February 2001 posts

Previous February 2001  

More February 2001

"*** "For a few moments I was unable to tell if they were just normal or if he was going to rape her. She is strong enough to have stopped him so I will assume it was not rape."

*** "I agree with you -- it almost makes Spike's chaining up of the slayer look tame by comparison." ***

*** "Also disturbing to me was the encounter between Cordelia and Angel." ***

Quote #1-- I suppose I wasn't as disturbed by this encounter since I tend to expect that sex between vamps would likely tend towards the rough side. I assumed Darla was just playing along. You do bring up a good point though in that I'm not shure she would be strong enough to defned herself if he really did intend to rape her.

This is an awfully dark topic but it is a good question-- could a vampire woman be raped psychologically that is? (The physical fact is obvious). I'm voting yes since we have already seen instances where vampires do avoid conflict or pain such as in the famous 'vamp hooker' scenario.

Quote #2-- I agree and in fact was think the same thing while this was occurring on screen. IT's a matter of degree of evil again. Spike simply isn't in the same class as Darla or Angelus. This continues to emphasisw what we have already observed over this pat season and those before-- that Demons in general and vamps in particular cover a whole spectrum of evil behavior.

Quote #3-- *This* was the encounter I personally found the most disturbing. For Darla rough play is a pleasant little game. For Cordy this was real hurt and betrayal-- the clear feeling that the Angel she knew is slipping away ever faster and Angelus getting closer and closer.

She had stated in the past that if Angel ever 'reverted' she'd 'Stake him in a minute'. But she has too much invested emotionally to make this happen as easily as she says it."

She had stated in the past that if Angel ever 'reverted' she'd 'Stake him in a minute'. But she has too much invested emotionally to make this happen as easily as she says it.

Thought I doubt we'll see the return of Angelus next week (though shades of him seemed to appear in the past few eps) if he were to return I think Cordelia would take him out if he reverted. I agree it wouldn't be easy but she is the only one of the the LA SG to know first hand what it means to live with Angelus roaming in your life and still live to tell the tales. She vowed to Angel she would and as much as she's hurt now by his attitude she would stake him to prevent him from doing more harm. I'm sure plan A would be to call Willow to do another curse but Plan B C & D would be to stake him.

Made a post and got an error message when I submitted. That's what I get for not writing it elsewhere first.
"Ok here's the real post if I can remember what I said the first time.

I found the Darla/Angel scene disturbing but only in the context of the story. I too think it's been well established that roughness is de ridueur for vampiric foreplay. Darla's protest such as they were had to do with her suspicions of Angel's motives. And Angel made his intentions clear fairly quickly.

Since stronger vampires like to keep their minions in line with humiliation and intimidation I would say vampires can and do get raped. It seems as "good" a method for that purpose as sticking a finger in their eye.

I have to see the episode again to comment on the Cordy/Angel interchange. My baby granddaughter decided to honor us with a song at that moment. All I remember is them bickering over some book. But I will say this. Betrayal and abandonment can go both ways."
Well vamp sex in the Buffyverse definitely seems to have a little violence thrown in but Angel is supposed to have a soul after all and I was disturbed by the way he threw Darla around...although Spike's fantasy dream about Buffy had a little pushing and shoving too. I guess when you have super-strength a little rough play is a whole different matter. I flashed back to poor Willow's predicament too when she gave Oz her virginity and then he later left her to have wild wolf sex with someone else!
This goes back to previous line about the symbolism of colour in the costuming. In begining of Crush Spike has packed away the total black on black look in favor of green. Once Dru reentered the picture he struted into the Bronze in he's bad boy black.His leather coat flying in his wake.
Black = evil bad death etc. that part I get
but why green. Green is rebirth a begining spring life.

that's good...still vague memory of Spike coming onto the show in season2 didn't he wear a red scarf too. Very bright could be be blood and carnage.
Wasn't he wearing a grey-blue shirt?

Anyway I spotted another titbit in Blood Ties. When Buffy is coming out from her fighting practice in the back room of the magic shop she is wearing browm pants a belt and a brown T-shirt. When you look at her when she walks... she's wearing the same kind of outfit Spike is wearing all the time... only the color is different!

(nothing philosophical in this... but you brought up the subject so I thought I'd say it!) ;)
"I've been lurking for a while but I decided to test the waters and post. Forgive a newbie if she steps on any toes.

Season 5 seems to me to be a season exploring moral ambiguity. The two major storylines thus far this season have been the Glory/Dawn Key storyline and the Spike Transformation storyline. What ties these two stories together is that we have three characters who aren't registering correctly on the good/evil scale of the Buffyverse.

Let's take Glory. She's a god. What is that saying about the mythology? An evil god? With alternate personalities that appear to be good (Ben)? Presumably a god in this universe would at least once have been good: unless we're dealing with gods along the lines of Greek Roman or Celtic gods who might typify more forces of nature than moral absolutes.

Then there's Dawn. Is she good or evil? There is one group of people sworn to protect her and another sworn to kill her because she is evil.

Spike is another morally ambiguous character right now. I saw a thread below that called Spike confused. I absolutely agree. I think Spike is so fascinating this season not because of the Buffy love angle but because we see Spike struggling against what he was and trying to become something he isn't yet.

Spike always exhibited more emotion than most of the other vamps that we've seen; he seemed to form strong attachments (Drusilla) and he also seemed to be looking for a more heroic (in vampire terms) existence as shown in his desire to kill slayers and his comments to Angelus about getting tired of fights whose outcome you know. Spike is the romantic heroic type translated into the negative (or evil) opposite. This is probably how the demon has perverted William's original romantic poetical nature.

The chip prevented him from doing physical harm to a human. At first after the chip was installed Spike still demonstrated all his usual evil thoughts despite his inability to translate those into action. As s5 has progressed however he has been having distinctly non-evil impulses: his desire to comfort a crying Buffy (even when he original intention when going to her house was to kill her); his friendship with Dawn (notice he comforts Dawn with "fairytales" in the time-honored tradition of all adults -- although his version are blood-drenched and gory the impulse behind the storytelling is very human); his instinctive choice to save Buffy when Drusilla attacked her; his easygoing conversations with Joyce.

Most telling is The Crush. Drusilla arrives and Spike is tempted to return to his old ways after receiving yet another rejection from Buffy. Why not try to become himself again? But before feeding on Dru's kill he has a moment of what -- conscience? it can't be fear of the chip since the chip only activates if he plans harm to a human (can't hurt a dead body). Maybe he would have continued to try to regain himself but Buffy forces his hand by being in his crypt when he arrives with Dru (remember he didn't plan to tie them both up -- events forced his hand when Dru attacked Buffy with the stun gun and he had to react).

The most revealing scene is the confrontation with Dru and Buffy. Dru says that Spike is so lost that even she can't help him. Is that true? Spike knows that something is happening to him. He even tells Buffy he knows that whatever is between them is wrong and he fears that he is becoming like an empty shell of himself where only she will remain with nothing left of himself. This sounds remarkably like what happens with the vamps: the human soul is gone leaving a memory while demon takes residence in the shell of the human body. Is Spike's demon leaving or does he perceive it to be leaving which will leave him with an empty human shell filled by what Buffy represents (humanity)? This entire scene sounds too genuine for Spike to be just "putting on an act" to fool the Scooby Gang. Spike is tranforming but his behaviors are bizarre as he attempts to demonstrate his transforming self with the actions that characterized him as a vampire.

Looking at the stalking parallel. Is Spike stalking Buffy? Or is his shrine to her consistent with what a love-struck William might have done? It seems like a perversion or perhaps translation of William's feelings through Spike's actions.

Spike may well return to his evil ways or he may become something else -- not 100% good but not evil either. If he can translate his feelings into human empathy (which is what all vamps are missing) he will have transformed himself. I don't think the writers are manipulating us with a pretense of a transformation. I think Spike is on a journey with his final destination in the balance: return to the Big Bad of s2 or perhaps become something unique in the Buffyverse: a vamp who transforms himself (without the benefit of a gypsy curse).

I do think that chip will prove to be non-functional in the end: when did government issue stuff ever work in prototype without a hitch?

Yes I guess I'm obsessed with Spike just the way I was with Angel when the show first started. James Marsters has been too great a talent to waste on the old one-dimensional Spike (as great as he was as the Big Bad); as the confused unsure changing Spike he has been mesmerizing. Who can forget the look on his face when Buffy barred him from her house? Or the change in his voice when she asked him if they were on a date (A date? Are you crazy?--do you want it to be?).

All I can say to the writers is -- keep it up! We're all fascinated.

Spike is the romantic heroic type translated into the negative (or evil) opposite. This is probably how the demon has perverted William's original romantic poetical nature.

I agree but I wonder if that was the original intention of the writers? His character as interpreted by the actor is certainly multidimension and riveting to watch almost to the exclusion of all other storylines.

I have to admit that I'm watching tonight and next week with much dread fearful that they will play his character only for laughs or deconstruct what they have created thus far. Here's hoping that the writers do not succumb to the easy way out.

I'm really not sure that I should be cheering on such a character but his transformation has been fascinating to watch.
"You've really expressed alot of my thoughts. I doubt that Spike is being played out in the original intention. I think that JW became more interested in this character as the series progressed. There is something fascinating to all of us about the potential redemption of evil.

I wonder if Spike will turn out to be a Miltonic Satan exploring his doubts/regrets about his evilness only to in the end embrace the "I am Hell" viewpoint and become an even Badder Big Bad."
"Great post. It covers all the bases and nicely summarises alot of the arguments re: Spike's ambiguity/transformation/redemption - whatever it turns out to be. I do hope you decide to join our discussions and post with a handle in the future. Welcome.

"I do think that chip will prove to be non-functional in the end: when did government issue stuff ever work in prototype without a hitch?"

Yay! Another convert:) *Aquitaine happy now*

Oh sorry I forgot my name on the original post! Meant to post my name. It's rowan.

Wouldn't it be hysterical if the chip had stopped functioning awhile ago and the pain was (excuse me for the pun) only in his head.

I think what I find most difficult to navigate in the Buffyverse is the arbitrariness of some things. Why is Anya okay but Spike is not? Anya is a demon? Has she expressed remorse for past deeds? Did she consciously overcome her demonness? Yet it's okay for Xander to love her and the Scooby Gang has (with some bumps in the road) added her to the group.

"Very much liked your post rowan. It's good in a saries when characters change...keeps the show interesting. I have been watching the Spike character roller coaster with a lot more interest in the show this season...and it's been a wild ride. I have my doubts that Spike will be revealed *aha*! as the several season's back "big bad"...they've never before decided to rewrite season two...*grin*. Yes I think Spike is changing and has changed (into what I'm not sure). So have Buffy and Willow and Anya perhaps most tellingly. Change is never easy and painless and never in a linear process thus the roller coaster. Welcome to the board."
Of course after tonight's episode Spike apparently has taken a little detour from the redemption path. Argh!!! These writers! They are torturing me with these twists and turns!
Anyanka's evil hasn't been as real for the scooby gang as Spike's. Then again Anya has made real changes and shown true unselfish concern for her fellow humans (for Xander for Dawn). She probably saw them as justified vengeance. [My assumptions on her transformations]She's completely human again so she's as non-threatening as any regular human being. Spike....i just doubt that the demon will reform not so much that it can't. He's just being conditioned. If he were to be released possibly attachments to some of the scoobies would make him hesitate to kill them but i doubt he would remorse killing unknown humans. He loves violence and destruction in addition to blood hunger.
Welcome rowan :)

I'm with you I am definitely feeling tortured by the writers! But as Rufus has said it's their show and they'll torture us if they want to :)

But seriously it would be rather boring if everything happened in a linear fashion all the bumps and detours have made it so interesting particularly in Spike's case. I keep going back to a quote Joss made a bit ago he said Spike may be sympathetic but he will never be nice or else he would not be any fun to write for. So what we may end up with (and I hope JM will be back next year) is a Spike who will pick and choose his good fights with bad attitude intact. At least I hope so seeing him and Buffy argue is about as good if not better than seeing them make cow eyes at each other.

And speaking of tonight's episode how about the look on Spike's face when confronted by Giles/Ripper? Surprise fear and a little respect.
"It's interesting that on 'La Femme Nikita' last Sunday Operations regards Nikita's sparing his life as sign of her weakness-- proof that she 'isn't fit' to take a leadership role in Section.

On a grimmer more realistic situation I've often thought that one of the primary reasons the Nazis could stand by so dispassionatly while all those people were being exterminated was that they considered the lack of resistance of many of their prisoners 'proof' of a lack of worthiness to live. It's like if they don't fight back they deserve to be victims.

Perhaps this attitude is shared by most demons in the Buffyverse vamps of course included. Humans aren't fit to be more than food why they don't even have enough strength to fight us back as we are trying to kill them.

Ah classic circular reasoning sprinkled with a little rationalizion and heaping helping of good old 'blame the victim'.

Perhaps one of the influences on Spike's behavious is that he has come to see that humans aren't as weak as he thought they are. The Slayer obviously isn't but he has come to see that the Scoobies aren't complete pushovers either. This probably seriously confuses the demon-- recall in 'Anne' the outrage at-- "You don't fight back-- that's not how this works!"


Thank you for the welcome! I love this board! The conversations are more in depth than what I have seen elsewhere (other boards usually just talk spoilers which is nice too). As someone with a degree in Lit I love to talk this stuff to death!
"ATPoBtVS is going to need a new forum for the great discussions we've been having on the show. I need your help finding another place on the web that has free message boards like this one. Any suggestions would be appreciated!


"Dear InsideTheWeb message board owner

Since January 1997 InsideTheWeb has provided free message boards to online communities. Our goal has always been to offer an easy-to-use and technically superior format for threaded discussions. Though we have hit a few bumps along the way we feel we have succeeded in that ideal. As some of you may know internet advertising revenues have fallen to extremely low levels over the past several months. Supporting a community service such as InsideTheWeb is impossible without a secure source of funding and we are being forced to close our doors. While there are certainly other means of generating income we do not have the ability to address them without sustaining significant losses in the foreseeable future. Therefore as of March 5th we will be shutting down all InsideTheWeb message boards."
How about http://www.ezboard.com/ ? I don't know how much traffic this site generates but they seem to be able to handle a decent amount. There seems to be a number of different ways to set up the format for their forums so you can probably customize it to mimic the look of this forum.

