1056, 09:53:40 04/06/03 Sun

I located http://www.voy.com/14567/97331.html manually and just kept changing the last digits until I hit a 404. The highest number that had a post attached to it was 97339.
[> [> [> [> [> It should be in the archives, although I couldn't locate it right now. -- OnM, 20:40:20 04/06/03 Sun

The post was by Masq, at 21:51:56 on 04/03/03 Thu. I had previously found a post at # 97346, and thought that might be the highest, but then located (this) one at 97349. Couldn't locate anything higher, and the time signatures are pretty close.

Has Voynak struck again???
[> I say we party. I'll bring the hamster kabobs! -- HonorH, 22:36:54 04/05/03 Sat

And maybe some bichon creme frise, too. Anybody have a good recipe for entrail salad? And don't forget the cats-in-a- blanket!
[> [> Honorificus!!! -- HonorH (the real one), 23:29:23 04/05/03 Sat

If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times, NO USING MY PSEUDONYM TO MAKE WEIRD POSTS!!!!!

That's it! I'm listening to Air Supply tonight.
[> [> [> Do we suspect that Honorificus and HonorH are connected somehow? -- Jay, who just noticed that I lost an hour last nite, 07:22:52 04/06/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> Dude...could it be possible?!? -- Rob, who wants that hour back....NOW!!!, 08:48:17 04/06/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> [> Arizona doesn't do that. We just suddenly move from Mountain to Pacific! ;o) -- CW, 11:35:52 04/06/03 Sun

[> It happened last week, but the big news is... -- Masquerade, 08:09:06 04/06/03 Sun

I meant to comment on it, but I got busy. The good news is, CW, we can continue to keep count just by doing math. We'll know when we get to 100,000

The big news is we probably went over 100,000 a while ago. Voy is our second board host, and we were at InsideTheWeb for over a year.
[> [> It figures. I'm usually a year late to the party ;o) -- CW, 11:38:14 04/06/03 Sun

Spike, Souls and Whips -- Majin Gojira, 12:14:15 04/05/03 Sat

A Disturbing trend in Spike's Behavior has reared it's ugly head. His capacity to redeam himself for his past transgressions is on even more unstable ground than it was before. This season, it looked to all intesive purposes that Spike was going to try and redeam himself, now, it looks like he does not want to be redeamed or even care if he is.

At the beging of the season, Spike arrived with jibbering insanity and gnawing guilt. His behavior looked much like Angel did when he was first ensouled.

However, it was revealed that unlike Angel, who felt bad for everything he had done durring his soulless days, Spike only felt bad for one thing and one thing Only: His treatment of Buffy. Nothing else appears to be wracking his conscience.

He tried his best to do good, to do what was needed...to do what Buffy needed him to do.

He tries, he wants to be good and has the capacity to show kindness. However, at Buffy's bidding, he can tune it out just like that.

Buffy is actually a barrier to Spike's moral development...wait a minute.

Spike has hardly developed morally since season 5. he's perpetually Buffy's bitch. She wants him to help. He does. She 'needs' him to be a killer. he becomes one...completely.

Spike's moral compas is, and probably always will be Buffy. Now that she's asked him to be bad, we got to see the ramifications of that in LMPTM.

In it, it is revealed that Spike's world has always revolved around the women he's cared about. His Mother, Cecilly, Dru, Buffy. They guide who he is in the greater sense.

He doesn't care about anything else except how these people view him.

Spike Doesn't feel bad about what he's done to countless innocense over his 150 years of vampirism. He only cares about what he's done to the women he seeks approval from.

Hence his return to his more brutal ways.

This bring up a whole slew of issues on Vampires with Souls in how much of them is Demon and how much of them is Soul.

Spike, even with this new soul, is hardly an improvement morally over the Old Spike.
[> Disagree -- HonorH, 12:44:07 04/05/03 Sat

Yes, he felt bad about his treatment of Buffy, and that was his major focus when he first got his soul. However, we see him wracked with guilt in "Sleeper" as well, telling Buffy that he wouldn't hurt more people because he can hardly live with what he's done already. Now that the chip is out, Spike has his real test: can he restrain himself from killing people on his own?

Think back to "Smashed". What was the first thing he did when he thought the chip wasn't working any longer? Tried to bite a girl. This time, no such thing. Even when he's very angry, like in the case of Robin, he can still restrain himself from killing, even without Buffy's presence to stop him.

Also, Buffy didn't tell him to be a killer again. She told him to quit wimping out on fights--to be dangerous again. He wasn't fighting his hardest for fear of releasing the demon again, and she essentially told him to get over it. Now, that might've been unwise, but so far, Spike's actually done very well. Again, in the fight with Robin, Spike restrained himself from killing. The old Spike would've killed Robin in a heartbeat.

The point of LMPTM, to my way of thinking, is that Spike is now truly his own man. He's not the First's lap dog anymore, he's not restrained by the chip, and he's no longer Buffy's bitch. He told Buffy flat-out that he'd kill Robin if he tried anything else, and I don't imagine he was thinking Buffy would be especially pleased to hear it. Spike controls Spike now. It'll be interesting to see where that goes.
[> [> Which is probably a first for him, actually. -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:09:42 04/05/03 Sat

I don't think we've ever seen Spike before when a woman (or at least the memory of a woman) wasn't what his mind was focused on. For most of his mortal life, he was symbiotically (or parasitcally, depending on your outlook) attached to his mother, and late in it developed a deep obsession for Cecily. Then, after his vamping, Drusilla became his world. Everything he did he did with thoughts of her in mind, which spurred him on to be even more viscious than he might have been otherwise. Even after she left him in 1998, he was still haunted by his memory of her and dreamed of getting her back. Even in his relationship with Harmony, it was clear she was just a Drusilla substitute. Then he fell in love with Buffy in Season 5 and became her faithful lapdog. The memory of her lasted him throughout the summer, and, after her resurrection, he returned to making his life revolve around her, and this has continued ever since.