Good luck finding a replacement. This is my favorite BTVS board due in large part to the great regulars here. Unfortunately I think eesites depends on ad revenue the same as insidetheweb.com so this may just be a stop-gap measure. FYI their rates if you don't use ads are:
Monthly Page Views -- Monthly Fee
0 - 25 000 -- $19
25 001 - 50 000 -- $49
50 001 - 75 000 -- $69
75 001 - 100 000 -- $99

Have a good one.
"I'm playing around with a new threaded message board at:

"The Harmony thread down below has inspired me to post something that's been on my mind and I don't think it's been addressed yet. "Crush" was Harmony's last episode on BTVS from what I understand and I also hear that she may be appearing on AtS from now on(supposedly there's an upcoming AtS episode called "Disharmony" which could be the one that moves her over to LA(that's not confirmed just what I've heard).

Anyway my point is I've seen a lot of posts discussing this possible move for Harmony and everybody laughs about it and how incompetent Harmony will be in helping Cordy and the gang with their investigations blah blah blah. What I find noticeably absent from any of the discussions is that this would be a redemption of sorts for Harmony fighting good instead of being evil. No one has even blinked at the possibility that it could happen. Contrast that with any post that suggests Spike could possibly be redeemed which usually creates a board war within 5 minutes. There seems to be a double standard for these two characters. Is it because Spike has always been portrayed more seriously than Harmony who was always used mainly for comic relief? Is she just too goofy to be taken seriously as an evil person? Even if she's an airhead it still wouldn't change the fact that she is a vampire and therefore by the moral canon of the Buffyverse that everyone likes to quote when talking about Spike she isn't capable of choosing to be good or being redeemed. Yet I hear no howls of protest about Harmony potentially going to LA to fight crime. Why does Spike seem to push so many people's buttons? I just found that a little curious..."
Well Jade... I don't know if that answers your question but when I started the thread bellow I had no idea that people would leave Harmony behind so fast! :) Personally I find her fascinating and I still believe that she's the key to a lot of answers about vampires. She's not bright and she's the comic relief but there's more to her than that. Cordelia used to be like her and she redeemed herself with Xander. Harmony has a bigger problem for redemption as she is a vampire now. The good point for her is that killing and torturing are not a priority but still she has a lot of way to cover...

---> Warning! This post contains *Spike* subliminal messages urging you to forget *Spike* the main topic of the *Spike* thread and concentrate on a certain other *Spike* character who shall remain *Spike* nameless 'cause frankly I'm *Spike* getting ti

We really are being brainwashed aren't we? Let's see how long we can go without saying "his" name!!!!! :)"

Omygod! Like Harmony would say! That's pretty freaky all right! :)

"Wonder what song Harmony would sing at Caritas?"

I guess that would depend on whether her drink were 'Spiked' or not:) but with a name like Harmony hopefully she could hold a tune better than Cordy;)

OnM remember how I suggested that Riley's staking of Spike could be interpreted as the transfer of Cupid's arrow? Well I'm thinking that Harmony spearing Spike in the back might also produce some kind of transference... LOL. Maybe Spike will start wearing the blue angora sweater himself.

A few random impressions:
Without Harmony around how will Spike find his way around his favorite soap Passions which takes place in the fictional town of Harmony? And in view of the happenings of IWMTLY isn't it spooky that Spike told Joyce not to worry about Timmy 'cause he was just a 'doll' that could be sewn back together???
Now now... see... it all goes back to Spike. Can we let him 99% of the other threads and give a little shrine to Harmony here! LOL!!!

LOL! Poor Harmony certainly does have problems with that crossbow although that's pretty fortunate for the ones she's aiming at!

You mean you think that Spike hasn't worn the sweater already? ;) (Xander to Oz-- should we hug? Oz-- No I think we're too manly...)

( --Insert Monty Python Lumberjack song here-- )

HEY! (damn Evil Clone...)

Seriously it never fails to amaze me at all the little hints and glimmers the writers drop into this show. How do they ever get anything done in terms of actual like writing?

I really feel that they must do it unconsciously. I know that happens since I've done it myself a number of times I write something-- even like a post for this board-- and when I reread it I see something and go How did *that* get here?

Does this happen to you Aquitaine?
"I really feel that they must do it unconsciously.

And here I was thinking they were geniuses. LOL.

"I know that happens since I've done it myself a number of times I write something-- even like a post for this board-- and when I reread it I see something and go How did *that* get here?

Does this happen to you Aquitaine?"

Yep. And I find that writing in this kind of forum really fosters that kind of free form creativity. Maybe writing by committee produces a similar effect. Getting feedback and responding to others' ideas really gets the 'little grey cells' working - sometimes in ways we aren't consciously aware of. It's a concatenation of factors.
You're right about getting the synapses all a-twitter it does seem to help.

You has better not be conning any cats whatever nation they might be in though or Rufus will be after you! ;)
That Timmy comment is very interesting. One of the things I've learned about the words that come out of Spike's mouth is that they are usually getting at some of the truths of the Buffyverse.

Spoiler ahead
In IWMTLY I'm hearing that Spike inquires about making a Buffy robot (creepy Spike is back). Wouldn't it be interesting if that was linked to the Timmy comment? Sort of well if I can't have the real thing I'll create my reality i.e. sew Timmy back together with technology. That would be typical unempathetic vamp thinking. But maybe Spike will learn in future episodes that you can replicate a soul which means no robot will ever do him any good.
Spoiler ahead
"It is difficult to discuss Harmony without discussing Spike. Spike's true character is revealed in the manner in which he treats Harmony.

There seem to be parallels between H/S and S/B -- each is pursuing a relationship with someone who despises them. There was one moment I felt sorry for Spike (when I saw the look on his face after he tried to enter Buffy's house) but then I remembered the physical and emotional abuse that Harmony has suffered at his hands. Certainly Buffy's treatment of Spike has been more humane than Spike's treatment of Harmony (and even if there were a B/S pairing in the future I doubt Buffy would make Spike dress up as Angel and quote existential philosophy to "get her in the mood"). We laugh at Harmony's speeches but she has been the giving person in the one-sided relationship. Spike is an awful creature -- there is far more humanity left in Harmony than there ever was in Spike. "
I guess I could feel a little more sympathy for Harmony if she hadn't formed a gang to kill Buffy. ;) But seriously Spike's treatment of Harmony is very emblematic of the evil Spike side of his nature: he uses her for his purposes and then discards her when he doesn't need her. But Harmony participates in this pattern with her co-dependent ways. After all Spike doesn't pursue Harmony to abuse her; Harmony pursues Spike to be abused. He's her crush her addition just like Drusilla and Buffy are Spike's.

I wonder if we're supposed to impose human morals on the vamps. They all seem to abuse each other fairly regularly in a way that would be horrific if they were human. It's very clear though that each character must embrace one way of life: either the vampiric/demonic or the human. What has everyone captivated about Spike (whether you love the storylines or hate them) is that he is someone straddling the two: his behavior is confused contradictory and we're all dying to know how it ends.
"After all Spike doesn't pursue Harmony to abuse her; Harmony pursues Spike to be abused. He's her crush her addiction just like Drusilla and Buffy are Spike's.

And Buffy doesn't pursue Spike to abuse him; Spike pursues Buffy to be abused.

One of the things I liked best about Crush was the poetic justice. Spike whines about the way Buffy treats him but she treats him with more respect than he treats Harmony.

I cannot understand why there is such a double standard -- we see that Spike has sent several unambiguous messages to Harmony (like staking her) that he does not want her and she continues to pursue him no one suggests that her obsession is in any way romantic. Spike's pursual of Buffy is identical -- she told him previously in no uncertain term that "it would never be you." Yet Spike gets to be the romantic-poet-guy while Harmony is the desperate-pathetic-girl.

I agree there is a double standard here. I think it has to do with the fact that Spike is a main character but Harmony is a minor character for comic relief. Shows are usually slanted to make the main characters more palatable to us.
Aquitaine you probably read that already but I thought about you when I read this. It's a scene that's been removed from Checkpoint (see: Buffy shooting script site)

You can't hurt anyone?


Spike sits on his bier. Two Council members stand in front of him braced and tense. One holds out a cross the other has a crossbow trained on Spike. Lydia wearing a turtleneck stands some distance away holding a clipboard.
SPIKE That's right.
But you are a vampire.
If I'm not I'm gonna be pissed about drinking all that blood.

Lydia doesn't crack a smile.
So it's this chip in your head that keeps you from hurting people.
My goodness you put that together all on your own? That's right. Leastways that's what I've got 'em all believing.

The humans all tense at that.
Could just be a hoax though. I fake some headaches everyone gets used to poor helpless Spike. Then one day no warning I snap a spine bend a head back drain 'em dry. Brilliant.

If she's scared she hides it well. She soldiers on...
The chip. Assuming it exists. It takes away the... ability. But it leaves...leaves the...

He smiles at her sexily.
Desire? Yeah I've got tons of that.

She's a little shaken by his flirting.
Um... but we understand that you help the Slayer.

(the rest is the scene as we saw it...)

See you weren't the only one to believe that the chip wasn't there? The interesting thing here is that they removed the scene from the episode... Was it reveiling too much!? ;)
ROFL. No! I hadn't checked out the shooting script for Checkpoint only Blood Ties. Thanks so much for posting this excerpt Nina. At the very least I know that my wacky theory would we good enough to get me a job as a professorial type WC member. LOL. The weirdest part of it all is that I sort of look like Lydia as well...

The scene you have posted together with the scene that was removed from Blood Ties (about Spike saying he still wants to kill things etc.) really puts a different spin on his character. I wonder why TPTB decided to continue to give the impression that Spike was benevolent?

Ack! It's enough to drive a gal clear out of her mind. And what's worse recent developments on BtVS have made it a bit of a challenge to discuss the show in philosophical terms...
Well if you read the entire script you'll see that they also took off the part where Buffy says that she'll get Spike his money if he looks after her family...

So I guess they really wanted to show that he wasn't thinking about killing and money! Still I would have liked to see that scene with Lydia... should have been priceless! :)

BTW what does ROFL means (I saw that a few times... still can't figure it out!)
Rolling on (the) floor laughing:) The acronym often comes with more colourful extensions as well such as LMAO (laughing my a$$ off).

I'm definitely going to go check out that script now.
Thanks!!!! Have fun! :)
Does anybody know who the person is at the end of the series who gets bumped off in Buffy? I am wondering because the preview said that it is somebody close to the group. Can anyone help?
"As this is not a spoiler's board... if you want to know more about "The body" I strongly suggest you to see the C&S Board (Cross and Stake board) Hope you find your answer there! :)"
Could you give me a link please. I'm confused by the links on this board
Here you go:


thanx :)
Why are all the main Buffy characters either acting out of character or feeling strange lately? That's the question that was discussed on another board yesterday.

First the evidence:

1) Buffy has been noticeably out of form lately (since she speared the vamp hooker IMO). She did kill a vamp in Triangle but she's barely gone out of her way to fight anything other than the troll and Glory. She didn't even bother chasing the two vamps in Crush and let Dru and Harmony walk away. When she fought Glory and the Troll Willow had to do a spell to save her butt. She has also been acting very distant this season except for Triangle where she had a loolipop emotional tantrum. And finally there is the fact that she hasn't staked Spike despite being chained up by him... Just plain weird.

2) Xander: He's been alternately strong and quirky. His fixation about Dawn's crush is weird in the extreme. His reaction to Buffy's news about Spike in Crush insincere.

3) Anya: Since when does she care so much? While the other characters are becoming estranged from their own personalities she is becoming sensitive? She empathises with Dawn and Spike - two not-quite-humans...

4) Joyce: The tumour - need I say more.

5) Willow: The headaches.

6) Giles - no evidence of change

7) Tara - no evidence of change

8) Spike - a surfeit of evidence of change! I don't think I have to restate anything here since we've discussed the vicissitudes of his behaviour all season long.

9) Riley - he has one carrousel-side talk with Dawn and he's off to the vamp brothel????

9) Dawn's memory loss re: Ben morphing into Glory.

So what is making them feel and act differently? Is it the monks' spell? Is it Glory's influence? Is it Dawn's presence? The more I think about it the more I think that not only Spike is acting like he's out of his mind. Is everyone suffering from some kind of insanity?

Everyone acting oddly because of the Key? I like that explanation more than some of the ones I have been hearing. (grin) Dawn (as the key) is an energy source. Does any of that power spill over into her human form? Could unknown electromagnetic 'Dawn' rays be influencing everyone's behavior? (insert twilight zone-y music here)

My own personal hunch is the writers are having a harder time than usual keeping character consistancy from one episode to another. We keep getting good episodes but it is obvious most of the characters are behaving differently from one episode to the next. Maybe Joss is busy? Or the writers are uncertain what this season is supposed to be about? It started off heavy with themes of change evolution and the search for who we (as in the shows characters) really are. Has that changed?

"I think we are volontarily misled with everything that is happening to Spike so we won't see those wonderful details you bring on Aquitaine.

Look at this board... anytime someone starts a thread... it always comes back to Spike (even if the subject doesn't call for it!) It's the first tactic: you don't want people to predict the end... you give them a bait on which they can poke while you have all the field for yourself to prepare your unpredictable ending. Pretty smart on their part. By putting Spike in the center of the Buffy verse we tend to neglect what's happening on the outside but Spike is only one player and in a chess game he's nowhere to be a key figure I'm sure.

I love that remark that Buffy has been rescued two times by magic. This is true and scary. When you think about it though... those two times she wasn't fighting vamps one was a troll and the other one a god! Buffy too is out of her mind. I believe she wanted to rescue that relationship with Riley to prove that she could have a normal life. She was hanging to him to be rescued (sounds familiar???:) She's not been very in touch with her feelings lately no wonder she says to Spike "No feelings"!

As for Xander his need to be the only crush for Dawn is way bizarre I grant you that. Is it his way to compensate the fact that Buffy never loved him back? Did Xander ever got over buffy? He says he did but his reaction to Angel and the laugh he had about Spike could maybe bring some old unrequited feelings back.

Joyce since her tumor is rarely acting like a mother. It's Buffy who's always telling her how to deal with Dawn. She tells work jokes to Spike(??!!!) she leads Buffy to him even though they just said that he was twisted.

Willow is travelling on a bad road we can all predict that something bad is going to happen but why? She's a romantic at heart (she wants Quasimodo to marry Esmeralda) She's becoming even more careless in her spells than before. Her emotions and mind don't seem to be on the same level.

As for Giles he's pretty not there again this season...

Did you noticed that Spike is the center of this week's episode trailer? Something's fishy here! I thought he was going to disappear for a while (be a lot less present) and what do they do? They put him in the center of the trailer! We really are being misled here.... something is happening to Spike there's no way to deny it... but he's only the point of the iceberg. While we analyse the ice ouside... we don't see anything inside the water!"
"Joyce's behavior bothers me. I'm a little new to the Buffyverse so I haven't seen her before this season but it strikes me that she doesn't really act like the mother of a teenage girl (just turned 20!) who goes out and kills nasty-bad things.

She's not afraid of Spike in fact she talks about her work day as if he was a friend or a roommate. (BTW I thought Spike was very polite when he kept her from boring him with her story a second time.) When Buffy talks about Spike's crush on her Joyce says Buffy should "nip it in the bud" and go talk to him in almost the same breath as she points out that Buffy's rejection of him could be dangerous because of his twistedness. She sent her daughter to go talk to a twisted killer about her daughter's rejection of the killer's crush????

And Joyce's other daughter...the one who isn't entirely human and cuts on herself when she finds out and likes to hang out in the aforementioned twisted killer's crypt...just how is Joyce handling that?

I like Joyce a lot but I wish she acted more logically!"
If you think her behavior seems inappropriate now you should have seen her the first two seasons before she knew that Buffy was the Slayer. Buffy pretty much summed it up in Becoming 2 after her Mom finally found out:

Open your eyes Mom! What do you think has been going on for the last two years? The fights the weird occurrences - how many times have you washed blood out of my clothes you still haven't figured it out?

Denial much?
I agree the interference/distortion caused by any of these things that you mentioned is the only the only thing that works for me. And since we somehow always get back to Spike when the end season conflict is resolved and the characters are faced with the cause of their strange/conflicting behaviour his crush could be explained away by Buffy and SG as simply another temporary insanity. Of course the viewer through Dru's comments would know that Spike's feelings precede this time and that they are still genuine but none of the other characters would be aware of that. In a way the writers can bring Spike as low as they want this season and quickly explain it away and give him back his cool in a flash. (Not that his cool is gone. I mean I still see it.)
"To erase all the season by bringing things like they were (before Dawn appeared) would awfully ring like a "it was only a dream" plot. That's stale and so dÈj¦ vue!!!! I am sure the writers are heading towards something else. Gee... I hope so!!!! :)"
Of course the viewer through Dru's comments would know that Spike's feelings precede this time...

Dru's memory was most probably affected by the monks' spell. His feelings for the Slayer didn't have to be around prior to the Key's arrival.
1. I think that finding out that your sister isn't really your sister and she's an energy thing that you have to protect from a god is going to play with your mind. Never mind that she realises that she can't take Glory on 1-on-1 so she has to figure out another weakness. She hasn't yet. So she's kind of focused on Glory and Dawn right now. Then throw in Riley going away and Spike's behaviour and you end up with a Buffy who isn't going to be focused on killing vamps.

2. Xander has always been like that. He is strong at times quirky at others.

3. You answered your own question here. She can relate to those two because she doesn't feel like she really belongs either (being an ex-demon)

5. Using a teleport spell on a god has to hurt.

8. Anyone reading my other posts on this board can tell you about this.

9. They were building up to Riley going to the vamp house for a few episodes. He was questioning his relationship with Buffy. He thought that she needed someone dangerous and he was interested in what she saw in vampires (Angel). So we see him earlier telling Xander that Buffy doesn't love him. Losing his super powers from the drugs also left him high and dry and he felt useless. For the first time in his life he didn't have a purpose. He didn't know who he was anymore he had always been in the military. And he knew he wasn't being what Buffy wanted him to be and was exploring to try to find out.

10. Who knows what affect a god will have on one's brain.

I think Xander's been pretty much in character so far. His fixation on Dawn's crush really didn't strike me as being bizarre. First he was smug that a nearly-divine being could be attracted to him (and it's a big step up from his usual demon admirers) and then he was abashed to find that she passed him over. Since it's only been brought up those two times it seems adequately Xanderish. If he starts harping on it every episode then yeah it would be wierd and silly. As for his reaction to the Spike news I thought it was quite appropriate. He considers Spike relatively harmless and it _would_ be pretty funny if not for all of Spike's stalking (which Xander and even Buffy didn't know about at the time).

His alternating strength/quirkiness is something he's always had and it's a part of his personality that's been emphasized especially in The Zeppo and this season's The Replacement.
There just seems to be something desperate and edgy about his attitude in the last couple of episodes. I agree that on the surface he is acting true to character I just think that The Replacement and Into the Woods showed him moving decisively in another direction. At the moment he appears to have regressed (again). The scene in the alley with Giles in Checkpoint was particularly inappropriate I thought. But like many other issues that have been brought up this season Xander's ambiguity could just be X being X or it could be that an energy source vibrating at blah blah is interfering with his psyche:)
Of course I'm Spike obsessed here but it seems to me that the (fairly thin and obvious) plot device of having Dru claim that her affair with the Chaos Demon was triggered by clairvoyant images of Buffy/Spike is the writers attempt to bolster the validity of the feelings.
Hmm the impression I got from Dru's speech about the Slayer being all over him was that she was seeing a vision of his obsession itself not of any future possibility of a relationship between them or validation of his feelings.
True the Key might be making him swing faster (Restless connection?) between his extremes. He was very suaveXander near the end of the latest episode. ^_^
Or maybe being split into two has affected his brain so that they take turns. Kind of an internal fight between the two halves.
I'm sorry if this question has been resloved here before. If it has please just give me the short-answer response.

When a vampire feeds on a slayer and she dies what is stopping her from being vamped? Could she resist the urge to taste the blood on offer? Would reciprocal feeding not affect her hence no new super-vamp? Or did Dracula know what he was talking about and its the same for a slayer as for everyone else?

It just seems that letting a slayer become a vampire even if the next is called would be a bit of a disaster for the PTBs...

I always thought a Vamped Slayer would be a BAD-A$$ Big Bad
I always figured the Slayer is mortal so she can die and she can become a vampire. Maybe she'll fight the urge to survive a bit more when it comes to drinking the vampire's blood. Angel said that it's hard to fight because the living don't want to die.

I think the Slayer's powers are a different matter. Once her heart stops the powers are bestowed on the next Chosen One. Since the vampire doesn't rise right away there's a gap where she's just a dead normal person. Once risen the vampire will have all of the memories and experiences of the former Slayer to use (starting out as a much tougher than average fledgling) but she'll be just like another vampire.

I have this image of the Slayer's powers being like Miss America's tiara. When her term ends she hands it to the next girl she doesn't get to keep it.
I have thought that this would be an excellent episode. Buffy going against a former slayer who has been vamped. We could even say that Angel was the one that killed her and made her. You could have a real cool scene from the past. hmmmmmmmmm.
There are several comics about a Dunpeal (half vampire half human) that slays vampires. The demon fights at the mortal coil inside her and the greatist enemy is herself she knows if the demon overtakes her she dies so she comits herself to fighting evil outside and inside herself.

That sounds a lot like Blade. We did not care for that movie because it was too bloody but the idea of a half vampire half human sounds pretty cool. I am not sure that in the buffyverse it is possible. But who knows this is fantasy they can change the rules when they want.
I think your talking about VAMPIRE HUNTER D. An I have read that a Dhampir is the child of a Vampire and a Human female usually the recently resurrected Husband in european myths.

Isabel: If the slayers powers get passed on to the next slayer at death then how did Kendra and Faith have powers? Wouldn't they go back to Buffy after she was brought back?
Buffy came back to life breathing heart beating can stand in sunlight. Maybe the Slayer powers are attached to the Slayer's life (soul? maybe but I so don't want to get into that discussion here.)

And she did die. So the the next Chosen One was all chosen with her powers also linked to her life. Hers to keep until she dies.

I think the $64 question is: Is Faith Buffy's co-slayer or her successor? We won't know until Buffy dies to see if a new slayer is chosen but boy can we discuss it.
Various other persons on this board have commented on how Anya is gradually showing more signs of 'humanity' as this season has progressed most recently when she showed genuine concern and sympathy for Dawn upon learing of her true nature.

Do you think that before the season ends Anya will say something to someone that indicates she is starting to feel some regret for her demon related activities? If so to whom will she first say it? (Xander Willow Tara Buffy Giles Spike? Maybe just to herself?)

I'm thinking it will eventually happen just not sure if it will occur this year or in season 6.

My first choice as to person said to would be Xander but I'm thinking Spike would be a good possibility also. (Remember when she and Spike were sitting together at that party and talking about the 'good old days'? She's changed quite a bit since then and if she had a future meet-up with Spike the exchange could be very different.)

Item last and not directly related to the above-- didn't Anya look a lot like Faith in terms of her dancing style at the Bronze in the first act of *Crush*? Pretty free-spirited style for an ex-vengeance demon methinks! ;)
Why should she feel sorry for what she did? She was just fulfilling her job as a vengence demon. If she didn't do the job D'Hoffryn (sp?) would have found someone else for the job. I could maybe see her feeling bad for what she did initially for becoming the demon in the first place but after the Troll rampage I hardly think she'll feel very bad about that. Which brings us to Spike (I always seem to get around to him). Why should Spike feel bad about stuff that he has done in the past. Most things he has done have been for self preservation. He was made to feed on humans so he fed on humans. It has only occured to him recently that he doesn't have to do that. Angel has reason to feel bad. He tortured and killed people. To him it was a sport not just survival. The horrors he introduced to people were awful. Spikes style was to kill quick and get it over with he never was one for torture.
And while we're at it Xander was all over Buffy for dating an ex-killer in Angel and now he is going out with an ex-vengence demon. Hypocritical or growth? (I'm not making the decision I would just like to get reaction)

Since he still doesn't like Angel I vote hypocritical. I guess we'd have to see how he react if Angel ever became human. I think Xander still fears Angel could go bad... any minute now! and doesn't think the same about Anya. Problem is until the 5th season Anya was always reminiscing about her demon days and what she'd do if she had her powers back. I think until recently she'd have said yes if D'Hoffryn appeared at her door. Now she still doesn't regret her demon days she's simply having more fun as a human and thinks it might be fun to stay that way.
"Hmmm... okay it started as a Anya thread and now we have many subject to cover... let's start with Anya. Anya did torture men for centuries (boiling their penis and such - as she says it herself) it may have been part of her job but at some point I believe she would have to feel compassion for what she did and even regret it. The strongest force of the BtVS's writer's teem is that they never rush things. They give all the time necessary to give some justification for a character's behavior to change. Anya is starting to change and I'd love to see a scene with her and Spike again. How different it would be!

I agree that Spike wasn't for torture and that he killed to feed but it was also a little more than that. He felt pleasure doing it. A little more than just the pleasure to eat!

As for Xander... that's interesting. He didn't like Angel from the start and was angry at the prospect of a relationshipt between him and Buffy but his reaction when he learned that Spike loved Buffy was priceless. He laughed. "It's funnier if it's true!" How weird is that! The fact that Xander overcome his love for Buffy also shows us that Spike could do that as well. We've had plenty of unrequited love in the series Spike's love for Buffy could well turn into friendship or something else..."
" I don't think Spike was ever into the kill of his victims he liked to kill Slayers because it was a challenge. There's no challenge in killing innocent people. He told Angelus once "Don't you ever get tired of fights you know your going to win?" He was more about fighting and challenges (not anything to do with people) than killing. Atleast IMO."
I like that Luna. I think it's pretty much that! To kill slayers he risks his un-life every time.. that's the challenge. The question is: why didn't he seek for more slayers? He only killed two of them. Maybe he didn't know where they were sent?

As you say lots to cover...

I'm not sure Anya will ever truly regret what she did as a demon. I suspect she saw herself more as a tool than anything else granting the wishes of scorned women. Do we blame the hammer for our smashed thumb? She may come to see the vengance gig as Not Such A Good Idea though especially as her love for Xander continues to grow.

Speaking of Xander his dislike for Angel is rooted more in jealousy than anything else. He saw Angel as a threat to his (non-)relationship with Buffy. Spike is no such threat. Notice that he laughed at the idea of S/B but when he learned that Dawn has a crush on Spike he got very upset indeed! Deja vu anyone?

As for Spike when left to his own devices he is certianly all about the challenge. Poor old William is still trying to prove himself after all these years. The chip on Spike's shoulder is even more of an influence than the one in his head.
The chip on Spike's shoulder is even more of an influence than the one in his head.