But, in "First Date", Spike talked about having moved past him and Buffy as an item. He got past Drusilla back in "Crush" when he was willing to kill her for Buffy. He most likely stopped crooning over Cecily shortly after Dru turned him. And now, finally, he's put his issues with his mother behind him. The closest Spike ever came to this type of freedom before was early Season 4, but even then it was very clear he was still pining. The last five episodes of Season 7 should give us our first look at a fully independent Spike.
[> [> [> Well, he's not independant yet. -- Doug, 14:27:33 04/05/03 Sat

Spike's at sort of a complicated place in his relationship with Buffy. He's no longer the faithful lapdog, but while he is no longer emotioally dependant on her he still is tied to her in other ways. How many allies does he have? Wood just tried to kill him, Giles helped Wood try to kill him, the potentials are terrified of Spike, Anya is trying to get Spike into bed but I'm not sure how much she likes him; and as for Xander, Willow and Dawn I have no clue about how they feel. The only advocate Spike has, the only person who will trust him, is Buffy.

I don't think there's anyone else in the world right now who would treat Spike as a friend (we haven't seen Clem for several episodes, and no interaction between him and Spike since last season), no one else who would help him or who would accept his help. So until Spike can find at least one new ally he is tied to Buffy as tightly as he ever was; he's no longer emotionally dependant, but there are a lot of people who want him dusted, and since Buffy is the only person other than Spike watching out for him he's still going to be watching her back.
[> [> [> [> emotionally independent? I'm not so sure . . . -- pilgrim, 18:09:42 04/05/03 Sat

I agree with much of what you're saying, but I think what's getting Spike through, even now, is that four-word mantra: Buffy believes in me. As long as he has that foundation to stand on, he has both a reason to try to be a good man and a guide for how to achieve that end, ie, what Buffy would want him to do. I see him as still being basically Buffy's faithful lapdog, or perhaps her trained pitbull--he still looks to her for approval, basically does what she asks of him, and jumps when she calls him.

What would happen if (1) he screws up royally and Buffy doesn't believe in him any longer, or (2) Buffy falls or jumps off that pedestal he still has her on? (re the pedestal, Spike tells us that for him, it's still all about Buffy.) Would he believe in himself even if she didn't? Would he even want to be a good man? I suspect that making that leap, essentially a leap into true adult responibility for himself, would be difficult for Spike. Shadowkat suggests in her thread below that Spike went after a soul for deeper reasons than just needing to be a good man for Buffy--that he longed for human connection. I hope so, although I'm not entirely convinced. I also think that Spike has his own, very personal reasons for wanting to fight and defeat the FE--it took away his self control. So that gives him a non-Buffy motive for wanting to be good, at least good enough to fight with the other good guys.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: emotionally independent? I'm not so sure . . . -- Doug, 18:40:49 04/06/03 Sun

I think that what Spike's final scene in LMPTM was supposed to show was that he was through just following Buffy and was setting his own rules for things like people trying to kill him. He is starting to define his own existence, rather than let himself be defined by his mother or Drusilla or Buffy. That being said, while he has his freedom from chip, mind control, and at least some of his issues, he still has nowhere in particular to go in this world; he has alot of enemies and few real friends.
[> [> Re: Disagree -- luvthistle1, 20:04:55 04/05/03 Sat

Do anyone remember, that he stayed with Dawn after Buffy had died? If it was all about Buffy, wouldn't he had left, or went evil? instead he continue to help the scoobie in there battle against evil.
[> [> [> Re: Disagree -- Dochawk, 20:35:51 04/05/03 Sat

The fact that Spike stayed to "help" at the end of Season 5 don't support Spike having changed.

1. Spike obsessed over all women Summers, not just Buffy, but Dawn and Joyce as well. In their instructions to authors who write Buffy novels, they are told that Spike is not allowed to do anything good except when it comes to one of the Summers women. Get It Done, when Spike fights to save Anya was the first time we have seen Spike independently do something good for someone who wasn't a Summer's women.

2. Remember Spike loves to kill, when he learned in Season 4 that even chipped he could kill demons he couldn't wait to get back out there. Working with the Scoobies allows Spike to do this. He could have gone out as a rogue demon hunter, but he still felt a responsibility to Dawn, the last of the Summers' women.
[> [> [> Re: Disagree -- Dannyblue, 20:45:22 04/05/03 Sat

It's true. Buffy wasn't there physically to see and be impressed by all things Spike did (fighting demons, looking after Dawn) while she was "dead". But I think that, to Spike, she was there in spirit, and he was still trying to impress her.

1. Spike promised Buffy he would protect Dawn. As he told Doc, he "made a promise to a lady." A lady he loved, no less. That's not a promise he going to break.

2. Doing things Buffy would want him to do was a tribute to her memory. A living memorial, if you will. Buffy would want him to protect Dawn. Buffy would want him to fight demons and help her friends.

3. Staying in Sunnydale gave him a connection to Buffy. Yes, she was dead. But he could keep her alive, in a way, by interracting with other people who loved her too. By leaving, he would've lost that connection.

4. He also protected Dawn out of guilt. I think a part of Spike blames himself for Buffy's death. If he'd been able to save Dawn on the tower in "The Gift", Buffy would never have had to sacrifice herself.

I thought it was possible Spike stayed in Sunnydale because he cared about Dawn