I'm definitely going to have to find a place for this quotage on my site!
It's not that late... but I don't understand the quote... what chip on the shoulder? Okay... maybe I should re-read this quote tomorrow!
Glad you like it! I'd be honored to be quoted by you. :):):):):)
"Spike seems to be caught between two worlds the human and the vampire. When Dru comes back he immediately appears to revert back to his old self and throws Harmony away (literally) and goes off with Dru to the Bronze. It is there that he realises that he isn't the same anymore. Dru kills the two lovers and you can see Spike decide there that this is not what he wants to do not what he wants to be. But he feeds anyway. Why? Well Dru would be pretty upset and disappointed if he didn't. So then he goes back and ties up Dru and Buffy. And now he presents the choice to Buffy to throw him a crumb or to die. He's trying to make her make the choice as to whether he can be redeemed or not. He isn't sure that he can so if the slayer says he can he can. But she doesn't say he can and he still doesn't kill her or let her be killed by Dru. He has hope but not much. But he knows he doesn't want the life he did before. Dru gave him that option he didn't take it. So now as Dru said "Poor Spike. So lost even I can't help you now." He wants to be redeemed but no one knows if he can be not even him.
"Well I actually saw "Crush" for the first time Saturday night. The show comes on later in the week in my part of the country. I had read the wild feed post as well as the infamous DF interview and was bracing myself to be disappointed yet I must say that I still enjoyed the episode. It's amazing how many people can watch the same show and get something so totally different from it.

I didn't see the old Spike at all. Instead I saw a complex and confused character who pulled at the heartstrings. He is a creature torn between two worlds and the fact is that he doesn't really fit into either one. I was left thinking that Spike with his internal demon doesn't really understand humans as much as I thought he did. Granted the emotions that he is feeling towards a human Buffy further complicates things for him. As much as he doesn't really have a grasp of what he's feeling and how to deal with it I think Buffy is even more clueless about the nature of Spike and vampires in general. This episode really drove that point home for me.
Spike has always been capable of love he was never really loved in return. I agree that this is what he craves more than anything and in his present state is incapable of finding it. It's almost like he's doomed to remain as he was when vamped helpless with a broken heart seemingly pathetic and the butt of jokes to humans.
I'm sure that this character is going somewhere though. (I know "The Body" doesn't help his case.) I just think that we will learn something new or there will be some startling twist that non of us saw coming. JM is too popular and too talented to waste. "
I agree. Would Joss really let us down now? I don't know. I kinda like the new Spike I always knew there was more to him I was just wondering when Joss&co. were going to let us in on it. He could anyway way now kinda like The Great Glass Elevator from the Raould Dahl Books he could go in each and every direction but which one is he going to choose?
"This is going to sound warped and oogy but this has question been floating around my head for the last couple of days.

Does Spike's chip stop him form harming living things period or just "hands on" damage? Spike throws a few punches at Buffy and comments that he's not in pain because he knew that the punches couldn't touch her. What does that mean with regards to traps? Would the chip cause him
pain if he dug a pit? Then he puts spikes at the bottom. Not hurting anything there. Then covers it up. Ditto. Would the chip cause him pain once something fell in?

These are the things that pop into my head late at night..."
"I don't think it would. We have seen that if he intends to do harm to a living human he will feel pain. The chip seems to be connected to direct conscious actions. In the ep where Faith woke up he told Giles and Xander that "Just because I can't do the damage myself doesn't stop me from aiming a loose cannon your way." This leads me to believe that he has tried it before. Maybe he doesn't do it because if Buffy found out she would probably kill him and while he can defend himself he can't fight her back."
If there is one thing that I would bet on (a generally unwise tactic in the Jossverse ;) it's that Spike would not do something like this. The fight needs to be a personal one he would consider it a form of 'cheating' if he got someone else to do the work for him.

A perfect example from *Crush* is that while he *threatened* to turn Dru loose on the chained-up Buffy when she actually got loose he freed Buffy at his first opportunity.

If for any reason Spike reverted to Big Bad status once more and actually truly tried to kill Buffy it would be him and him alone that would deliver the death blow.
Very true. Remember having killed two Slayers is a source of tremendous personal pride to Spike. That glory comes from having done it with his own hands.
I believe you are right. Take the episode when Spike was going to shoot Buffy with a shot gun. He could have had Harmony do it but he wanted to do it himself.
"Harmony is a real moral ambiguity to me. She's seen as the bug Giles tries to push away in "Restless" like the sexy girl who thinks more about clothes than blood the not so bright vamp who's there but we know she won't stay long but ó

I believe that we learn a lot about vampires just to look at Harmony. She's part of a new generation of Vampires. She doesn't hang out with her sire. She doesn't have the kind of baggage Darla-Angel-Dru or Spike have. She's new to the world. Looking at her action proves us a lot about what a vampire can be.

As a human Harmony as we know was shallow. Friends clothes and boys were all she thought about. As a vampires she kept pretty much the same profile. She hired some minions to act as her chorus She's still care for clothes (only now she doesn't have to pay for them) and as for guys she won the price becoming the center of attention by putting her hands on the "coolest guy a high school girl could go out with".

Even though she acts like her relationship with Spike is only based on sex I believe that somehow she really has feelings for him. Probably not a deep and passionate love but there is something more than a sexual gratification here. I think she understands pretty well that Spike is using her as sex object but her speech at the end of "Crush" lets us believe that inside she was hoping for more. "I gave and gave.." Coming from a vampire those words are unusual. She seemed to really want to help him to be more happy. I was impressed at how insightful she was to see that Spike had "trust" issues. She looked like she wanted to reform him. Not making him be good but making him less dark (get rid of the Dru influence)

So Harmorry too is able of feelings. Even though Spike had shoved her away she came back calling herself "The actual girlfriend". She was not ready to let go. The couple quarel was very "human" like. Nothing reserved to the vampire world.

Harmony also proved that a vampire can change. Can improve oneself and not only physically. She's become a better fighter... but on a personal level she has changed as well becoming more confident more able to deal with her emotions.

We probably won't see her much now but I think that she deserved a little thread. :) "
Vampires are products of their time. Politics world view sexuality etc are all going to be informed by their life experiences ( and prejudices). We have seen examples ofvampires who were captains of industry prostitutes perennial students magicians...yada yada yada. As humans run the gamult of mediocrity to genius so shall vamps. Only vamps get a lot longer to figure out their mistakes.
I don't see that Harmony loves Spike. What I see is her wanting to be with the coolest guy in school (and there are very few vampires as cool as Spike still around). She is very much stuck in her superficial world and with her power as a vampire I don't see her ever coming out of it. She didn't have the depth of character or pain that Darla Liam William and Drucilla had before they were vamped. She was superficial and everything she does and feels is superficial.

I don't see that Harmony loves Spike.

I don't say she loves him but merely that there is something more than just the sex in their relationship. What is fascinating about Harmony is that she is shallow she is the comic relief and yet she showed us this week that she was way more than just that.

The reason why I wanted to bring the subject is because I didn't find Harmony in the ATPoBtVS section about moral ambiguities and even though she is not a major character I think we can still learn a lot from her actions. Just thought we could discuss that! :)

I'll give you that. There is a certain amount of moral ambiguity to her character. And yes I agree that there is more than sex. She cares for him as much as I think she can care for anyone.

"Oh you caught me....

I think Harmony belongs in the moral ambiguity section too but I put her in the "big bads" section mainly 'cause I'm still rootin' for her for some reason. I never cared for human Harmony. It's funny.

She's clearly not a BIG bad... yet. In my section on her (http://home.4w.com/pages/btvs/bigbads.html#harm) I even use a fan quote that says "she's not evil". Not evil in the destroy-the-world sense or the gratuitious violence sense that is.

I'll make a link to that section on the M.A. page."
I'm struck by the comments that Harmony almost seems more human as a vamp than she was as a human because I feel the same way especially after seeing her in *Crush*.

It is interesting that during the whole scene with Buffy Dru and Spike Spike reveals his 'evil' side the most with Harm in that even by stating he would kill Dru for Buffy in vamp logic that was actually sort of a compliment to Dru.

On the other hand with Harmony he basically treats her as if she had no significance to him at all-- this for a woman who was even willing to pretend to be Buffy to make him happy sexually. (She should know better of course but there you go...)

I found myself actually kind of happy that she fought him back as well as she did.

A possible related item for discussion or of course (as usual) I am reading too much into this: Did anyone take note of the fact that Spike chained Buffy tied Dru with rope and did nothing at all to prevent Harmony from interfering with his plans? What does this say in terms of how he regards the power each of them has over him?
Well he wanted Buffy to hear him out. If he didn't chain her she'd have escaped as easily as Dru did and left.

And/or he just had the one set of chains. ;)
LOL! Spike? Have only one set of chains?? Nahhhh!! ;);)
Did anyone take note of the fact that Spike chained Buffy tied Dru with rope and did nothing at all to prevent Harmony from interfering with his plans? What does this say in terms of how he regards the power each of them has over him?

I love this OnM!!!!! This is subtext and maybe he didn't notice it himself but it says a lot about the way he sees those woman. That even goes with my earliest statement that he sees women three ways (the virgin the mother and the whore).

Masquerade I didn't want to catch you here!!! I just merely thought about Harmony and before posting I wanted to see if there was anything (I didn't want to reiterate what you would have already said!)

I really do think that if Buffy takes the time to analyse what she saw in the crypt she really will have no choice but change her opinions on vampires. Spike was living the man's nighmare... caught between the ex the girlfirend and the object of desire. Nothing demonic in that! Really human indeed! :)

As for Harmony... she's been treated so much as a comic relieve that there has to be something else. Something we can learn out of her. As Rufus stated she's more of a human now and which vampire will want to work to improve himself?

"I agree that Harmony cared for Spike. (As much as that shallow girl could care.) She observed a lot about him. Since we haven't seen her recently I thought that she'd been long gone. Maybe now she is.

I keep thinking about how she begged Spike not to try to kill Buffy at the end of 'Fool for Love.' He's storming around muttering imprecations loading the shotgun and she yells
"You are so sensitive!... She's the Slayer she will so kick your ass!" Supportive but concerned. "

Hey I just noticed that Dawn is taller than Buffy. No real significants in this statement its just funny watching Buffy lecture her little sister who is towering over her. If she sticks around beyond this season I wonder how much more taller she will be than Buffy
Last week Masquerade asked how it was possible for the apparently large numbers of demons in the
Angelverse to remain effectively hidden from view in Los Angeles. I mean sheís right there appear to be
demons all over the place but how come so few of them get noticed? Willful blindness? Magical spells? A
good PR department?

Whatever the reason the idea of an enemy being all around us and yet seemingly out of sight is a tried and
true theme for a lot of science fiction stories over the years. I could pick from quite a few movies that have
this idea at their center but for this weekís classic movie Iím going to select one of the lesser known ones.
While you may not have seen or heard of the flick Iím sure youíll recognize the name of the director the
one and only John Carpenter.

There are a couple of noteworthy items that distinguish this from the run-of-the-mill B-movie and yes this
is a ëB-movieí. John Carpenter would probably not consider his films to be in the class of ëhigh artí but
they also usually serve up more than could be reasonably expected from something primarily intended as a
a couple of hours of purely escapist entertainment. (Sound like anyone we know hummm?)

In the opening sceen of this film for example the lead character appears in the midst of a railroad yard.
The camera shows him initially as a small figure in a large space. He walks towards us his visage slowly
growing larger. He is carrying a huge backpack and is obviously dressed for hard traveling. In the next
shot he is framed on the right by a huge set of railroad cars all great darkness and shadow to his left is a
road leading into a city somewhat overcast but still very light by comparison to the shadow of the railroad
cars. He walks down the middle then the camera pans upward. There are skyscrapers huge office
buildings obviously this city is a major center of commerce. The next shot shows him looking around
taking it all in-- the grandeur the indifference. He walks on...

You donít know it yet but in one short minute Carpenter has foreshadowed most of the movies main
theme with just a few clever shots of metaphorical photography. A B-movie? Yes it is. Art? Yes it is.

This weekís Classic Movie is *They Live* a title which immediately makes one think of zombies or the
undead but actually it is we the people who are asleep in Carpenterís vision. This movie wears its
political heart right on its sleeve but we tend to mostly ignore that aspect since after all itís an ëactioní
movie with none other than (ex?) wrestler ëRowdyí Roddy Piper in the lead role. Yes you heard me!
Amazingly (or not) he is actually pretty good and wrestling fans will be happy to know he gets a nice long
fight scene to show off his talents a bit more than halfway into the flick. (Iím *not* a wrestling fan but Iíll
cut ëem some slack since obviously many people wouldnít go to see the movie otherwise and then they
wouldnít get caught up in all the ëartyí stuff! ;)

A caution here to all those who rent the DVD the film was shot in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio (*very*
widescreen) so if you have a TV set smaller than say 35î consider either going over to the home of a
friend who owns a really bigscreen set or else rent the VHS version instead. If you do watch the
widescreen version you will get to note another interesting photographic trick employed extensively
throughout-- the use of an extremely wide-angle lens for many shots particularly outdoor scenes. The lens
is so short that the edges of the frame actually show curvature of what would normally be straight lines.
The resulting visual effect is very disconcerting if you take your eyes off of screen center-- and very
illustrative of what the main plot is all about-- again without saying a word.

One last caution-- this is an ëactioní movie and deserves its ëRí rating although most of the first half is
used to ëset the stageí (hummm sound familiar?) and so has relatively little ëactioní. Those who crave the
genresí requisite gunfights and fireworks will get your fix just be patient. (I personally find these a little
tedious but again I understand the nature of the medium here...). There are several final twists one of
which you may see coming two others you probably wonít and the closing shot is both humorous and
outrageous at the same time.

Classic Carpenter-- and my Classic Movie of the Week.

E Pluribus Cinema Unum

"I have seen the movie "They Live" a few times. One scen I like is when Roddy is trying to get this African American Gentleman to put on the (you know whats) so that he can see what is going on. The guy refuses almost like he knows that something is wrong but he doesn't want to believe. "
"As promised I'm reposting the story on how what Rufus refers to as 'the Re: Technique' came about. The 'El-Reo-X' or 'El-Re-o-x' as I have referred to it is just this silly pun on a band that one of Jackson Browne's bandmates had "El-Rayo-X". (I think it was David Lindley or Warren Zevon.)

This stuff is all in fun please take it as such since it has absolutely nothing to do with BtVS or Angel per se. I'll start where it all started:

Tall skinny posts are occurring. This is bad. Only 800X600 here ya know... ;)
Wednesday 31-Jan-01 00:51:56
Also keep in mind possible use of Patent Pending OnM El-Re:o-X technique. That is after 4 or 5 Re:'s
you can use Re:x5: followed by Re:x6:

(Use of this technique might completely change the look of BC&S Spoiler board! ;)

I can explain this technique in detail if any of you are foolish enough to ask me. You have been warned!

Re: Tall skinny posts are occurring. This is bad. Only 800X600 here ya know... ;)
Wednesday 31-Jan-01 00:56:08
Okay O Wonder Brain...tell me how I can change the look of the posts on the C&S as I happen to be
one of the offenders.

Whew! I feel horizontal again... El-Re:o-x explained...
Wednesday 31-Jan-01 01:40:49
It's getting late here Rufus!

But I'll give it a go. It isn't really that tricky. And it's been my observation (re: your being a guilty party)
that it takes at least two to tango and there must be like 50 of ya'all over there!! ;)

Like I said before after 3 or 4 or 5 re:'s just use the format Re:x5. When someone responds to that
post they label it Re:x6. The next respondant labels it Re:x7 and so on. So instead of

Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re you'd have--


Of course you need co-operation from other posters to do this and they may just think you're insane
but you can always blame me and just say it's that weirdo long post guy from ATPoBtVS. ;)

One revision I had to make in the otherwise elegant simplicity of the basic El-Re:o-X plan was what to
do if someone is reading down an existing thread say currently up to Re:x32 and sees a post at say
Re:x8 that s/he wants to comment on. How would you denote that this is a branch?

I would suggest following standard program version notation and make the branch response like so--
Re:x8.1 Followup on that branch would be Re:x8.2. You could also use letters for people who hate
decimal stuff. Re:x8b Re:x8c etc etc.

Now the really neat thing would be for some programmer much smarter than little 'ol me (my coding
ability is ludicrously out of date alas...) to write this in the board software and then it would be done

OK that's it. Remember you asked!! ;) ;)


As of today - 02/18/01

*** Some additional thoughts: One thing I have noticed as my evil spell continues to wend it way
through the woods or into the woods or... oops sorry. ;)

While it it true that you basically just count the number of Re:ís and replace that with Re x 5 or
Re x 8 or whatever some posters will not respond to your post with the next increment. So you
might see ëRe: re x 8í instead of ëRe x 9í.

First remember *never* to hassle anyone about this! You can actually pretty much write anything
you want in the post response header. All of this is completely voluntary and even if you do
everything perfectly it *does not* ultimately prevent tall skinny posts from appearing on the far
right of your screen it just holds them off a lot longer thus maintaining readability to a greater

Second if you respond to a ëRe:re x 8í remember that ëRe x 8í = Re:re:re:re:re:re:re:re or a total
of 8 ëre:ís.

So *donít* count the Re: in ëRe x 8í as *another* re:-- itís already *included* in the 8!

At the risk of getting overly mathematical you could look at it like Re+(Re x 8) or 1 + 8 = 9
where re =1.

If you include the re: inside the (Re x 8) then you end up incrementing by 2 not 1.

Thus what should be Re x 8 Re x 9 Re x10 becomes Re x 8 Re x 10 Re x 12.

Make sense? If not donít fret-- I donít. Just remember this is the danger of thinking too much
which we encourage on this board!

One last item-- I have adopted the visual format Rufus has used most of the time which is Re +
space + x + the number or ëRe x 8í. There is no right or wrong here as long as the result has

Also acceptable for example would be formats such as ëRe x8í ëRe:x8í ëRe/x8í ëRe: x8í
etc. etc. I happen to like the spaces because it is easy to type and if you use the branching
format it still reads easily-- ëRe x8.1í ëRe x12.4í etc.

So anybody working on software yet? ;) ;)

(By the way my evil clone made me do this...)

G'nite all."
"I'm not sure I can come up with alot to say on this topic (and I'm not usually one at a loss for words:) - the subject line pretty much sums up my question.

Was I the only one who flashed back to the first Slayer when Buffy said "No feelings" to Spike in the warehouse? It really gave me a chill when I heard that. It was as if she were trying to physically stop feelings (not just supposedly repressed feelings for Spike but other kinds of emotions as well) from surfacing... "
" That had never occured to me but it makes perfect sense. After Buffy's encounter with the first slayer she had a sort of "fake" relationship with Riley then they broke up. It suprised me how Buffy didn't even pause to consider Spike seeing him more of a problem than a being.

I have a feeling that in this season Buffy may learn more how to control her powers including this side effect but at this point they may be getting the human half of her. "
I have been following the debate between Max and Rufus and I must admit I've been agreeing with whoever I read last. But for me it is The Host's comment that really puts things in perspective for me. What good is it to fight a war if you lose the very thing you are fighting for? In this case it is Angel's soul. He is the prize I believe that Holland told him as much. Angel's status may be what tips the balance on the day of the Apocalypse according to the prophecies. So he may indeed need to fight a total war but he may not be fighting the right war if his objectives are merely destructive instead of constructive (or defensive as the case may be).

Still one definately positive thing has resulted from Angel going AWOL from the TPTB - his team has more confidence and cohesiveness than they ever did before when they were just his back-up team. When they do get back together again they will be far more powerful together than they ever were before. Of course I am assuming they do get back together again it would be too hard to maintain this dual focus for long in a single series.
"He may find them a lot less willing to simply follow orders. Not that they didn't question him in the past but now they're not "Angel minions" anymore."
I have the uneasy feeling I'm wading into a quagmire but this whole discussion confuses me.

For one thing all this argument about collateral damage seems to skim over the crucial word: acceptable. The bad guys go "Oh collateral damage. Fine as long as we get what we want." The good guys go "There's going to be collateral damage. Is it acceptable collateral damage?" It's a fine line often hard to distinguish even harder to abide by. But that is the difference between good and evil. Our heroes on AtS -- and BtVS for that matter -- have to make a determination about acceptable collateral damage all the time. And I'd like to say they always make the best choice but they don't. Just this week on the TTDL Angel's Ex-crew decided to postpone helping the girl with the third eye in favor of aiding Gunn deeming it acceptable collateral damage. Sure it was played for laughs "That eye's not going anywhere." But they had no way of knowing what the true consequences might be. IMO they made a bad choice because they abandoned someone in need and only made the situation with the zombie cops worse. Angel clearly is deciding on a level of acceptable collateral damage when after Kate tells him the crime statistics that will be returned to the neighborhood now that the zombies are off the streets he replies "I can live with that." Did he make the right choice? Are evil zombie cops worse then the predatory humans that will now have free reign there?

Angel is a warrior. He is not going to defeat his enemies with love and roses. That's not what his story is about. But as far as Angel using evil to fight evil I don't see it. He's just chosen the wrong battle. The darkness has to do with him losing focus on his real goal which is to stop evil. Angel is to be a major player in the coming Apocolypse and if he makes the wrong decisions he will end up at least abetting the side of evil if not joining it. We know it because we heard Holland tell Leilah and Lindsy. But Angel doesn't know it. He just knows they've been screwing with him. He's gotten lost in a quest for vengence on W & H and especially Leilah and Lindsy. This misguided pursuit has put him in jeopordy of achieving the goal that the Senior partners want.

And concerning the wine tasting incident Angel knew he was putting his salvation at risk. He just decided it was acceptable collateral damage."
Good Point.

I thought Cordy was a little insensitive to Angel though. Here is Angel sacrificing his chance at redeption protecting his friends by disassociating them from the evil he must do and all she can think of is herself. Why haven't you visited? Wahh!

Angel came through for them not expecting anything in return. Knowing for now he must remain apart for they wouldn't understand the path he must travel. They were the only thing standing between him and true darkness. But he must go dark to win. There is no other way. But at the same time he wants to protect his friends' souls. So yes he cares for them more than Cordy could ever know. If it wasn't for him the zombe police would have gotten them. Yet all Cordy could think of is herself.

I do want to see Angel get back on the warpath. What ruthless scheme can he come up with to torment Lindsey and Lila?

I hope it has something to do with Roses. Either that or puppy dogs. Perhaps Lindsey owns pet fish.
"Angel should find some way to make Lila and Lindsay go after each other.

Build upon the mistrust that already exists and let it flower.

Set them up to self-destruct. If he is really clever find some way to make it in their interest to take Wolfram and Hart with them.

"Therefore those skilled in moving the enemy use formation that which the enemy must respond.

They offer bait that which the enemy must take
manipulating the enemy to move while they wait in ambush.

Those skilled in warfare seek victory through force."
-Art of War
"I thought Cordy was a little insensitive to Angel though. Here is Angel sacrificing his chance at redeption protecting his friends by disassociating them from the evil he must do and all she can think of is herself. Why haven't you visited? Wahh!

Remember the LA Scoobies haven't seen the last 3 episodes of Angel. The last they've seen of Angel he'd just locked Dru and Darla in with their little smorgasbord. (A month ago.) Then when they had the audacity to question his actions he fired them. NO EXPLANATION!! At the time I thought he was embracing evil. I now understand that he is protecting them from himself and the repercussions of his actions. But he's said nothing to them not even when Wesley came to tell him they were keeping the agency. Complete silence remember.

Don't forget that Cordelia has seen Angel go evil twice Wesley has seen it once. Cordy was on the first wave of the body clean-up crew in Sunnydale. She more than anyone else KNOWS what the demon inside Angel is capable of. While it is obvious to us as well as the LA gang that Angelus is not back I think that he has retreated so far into darkness that Cordy could
not see the Angel she knows and loves. And her past experiences tell her this is bad.

Also Anne only tells them that Angel tried to help her but he wanted to mess with some law firm more. (The gang gets really hopeful and then are disappointed at her story.) True but she didn't tell them everything. And yes Angel helped save them in "The Thin Dead Line " but he didn't say a word about it. They don't know he's the reason that the zombies disintegrated.

And I think they have a little justifiable anger at Angel. He's the one who got drafted by the PTBs and they're stuck doing his job. Cordelia still gets the "mind splitting migraines with pictures" (and smells) that were supposed to be messages for him. The PTBs haven't stopped that. The three of them know that the people in the visions will die if they do nothing so being good guys they must risk their mortal lives with no superpowers to help them fight.

Plus he was their friend. And friends don't drop you cold."
"Then when they had the audacity to question his actions he fired them. NO EXPLANATION!!

He was only answering what Wesley said to him.

"We are the only think holding you back from true darkness."

Sorry Wes but true darkness is where Angel must go. And you can't follow.

Good point about Cordy though. She has known Angel as both friend and foe. Yes Wesley got to see "Angelus" one night but really didn't have the opportunity to get to know first hand what he was capable of. Cordy remembers it from Sunnydale. Wesley of course knows the whole "Angelus" story but "knowing" is different from "living" it like Cordy did.

But I thought she would use the rare opportunity of seeing Angel to at least attempt to bring him back into the fold instead of driving him away."
"We are the only think holding you back from true darkness."

"We are the only thing holding you back from true darkness."

Sorry its late.

Angel must remain apart from his friends. For now. Angel is sacrificing much to win this war.


"***"We are the only thing holding you back from true darkness."***

***Sorry Wes but true darkness is where Angel must go. And you can't follow.***

True darkness -is- Angelus. No one wants to go there again (not even Angel) and if by some chance he did then following ceases to become an option and becomes a necessity so he can be staked before he goes on another kill/torture rampage like the one on Buffy.


"Ryuei I'm glad you brought that up. The Host said to Angle "You just keep gettin darker and darker don't you? But funny thing your aura beige." (Or something pretty close to that.) Here's this character that reads people's inner being directs them in the path they need to go. And he says Angel's aura is beige! What's up with that? "
"Angel needs to employ "Angelus tactics" for a good cause. Good can't defeat evil by employing good tactics. Only though matching evil with evil can good defeat it. By mirroring then increasing. Only a focusing of overwhelming force wins. That takes a degree of ruthlessness.

Every leader needs a degree of ruthlessness (balanced by a sense of justice) or they become indecisive (See the Star Trek episode where the transporter split Kirk into two people. One 'good' one 'bad'. The 'good' one couldn't make a decision to save his life (or actually the lives of others).

World War II is a classic case. They bombed cities and killed civilians we bombed cities and killed civilians. We were just as ruthless as the Germans so the difference wasn't there. But there was a difference. A significant difference. And that is what we were fighting for.

In La Femme Nikita Section One is as ruthless if not more ruthless then Red Cell and all the enemies they fight. But the critical difference that makes them better that makes them the good guys is that they are fighting to prevent chaos. To prevent the evil out there from totally getting out of control.

You don't go out of the way to harm "collateral" for that doesn't serve your aims. If you are like Angel and Section One you try to minimize collateral to the greatest extent possible. But you can't let concern for collateral prevent you from doing what you need to do either. If somehow collateral futhers your aims or is unavoidable then it is just an unfortunate reality of war.

To win Angel must be more ruthless than Wolfram and Hart. But also he must act decisively. For the longer Wolfram and Hart exists the more innocents will suffer from this war. On all sides."
"And so it begins again....(sigh)

It is interesting you mention Star Trek. In this weeks' Voyager Capt Janeway is faced with very much a "do we go to total war to survive" or "do we maintain our dignity and find a solution to survival that does not force us to become animals" scenario.

Her answer (and ultimately the salvation of Voyager and others) is a refusal to lower herself or Voyager to the level of vigilantes and murderers. She wins and does it without a trip over to the dark side.

Collateral damage is just another way of saying:

"MY goals are more important than anyone else's."

"MY wants and MY needs are more essential than anyone else's."

"MY goals are so perfect that I am allowed any actions to further them."

We have been over and over this. One more time into the fray. Angelus -cannot- win. Using tactics he would have used as Angelus cannot help him defeat W&H. You cannot use evil to defeat evil. (not on a cosmic scale and not in the context of a war against evil) Total war is exactly what the Sr Partners want him to do. It is the best chance they have of corrupting him.


You were the one who brought up Voyager.

I thought Janeway's actions in that matter went way beyond ridiculous. She seemed practically insane in her insistance to 'stick to principle' beyond every other consideration.

To share supplies with others without even the assurance that they would reciprocate or join her alliance.

Even her senior advisors thought she was going off the deep end there. And they were right. To put such a rigid adherence to this ideal concept of hers it was more about her ego than it was anything else.

Look I can understand her not wanting to attack ships just to raid supplies. And I even go along with this alliance thing. After all all the ships were in a common predicament. All had the common objective of escaping the void. And Voyager had a viable plan to accomplish that. She might have thought it principled to form the alliance but she was just fortunate enough that it was the practical thing for them to do as well. To pull their resources.

Had their been no chance of excape then her alliance wouldn't have made sense. It really would have been every ship for themselves and all Janeway's "principles" would have done would have been to get her ship destroyed.

I think where she really blew it was when they had the technology to escape but she would not utilize it to escape. Look if she could have by losing that technology save the crew of that ship by all means do so. But the crew was dead. She couldn't go back she had to think foward. Again her ego getting in way of what was best for the rest of the crew.

For all this nobility and principle it really concerned me that after it was all over there was no attempt by Voyager to develop a solution to help the others left in the void or to someone develop warings (perhaps place a beacon) to prevent other ships from going into the void. You would have thought that there would have been a way of doing that without puting her ship and crew in danger again. But I guess principle only goes so far.

Give me Kirk Spock and Abe Lincoln fighting evil on some planet with only rocks sticks and their wits anyday over Janeway's "principles"

Again sorry you asked. I recognize that this is the Buffy and Angel board."
"One thing further.

They did spy on other members of the alliance.

How "principled" was that?

Actually it was that "unprincipled" act that saved them in the end. Without the knowledge that the one ship was going to break away and form their own alliance Janeway and all her "principles" would have been so much space dust."
I am not sure why you apologized you didn't offend me. For Voyager there was only one choice. They were members of Star Fleet and as such they swore oaths to -not- do all the things you and I have mentioned. Her officers may have been arguing with her but no one on the ship actually had a choice in the matter even Janeway.

Angel on the other hand has a choice. W&H are counting on that. If they can get him to chose evil actions then they have won. it makes any decision he makes that much harder.
"The only reason I appoligized was that I didn't want others to think I am turning it into a Voyager board.

As for Voyager forming that alliance wasn't only the principled thing to do - it was the practical thing to do.

Now for Angel and Wolfram and Hart this is different. Unlike the ships in the void who shared a common objective (escaping the void) Wolfram and Hart and Angel have OPPOSING objectives. There can be no alliance between them. No compromise. In the end there can only be one of these two forces remaining. And I am rooting for Angel.

In such a case Total War is the only option. That and or a defeat so horrible to be unthinkable. So you see Angel really doesn't have a choice either. He must be ruthless for if he isn't they win he loses. And with him humanity.

Again I think back to the "Abe Lincoln" episode on the original star trek. Kirk had no choice but to fight either. After all his crew's lives were at stake."
Aghhhh! Max! Oh great give away our secret plan to convert this into a Voyager board. Sigh...

As for the total war...I think it will have to be me agreeing to disagree. I truly feel the moment Angel gives into evil or as Rufus and others have said the moment he kills humans as a means to an end he will have lost. You cannot fight evil with more evil. But I have a suspicion you and I will not come to a meeting of the minds on this. Besides I am annoyed that you spilled our grand plan to the masses. ;)
"Rendyl are you a fan of Babylon 5?

Sheridan practiced "Total War".

The way he used the telepaths against Clark.

"Lyta: Are you all right?
Franklin: No. No I'm definitely not all right. When Sheridan came back from Z'ha'dum everyone talked about how different he was. Harder more determined. I really didn't see it. Aside from some physiological differences it was Sheridan same as ever. But the Sheridan that I know never would have told me what this one just did. He's right.... He's right it's the only way. I just wish like hell that he was wrong. (turns to Lyta)."

And during the shadow war didn't he sacrifice whole planets to gain stragetic advantage? To lurk them into a trap.

To win Angel must come on as Death Incarnate against Wolfram & Hart. Fear is the only language they understand."
To lure them into a trap.

To lure The Shadows.

He basically sacrificed the Narns.

It was necessary Yes but that is the point.

In war you must be ruthless.
"If a war isn't worth winning then it isn't worth fighting. If a war is worth fighting then you must do everything it takes to win it for defeat would be too horrible to imagine.

Angel must be ruthless. Angel needs his dark half to give him strength. Just like Kirk found out how much he needed his dark half in the episode The Enemy Within.

For can half a man live? Angel has been trying to run from his dark side but instead he must learn how to embrace it and focus it into a power for good."
Ben I haven't read the other posts yet so maybe someone said this already. But Cord Wes and Gunn did not know that Angel helped them. I think that since Angel came to the hospital it shows he cares for them. Cordy can't see that right now because of the feelings of rejection. I would guess the others feel that way too.
I feel for them all(esp Wes) They have a tough road ahead but I believe Angel will suffer the most loss. But hey what else is new.
"The Girl was already dead before Spike fed upon her. Dru killed her for Spike.

By the way that makes 8 people that Dru killed after Angel set her on fire (that we know of).

Angel should have finished both Dru and Darla off when he had a chance. I hold him personally responsible for those eight deaths.

And Buffy should have gone after those "loser vampires" They might have been pathetic but they are still vampires which means to continue they must kill humans. That is the only way they can exist.

Those "loser vamps" will kill again. Buffy should have at least made the attempt. That is as much as we can ask of her. That she just let them go means that she holds some responsibility for what they do after. For the deaths they will cause. If Buffy did her best to try to slay them and they somehow escaped then we can chalk it up to "can't save them all" but Buffy didn't even try to go after them."
scroll down a few pages there's a big discussion
I'm not saying you're totally wrong but I have a problem with holding someone else responsible for the murders that someone else commits by not stopping or not being able to stop the murderer.

If that is true then is the U.S. responsible for all the people people killed in Kosovo when we could have sent in ground troops even earlier to save them from the Serbs?

Is the U.S. responsible for not getting into WWII earlier even knowing what the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese were doing?

Are the police responsible for not arresting or even killing someone they know is probably going to commit a crime before they commit it?

Buffy and Angel may be guilty of negligence in relation to their calling but I would hesitate before holding them personally responsible for the crimes that others commit. This is a tricky issue though.
"I'm not saying you're totally wrong but I have a problem with holding someone else responsible for the murders that someone else commits by not stopping or not being able to stop the murderer.

NOT BEING ABLE to stop is one thing. I don't hold Buffy at fault for that. Buffy can't "save them all" can't be everywhere at once can't spend all her time slaying.

But when she does happens upon Vampires (even loser vamps) and doesn't give her best effort to slay them (or when she doesn't slay because the vamp used to be a former boyfriend etc. etc) then I do believe there is a certain degree of responsibility for the people they kill after.

Angel as well for not slaying Dru and Darla at their weakest when he had an opportunity holds some culpability for what they do after.

I don't know if any of you are fans of SpiderMan. But when Peter Parker first got his powers he wasn't interested in crime fighting. He went to get an agent because he wanted to use his powers for entertainment. While he was there a criminal ran by being chased by police. All Peter had to do was stick is foot out to stop the fleeting suspect. It didn't even require him to use super strength. But he did't care. Why bother.

Later that criminal murders his uncle who had raised him. He had an opportunity to have prevented that. His uncle wouldn't had died if he would have just stuck out his foot."
"I think Buffy didn't kill the vamps because they were afraid and left... to go after them would have mean to "kill" them. Usually Buffy fights against vamps who fight back... We are definitely going deeper and deeper into what a slayer is and how much her duty is related to killing. As long as they are bad creatures Buffy doesn't have a problem. But with cowards or chipped vampires... she does.

It also proves that she has some ethic in her work to some extend!"
"We need to cut Buffy some slack here. "Crush" was a series of startling and shocking revelations to her. Most of this episode she was trying to catch up with the out-of-control events swirling around her. I think when she shut the door on Spike she went upstairs to her room for a Big Think about all the events of the past two days."
ROFL. Great coinage Brian. Do I have your permission to use the turn of phrase in the future? :)

When Tara and Willow asked Buffy what her opinion of Quasimodo and Esmeralda was she said she'd 'think about it tomorrow' in true Scarlett O'Hara style. Buffy's been squirreling away so many things to 'think about tomorrow' it is almost inevitable that she'll go 'nuts':)
Aquitaine please use it freely and thanks for the compliment.
"It also proves that she has some ethic in her work to some extend!

That "ethic" as you call it will get innocent people killed. What is so ethical about that?

These vampires might be cowards but cowards as they are they can still kill. In fact they must kill humans to exist.

What to you tell the wife of the banker they kill? Oh I could have slayed them but since they were cowards and ran when I came I thought it much better to let them go.

Innocents will die as a result of Buffy's so called fighting ethics. If she would have made an attempt and somehow they escaped then that would be a different situation. But she didn't even give it a half effort (and with losers like that a half effort would have been all that was needed).
"Sorry. Forgot to put my name to that last post.

But what to you tell the parents of a teen that those coward vamps kill.

"Oh Mr and Mrs Jones I could have slayed those vampires before they came into contact with your daughter I had the opportunity. But they ran and were afraid so I didn't think it would be right to slay them."

I still believe that a "let them go" mentality only results in more happy meals for the vamps. She could have slayed them easily but decided not to. That decision was wrong. And it will get people killed. But as long as it is no one that Buffy knows I guess it's OK.

And by the way she wasn't distracted by anything at that point. She just didn't think they were worth the effort of slaying.
"I still believe that a let them go" mentality only results in more happy meals for the vamps. She could have slayed them easily but decided not to. That decision was wrong. And it will get people killed. But as long as it is no one that Buffy knows I guess it's OK.

And by the way she wasn't distracted by anything at that point. She just didn't think they were worth the effort of slaying."

I do think that Buffy was distracted when she entered the "nest" of the two vampires (btw did you see that they were making Jiffypop?). She knew immediately that something was wrong -- she just wasn't sure what. She has trusted Spike before (and Riley almost died because of it) and have every reason to suspect an ambush or similar treachery -- a dead slayer cannot stop any vampires.

Compare the actions of Buffy with the zombie cops of AtS -- they brought the crime rates down dramatically. The decent hardworking people of the neighborhood were a great deal safer before Angel ended the spell (just listen to the statistics Kate read to him). Yet none of us are suggesting that the cops were good or that destroying them was an evil action. The rule of law is that the good guys actually have to have proof that the bad guys are doing something wrong before acting -- killing creatures because of something they might do or are likely to do is not just. Having said that I still believe that all vampires should be staked -- but Buffy should be allowed to use her judgment to determine the risks involved to her personal safety and the risks of letting them go.

Also keep in mind that no matter how many vampires she allows to slip through her fingers the Buffyverse is a better place because of her actions."
-- but Buffy should be allowed to use her judgment to determine the risks involved to her personal safety and the risks of letting them go.

I understand and respect that. But come on these loser vamps posed no threat to her. She could
that was me ben

forgot to post the name (though it does say optional).
I understand and respect that. But come on these loser vamps posed no threat to her. She could have staked them without breaking a sweat.

Sounds to me that YOU would like to be in her place and enjoy the kill.... but maybe I'm wrong! ;)
"I understand and respect that. But come on these loser vamps posed no threat to her. She could have staked them without breaking a sweat.

I agree -- but at the same time Spike could have set up a trap -- the losers could have been a decoy. Buffy knew something was wrong -- to have charged after them into a potential ambush would have risked her life as well as placing the Key in jeopardy (if Buffy dies who will look after Dawn and Glory?)

Faith would have chased them down (and hoped for an ambush) but Buffy is more circumspect. It would have been different if Buffy had cought the vampires in the act of feeding and just walked away -- but even then she has made some difficult choices -- choosing her own life over meaningless self-sacrifice (leaving Ford to die in the bomb shelter and leaving Forrest to his death in Adam's cave).

"(Since the age of microwaves do anyone make "jiffy pop" anymore? They must have been vamped back in the 70's.)"

If you live in an abandoned tenement without electricity jiffy pop would be the way to go -- at least they weren't hanging around outside theaters killing patrons for their popcorn.
She was certainly willing to kill the vamp sluts even though they were even more loserlike and the SG didn't even agree they should be killed (since they were prostitutes and not killers). But she did that out of rage at Riley --- even let the one Riley was visiting go but then killed her from behind...killing in the back is usually not open to positive interpretation. It's perceived as cowardly.
"Innocents will die as a result of Buffy's so called fighting ethics. If she would have made an attempt and somehow they escaped then that would be a different situation. But she didn't even give it a half effort (and with losers like that a half effort would have been all that was needed).

Ben I seem to have touch a sensitive point don't I? ;)

It's easy to look at the slayer's job from the exterior. But are we the one who have to slay? We see we judge but we are not in the action. It's easy to say that a vampire is bad and that you have to kill them. But to be in Buffy's shoes is totally different. She staked a vampire in the back in "Into the woods" and this was already freaking. The simple act of destroying something every day (be it the most horrific demon) is an act that can't be done cooly as if nothing happened. She does kill... only she's on the good side. This has to affect her. And don't forget that she knew that Spike had feelings for her when she was in their lair. She was confused. She's not a killing machine. She's a human being with feelings and she cannot be expected to save the world all the time perfectly.

This could well bring some disaster but I prefer that instead of a killing Buffy who really doesn't question her actions."

I'll admit that Buffy is my least fav. character (perhaps because I'm always afraid I'm gonna see Dru at the end of Mr. Pointy) But I don't like to judge her because I for one could not be a Slayer. She's had to give up her whole life to this one cause and she doesn't even know what it all means? Face it she's been jipped. But one good thing I see in her is her moral ethics If she kills every vamp see runs into what will differentiate her from The First Slayer. She has a life hopes dreams and her biggest fear is becoming a killer (that and dummies)I think we should enjoy the show and not judge what Buffy should or shouldn't do if we think we can do a better job we should send resumes to the WC.
I try to cut Buffy some slack but this was a no-brainer.

Run the loser vamps down slay them then have it out with Spike.

I understand she can't spend all her time tracking down Vampires especially now that she needs to protect her family but since she did run into some she could have taken the few moments it would have taken to dust them.
"If that is true then is the U.S. responsible for all the people people killed in Kosovo when we could have sent in ground troops even earlier to save them from the Serbs?'

It's a civil war. There was (is) attrocities occuring on all sides of that conflict but since this is the Buffy board not the Kosovo War board that is all I want to go into that.

Regarding not getting into WWII earilier. War isn't something to get into lightly. For getting involved in war involves great cost.

I think that really isn't relevant here. It wasn't a case that Buffy didn't want to kill the loser vamps" because she was afraid it would get her or her friends and family into a larger war. And I could understand her letting them go if their was a stragetic purpose for her to do so. If it somehow served some larger purpose then despite the fact that it will cost some innocent lives that lost (still tragic) would be weighed against the larger gain.

Buffy had no stragetic purpose to let them go. She just thought they were too pathetic to go after. Pathetic yes but they are such vampires who will still kill humans.

You are right it is more a case of of negligence of their calling but still innocents die as a result of it.

In Angel's case he better have a very good reason to let Darla and Dru go. It better be the key to bringing down Wolfram and Hart because already it has come at a very great cost (eight or more innocents).

I can't think of any reason for Buffy's actions (inactions). Just lazy I guess. It would have only taken a few minutes to run them down and slay them.
"In Angel's case he better have a very good reason to have let Darla and Dru go. It better be the key to bringing down Wolfram and Hart because already it has come at a very great cost (eight or more innocents)."

I agree if there is going to be some purpose to be achieved by this then (although not to minimize the cost) it was an necessary evil.

Fortunes of War

But if it was just a case of oh I still have feelings for Darla and Dru I just feel so guilty then Angel was clearly wrong. Already eight people have died who wouldn't have had Angel slayed Dru when he had the opportunity.

There better be a payoff from this because the cost is very very high."
"I "agree" if there is going to be some purpose to be achieved by this then (although not to minimize the cost) it was an necessary evil.

I met to say I would "argue" that there needs to be a purpose behind letting Dru go. Otherwise Angel's actions would be truely evil.

If there was some tactical some stragetic purpose behind sparing Dru then it would be undestandable. I don't minimize the eight innocent deaths but in war this happens. Sometimes you must sacrific innocents to defeat evil. You must be ruthless.

War is in every sense Hell. You do what it takes to win.

But if was no purpose then Angel is negligent in the deaths in the deaths of those innocents.

And the whole "burning Dru and Darla" thing would be an evil act as it serves no purpose in winning the war. It is just an act of revenge."
"I'm coming back to the original thread...

I just watched the scene again. It reminded me of a French movie called "Les comperes" (there was an American version made later on with Robin William and Billy Crystal called "Father's Day" - though I am not sure it's that good!) In that movie a 16 year old boy flees from home and joins a gang. In order to be part of that gang he has to smash a car. I can swear that the looks between Spike and Dru are the same as the chief of the gang and the young boy. It says:"What are you ready to give up to be one of us?"

"I've been wondering about everyone' "false" memories of Dawn. What if they're not? What if the monks made some type of time travel spell (kind of like on Angel-don't know the name of the episode but the one where he becomes human and is with Buffy but takes back the day so only he remembers what happened) so that Dawn really was there and everyone's memories are not fabricated. I know it's a bit of a stretch considering the monks didn't really have a lot of time cause Glory was knocking down the wall.
Or what if the spell kind of like the Jonathan Superstar spell but only 100x stronger since everyone didn't become aware of it. "

To complete that type of spell would require a lot of power. Of course Dawn may be the most powerful force in the Buffyverse. If the spell did work this way then the folks in LA would hav ememories of Dawn as well.
Ripped off from the buffy shooting script http://www.mustreadtv.com/buffyscripts/

You should have seen her face. It was priceless. I'll never forget it.

So you didn't kill her then?

Of course not.

I know you haven't been in the game for a while mate but we do still kill people. It's sort of our raison d'etre you know

Spike my boy you really don't get it. You tried to kill her and you couldn't. Look at you. You're a wreck. She's stronger than any Slayer you've faced. Force won't get it done. You gotta work from the inside. To kill this girl... you
have to love her.

I thought of it for some reason.

Could Spike possibly be planning that far ahead?? That he allowed/forced himself to fall in love with the Slayer just so he could eventually kill her??

Pre-chip Spike was already fascinated/obsessed with the Slayer. (Dru told Spike as much in the flashback with the chaos demon.) So Spike came back to Sunnydale to act on those feelings got himself chipped (oops!) and now is stuck with feelings of fascination/obsession/love and can't kill the Slayer. And having the chip just makes it worse because not only can he not hurt the object of his obsession he can't even think about hurting her.

Yikes!! What inner turmoil for poor Spike!
"I'm glad you brought this up. This is really fantastic foreshadowing. Hard to believe the writers were thinking that far ahead especially considering that JM's wasn't contracted as a regular at the time.

Spike's transformation pains seem too real for it to be an act. In Crush he really seems to be agonizing at the end over these changes that are happening to him against his will which has characterizes as "wrong."

My personal opinion is that there will come a moment where Spike is able to kill the slayer. That chip is not going to keep Spike down. He will have a very real choice to make. Maybe he will return to evil but maybe he will prove that he's become something different. Wouldn't this make a great s5 cliffhanger? Buffy at Spike's mercy?"
Why dose the Hellmouth open when the Master gets free of the Church as that is still bloking the Mouth to hell like a cork in a bottle is it not? Also how did he get stuck in the first place?
"I didn't know where to put this comment so I put it here...

"Angel has also cut himself off from his friends and from humanity. We've been told repeatedly that engagement with humans is important to keep the demon at bay. With Angel now reverting to "lone stalker" mode will he continue to slide into darkness?" (Humanitas - in an earlier thread)

The thing that is fascinating in the journey both Spike and Angel are taking is that they both mirror themselves in their actions (even if it's for different reasons). Both stalking (Angel reminded me of Spike in the last A:tS episode... just less scary) both are now alone and shut from the human world both are trying to overcome their vampire state (We still need more proof from Spike as a change of clothes isn't enough to convince us - even me! :).

Dawn said that Spike's chip was like Angel's soul... Could that be true in some ways? The writers don't want to diminish Angel's quest with what Spike is going through. But there is really a similar pattern in their actions. They look like two faces of a coin. The good and the bad... who's the ugly????? LOL"
Darla's definitely the ugly here Her situation just gets worst and worst.
What exactly kept the Master inside the Church ruins. I mean were did that forcefield come from? And why did the Hellmouth unblock when he excaped the church must have been blocking it still?
He tried to open it but got stuck 'like a cork in a bottle.'. He had to get out to open it up.
"I wonder if perhaps the forcefield itself was related to the "invitation" clause; maybe his messing with the Hellmouth effectively uninvited him from everywhere else in the world."
"I'm absolutely confused by "Crush". I don't know to which Saint I must turn to! I got many answers and many new questions...

One thing did disturb me very much and I couldn't even sleep (yeah... no good when a tv show interfers with your life at that extend!) That was the scene when Spike tells the horror bed-time story to Dawn. There's something eerie in that scene and what disturbs me even more is that it's my favorite scene.

Dawn and Spike are not human and can connect in a way together that no one else will undertand from the exterior. I am under the impression that the whole B/S is only running water under ice... we haven't seen the surface yet. That story line was necessary to make Spike care for something but it's only the point of the iceberg. I think that the Dawn and Spike relationship is the real thing (not romantically speaking of course). If Spike is ever going to find any kind of inner peace or become good or whatever (that's another discussion!) it will be through Dawn. A relationship that is not based on love or sex or attraction. She's the only one who is willing to see him. And she might just be the key to his redemption! (pun intended!)

But that said. I'm still freaked out by that scene in the dark. It's so hypnotizing...and yet she was perfectly safe there. He wouldn't have done a thing. I'm looking forward to more Dawn and Spike scenes... check them out... I'm sure they will tell us more about Spike and Dawn than any other scene!"
Nina I've been thinking that too. They look each other in the eye and say exactly what's on their minds and I think there is a mutual appreciation in that. I also wonder if William had a little sister :) There is an ease between the two of them that isn't there when they interact with the other characters.

As for the ghost story that scene works also because kids at that age love ghost stories the scarier the better and what's scarier than a true ghost story? And I love his backpeadling when Buffy got there :) I hope this relationship is pursued though it will be more difficult now when Spike definitely off the guest list.

I hope this relationship is pursued though it will be more difficult now when Spike definitely off the guest list.

If you mean that Spike can't enter the house I won't be surprised if Dawn invites him in. Or even Joyce since they seemed to be getting along rather well together when Buffy came home.
I really do have a problem with Joyce sending her little girl to the wolf. Joyce says it over and over that she has read many parental guides and books and what she did was really dangerous. I don't think she will let Spike come in anymore but she certainly underestimated him.
Even if Dawn doesn't invite Spike in she'll certainly be sneaking out to his crypt for more ghost stories. The plot possibilities are endless!
I have to object to the characterization that Dawn is not human. The monk explicitly said that she is human. I suppose there is a chance that he was wrong but since he was involved in her creation I think we need to believe until shown otherwise that Dawn is human. Plus she certainly shows human emotions.
"I have to object to the characterization that Dawn is not human. The monk explicitly said that she is human. I suppose there is a chance that he
was wrong but since he was involved in her creation I think we need to believe until shown otherwise that Dawn is human. Plus she certainly shows human emotions.

Well I simply said that she wasn't human because she says it herself to Spike. She seems to like the idea that because the both of them are not humans it's why Spike is nice to her. The bed-night story shows how much he doesn't treat her as a child. He doesn't want to frightened her too much ("is it too much?" he asks her) but for once she is has the right to listen to things that are normally forbidden.

Her words "he has cool hair and cool leather coats" (quoting from memory) is really a reflection of what many teenagers thinks in many of the message boards that you find on Buffy. I'm not sure she really has a crush tough. She's conscious that she doesn't stand a chance. I think her feelings are mixed because he is a father figure for her and for once it's a father figure who accepts her as she is. Her mixed feelings might just develop into a new emotion soon.
If I recall correctly Spike said he used to be human and Dawn said she used to not be human... They bonded on the basis that neither of them was what they original were. Both have undergone a metamorphosis.

I believe that Dawn the teenager is human. Who knows how the 'glowy key thing' will manifest itself.
You are absolutely correct Aquitaine. Thanks for clearing thing for me! :)
It's pretty common for adolescents to imagine that they are adopted or aliens in disguise or in some way different or special. Now Dawn actually -is- unique but she doesn't feel anything other than human. In fact thanks to the monks' spell she is human for all intents and purposes (physiology place in the collective memories of the world). I think her assertion that she is not human has more basis in fantasy than (Buffyverse) reality. That's why she is attracted to Spike on an in-human level: it feeds her fantasy.
"I just read your comment on Spike and Dawn's relationship being...paternal and I thought "bi ngo"! Dawn feels safe with him and he is definitely giving her the attention and understanding that she needs."
"I know I'm going a little off topic here... but while we're talking parental figure I wanted to bring two things up. Two times it occurs that some characters are acting like babysitters while Buffy looks like the mother figure.

1- When Buffy comes home after her night at the Bronze. Giles looks like the babysitter who's been reading while the children were watching tv. Buffy accompanies him to the door and asks about the "baby" of the family. They have a babysitter talk. In the babysitter metaphor Giles is a lousy sitter (he was reading alone in his corner)not even strong enough to protect them.

2- When Buffy goes to Spike's crypt to ask help Spike was really the good sitter telling stories and keeping the child safe. Buffy again has a sitter talk with him. But as he his the bad guy he doesn't get to babysit again!

Buffy is clearly carrying too much on her shoulders to behave that way. I'm sure she isn't even aware of her mother-like behavior towards Dawn. But as the babysitter talks happened twice it had to be noticed!
Good observation Nina! That would also jive with the Restless scene where Giles and Spike are dressed alike etc...

Oh. My. God!!! I didn't go that far. But I LOVE it Aquitaine!!!!!
"I know I'm going a little off topic here... but while we're talking parental figure I wanted to bring two things up. Two times it occurs that some characters are acting like babysitters while Buffy looks like the mother figure.

It is a good thing that someone is acting as a mother to Dawn -- Joyce certainly isn't up to the job.

I found the conversation between Spike and Dawn a bit disturbing -- it was a little too seductive for my tastes. Spike is a "cool" older guy and Dawn is a teenager -- and he is doing his best to impress her. (I work with teenagers and I am always unsettled when I hear a 15 or 16 year old girl talking about her college boyfriend). The "is this too much for you" line in particular was rather Parkeresque.

As for the "ghost story:" it sounds more like Angelus' modus operandi than Spike's (up until the part about putting her up for adoption anyway.) I think Spike was trying to impress Dawn with some of Angelus' old exploits (that he witnesses and participated in) which he has claimed as his own -- he is a bit of a poseur after all.
Buffy was a teenager when she fell in love with Angel. Sweet 16 I believe (maybe 17). Dawn is 14 not a little kid anymore (although she still acts like one due to how protective everyone is being with her).

Give Dawn just a few years and she and Spike could be quite an item.

(Actually I agree with you about the disturbing part but I felt the exact same way about the Buffy/Angel relationship. Buffy was a teenager Angel an adult.)
By the way does anyone know how old Angel is? Not chonologically (around 200 years) but physically as when one becomes a vampire physical aging stops.

How old was Liam when he died and Angulus arose?
"Dawn is human.

But she is also something much more.

This reminds so much of Indian Mythology. The Ramayana.

Ramayana relates the adventures of Rama who together with his three half brothers collectively made up the seventh avatar (incarnation) of the Hindu god Vishnu.

What I found in common with Dawn is that one of the half brothers was the avatar of Vishnu's sword etc. So the brother was human but also some thing "a sword."

Also Rama didn't know his divinity. He didn't know he was Vishnu. But others around him did.

I am not trying to make any direct comparisions here and I am certainly no expert on Hinduism.

But would it be appropriate to say that Dawn is the key's "avatar"? Would I be using that term correctly?

Spike is also similar to Dawn because they are both immiture in different ways. Spike is acting like a love sick teenager while Dawn is actually going through adolecence.

I think Dawn may like Spike so much because he was sitting with Dawn in Bloodties when she found out the truth about herself. The current basis to Dawn's life are words that came out of Spike's mouth. Spike was the only one who could support during that critical moment so maybe she feels a special sequirity and connection with him.

I think the connection to Dawn and Spike may have a signifigant role in the future. I also think it's neat because I'm around Dawn's age and I really like Spike.

Do you think Dawn likes Spike so much because he doesn't talk down to her? Everyone else is always busy protecting her and shielding her from harm. She even gets sent out of the room if the conversation gets too intense. Do you think her new semi-crush on Spike is because he doesn't treat her like a little kid?
Yes ironically part of me thinks that the more Dawn bonds with Spike the safer she is. Apart from Buffy who else has much of a prayer of protecting her or in helping her fight? Dawn knows Glory wants to destroy her.
Okay I get it now. (blushes) Apologies to all for getting off topic.
"I too hope that the spike and Dawn friendship continues. The both need someone to be on their side someone to talk to that wan't judge them. Dawn has never known Spike to do anything truly evil she only sees that he isn't like anyone else not really a vampire not really a scooby. She has empathy for him a "you and me against the world" sort of thing because there is no one like her either. I think they'll either be really good for each other or be the end of each other. "
OK playing devil's advocate again.

Why is it not okay for Buffy to react to Spike's stalker tendencies in the way that she has (by hitting him which he unfortunately sees as a sign of endearment) but it's okay for Dawn to have a friendship with Spike??? This is still Spike chipped vampire used to be the Big Bad maybe again someday.

Just some thoughts before I go away for the weekend.
I got the impression that Spike really is changing. Certainly he has burned a lot of bridges by his rejection of Dru and Harmony.
I also think Buffy is in denial. She may have been encouraging Spike of a subconscious level that she was never aware she was presenting. As I look back over several episodes of their scenes together it certainly seems like there is a sexual subcontext to their conversations.
Spike's choices for good appear to be coming harder and harder. He has to fight the demon within him and try to convince the world around him that he really is differnt. He appears to have found an ally in Dawn.
"Brian I just love your posts! They always cheer me up! You keep me up with my original beliefs! I just watched "Crush" again and I still can't pinpoint my emotions to get into a philosophical debate here... but thanks! "
"Ever told stories around the campfire?

Like the one about the person who was driving one night and heard on the radio about an escaped murderer with one hand...

There is something very human about wanting to hear scary stories. And for Dawn protected all her life (6 months of it) by her mom and big slayer sister this fasination with the darker aspects of life has been suppressed far more than most. Remember Dawn is 14. Buffy was about 16 when she became the slayer. But as the baby Dawn has been far more shielded and protected than Buffy ever was.

When you are younger and more innocent there is most often a desire to become less innocent. You see it as a sign of growing up. You don't want to be sheilded. You don't want to be protected from hearing about life's darker aspects.

Ironically once you do grow a bit and lose some of your innocence you form a great desire and longing for the times that you were more innocent and didn't know about life's darker aspects. But of course then it is too late.

We humans are strange. Can't win.

Dawn is tired of walking into rooms and having all "grown-up talk" stop. But Spike he doesn't treat her like a kid. No he is willing to tell scary stories. And what makes the stories all the scarier is that they are true. She is hearing it from the source.

Sure they frighten Dawn but she wants to prove that she isn't a baby. She wants to prove that she can handle it."
Here's a wild idea based on Dru's comment that Spike tastes like ashes and Spike's own comment that he is only a shell. As his relationship to Dawn continues to grow he becomes her personal defender. In the final battle with Glory Spike the Vampire is destroyed but Dawn uses her energy to recreate him as something else. Something that could become a Watcher or a friend to the Slayer.
"I love that idea! It makes perfect sense. The writers must comes with a special season finale. They always do something very disturbing and Spike's death would be exactly "something disturbing'. The idea of Dawn being the key to Spike's redemption would add a great deal to the mix!

Yes. That's how I think it might happen too.
Count me in-- I like it too. 'Wayout' is so often just how it turns out.
Hmm..Do you suppose it would annoy Spike to suddenly be human? Would he consider it a punishment or a gift? ;)
If he isn't a vampire anymore... why would he consider it as a punishment? He's trying to do everything to become more than a vampire lately.
And he could teach English or poetry at University! All tweedy....*grin*
I could probably learn to accept the tweed...maybe...but if he shows up with a pipe I am calling Dru rescue him.
If Spike were to end up human would Buffy pay any attention to him? Spike the Vampire has dash:
Spike the Academic sounds...well academic.
"Rofl Brian. Like Giles only with better cheekbones. "Fix us a cup of tea Spike." Rofl rofl. One wonders if Drusilla is capable of feeling mortification?"
I think that would be interesting. We would maybe see another vampire with a soul or a human who has to deal with the fact that he was once a vampire. I think we would get some interesting insights into Angel if just his soul was restored. We see Angel after 100 years of having a soul what would happen if we're able to see a vampire just after his soul in reintroduced. An interesting concept.

Oh and what would Buffy think if Spike dies because he saves her? That would sure throw her for a loop.

"I've been thinking that. Maybe the writers will think that if Buffy returned Spike's affection posthumously people will overlook the "moral betrayal."

And think of the angst factor... ;)"
I think that Spike and Dawn relate quite well because they both are now looking at the world in a similar way. Teenagers can be the most selfish people on the planet (can be). I knew people in high school who thought of nothing but themselves and the only reason they did anything good was so they wouldn't get punished or they would get something. They 'loved' but it was a selfish or obsessive love. I see Spike as very much the same way. He is the 'bad boy' teenager who in time MAY end up changing his ways. And maybe his connection with Dawn is the way he can do it. As Dawn grows up maybe she can teach him a thing or two.

Am I the only one on this board who was utterly FREAKED OUT by the eye in the back of the girl's head in this week's Angel episode? For some reason it bothers as much as anything I've ever seen on Angel or Buffy INCLUDING the Gentlemen!!! It was only a minor sub-plot but a major freak out. I can only speculate as to why it was so disturbing.

Partly it's because the girl herself was presented as young and very scared. Her mother was with her obviously highly worried. This humanized the situation. It wasn't treated as a joke as sometimes happens with strange situations in the Buffyverse.

Then there's the eye itself. It was obviously not human but was attentively looking at the world around it. It tracked Wesley's motions. (It seems to be hard-wired into the human brain to react to eyes. This seems to apply to all mammals if not some other vertebrates. Consider the eye-spots that evolved on the wings of some butterflies to freak out predators!)

Thirdly there's the fact that it was only a minor part of the episode and could have been removed without changing much. A major freakout is used as a throw-off. That eye could have been the subject of an entire episode.

I am very curious as to whether or not there will be any follow-up on this. It's CREEPY!
That eye reminded me of the creature that eventually becomes part of Londo on Babylon 5.

I too was freaked out especially when the story line wasn't resolved. Could this be the start of something big?
"I believe so. It was too eerie not to come back. I guess they thrown that part in there as a teaser (like Ben was there as a teaser in "Crush") just to keep us on our toes... they sing-song at us :there is something coming!"
Agreed that was one of the nastier freakier things we saw probably because the eye was aware of its surroundings. There was a weird vibe from the mother - was she just worried or was she feeling guilty about something
I too picked up on something from the Mother as if she was holding something back. Not fair if this subplot doesn't come back for the Gunn/Chase/Wyndam-Pryce Agency to resolve.
"Am I the only person thinking asexual reproduction? What else is going to pop out of that poor kid's head?

pause "... just me then."
"On second thought my post is a little off-topic for this forum. It is about the Buffyverse but not really about philosophy unless unless you consider the question of WHAT FREAKS PEOPLE OUT? to be a matter of philosophy.

On third thought maybe the subject fits right in though most posters write "As If" the Buffyverse were real. There was a German philosopher named Vaihinger who lived about a century ago who developed an entire philosophy based on "Als Ob " which is "As If" in German...."
Gosh dang it BobR! Here I was trying to procrastinate and you make me go learn something again : )


http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/4/0 5716 9874+1 00.html

That eye totally freaked me out! I just wasn't expecting it. Monsters Demons people who turn into demons we've gotten used to them. Jos just wanted to shake us up with something we weren't expecting. I think the Mom and the child were way too calm. The mother said she woke up with it this morning I'd be so totally freaked out if that was my kid! I'm thinking maybe the mother tried to do a spell and the eye was a mistake.
I was thinking that perhaps what the mother was hiding was possible motives for the kid getting the eye. Didn't she say she knew Virginia? Perhaps they're also from one of the organized magic families and one of the rival groups gave the girl the eye as a means of spying on/terrorizing them.
I'm glad to force you to learn something. I enjoy learning things myself. Does this make me a Sadist a Masochist or a Hedonist?

Years ago I read de Sade's _Philosophy in the Bedroom_ which was a UNIQUE intellectual experience. I recommend you read it only if you want to take a lack of any moral standards to an extreme. De Sade managed to mix pornography and philosophy. (If this note inspires to you to read de Sade I suppose that this makes me a Sadist in more ways than one. The book is utter filth!)

What it reminded me of was Bill Murray's little speech in the original *Ghostbusters* where he and the other 'busters were trying to convince the mayor that he needed to let them do their thing because an apocolyptic event was about to occur.

You remember the one that listed all sort of horrendous creepy portents and that Murray finished up with 'Cats and dogs living together!!'

We know that an apocalypse is coming in the Angelverse the eye may be a portent. If so other similar events should occur.

Also it just occurs to me that this has happened before in the Buffyverse Jenny was talking to Giles about it but I can't recall the specific season/apocalypse. There was something about a child being born with the eyes facing inward or something equally horrific. (I'm sure some other more alert poster can give us the specifics).
Yes i'm pretty sure it was a child with (an) eye(s) inward and a cat giving birth to a litter of snakes.
" To qoute the Slayer "Ewwwwww" Creepy yet strangely effective. Sometimes Joss is just to much for me."
We've talked about Spike and Buffy relationship extensively but what about Dru? Why did she return to Sunnydale?

To kill the Slayer?
To return Spike to his former ways?
To heal herself psychologically from Angel's roasting?
To revenge herself on Angel by trying to hurt Buffy?
To get Spike to love her again?
To help Spike get rid of his chip with a little vampire exercise?

And didn't all of Dru's conversation make sense?
Or am I so far gone that it just seemed that way to me?
Spike asked her why she came back - was it nostalgia? Dru said she wanted to bring the family back together. Spike didn't want to go because he didn't want her to know about the chip but she knew anyway.

"Exactly how far around the bend is Drusilla exactly if she wants her "family" back together?? This is a family where Angel tries to burn her to death Darla belittles and berates her and Spike (the love of her un-life) tells her he now loves someone else. And she wants to gather these to her bosom once more?!?

Or is this a case of a dysfunctional family is better than no family at all. Dru is stronger than she used to be (both physically and mentally) but she is still extraordinarily needy.
It's all a question of psychology here I think. What were these people before they were vamped and what did they gain and lose by becoming a vamp? Dru was pious. She wanted to be good and was afraid not to be loved by her god. She lost her family because of Angel. To me it makes perfect sense that all she thinks about is being a family again. She despereatly tries to hang on something she lost as a human. Spike didn't have women love in his life and all he wants is to be loved and love. It seem to me that becoming a vampire is a big psychological experience. And they will have to relive indefinitely the same pattern over and over again until they can make it stop. Spike's speech about women was harsh... but I'd love to see his mother... I'm sure she has more to do with it than he even thinks!
"Although I finally did read the DF article because it really upset some people (you know who you are) I didn't pay much attention to it and I didn't read the wildfeed. So I watched the show with few preconceived notions. Although it is by no means my favorite episode it was a good one. The main thought that occurred to me (other than the fact that it very clearly prognosticated what was going to happen by the Quasimodo reference and the "Willow there is something you can do for me" line) was that the writers (I doubt if DF was the sole author of this episode) wrote as if they had been reading this discussion board for the past 3 months because at different time different characters expressed various views that have been posted on this board in recent months. Just a few examples (I apologize for being too lazy right now to research who posted these thoughts.)
1. In the Buffy/Dawn argument when they left Spike's lair Dawn equated his Chip to a soul.
2. Whether or not vampires can love.
3. Does Spike really love Buffy or is it just an obsession (base on Spikeís actions I would say both are true ñ he threatened to let Dru kill Buffy but then he saved Buffy from Dru). What will he do when she rejects him?
4. Serious consequences for Willow's overreaching herself with spells.
5. That Buffy hitting Spike was like foreplay to him.
6.The whole issue about whether or not Spike can be redeemed (juryís still out on that despite DFís remarks).
7. The Quasimdo discussion was a thinly disguised portrayal of the pros & cons of a S/B romance with Willow on the pro side Tara on the con side and Buffy not having any idea what was going on.
Man you are so right that was really spooky and I noticed all the same things that you did!

Me being one of the 'electrochemical soul via chip' concept promotors the comment by Dawn to that effect really jumped out at me. (You will also note Buffy's pretty much immediate rejection of the idea).

One of my favorite quotes from the ep would have to be Dru's 'Oh yes we can love.. just not always wisely.' She certainly isn't entirely crazy now is she?

"I totally agree with you all about the fact that the episode reflected so many themes that were discussed on this board. "creepy"!

Other little tidbits I noticed not that it has anything to do really with the thread but I felt they had some meaning (fel free to discuss them):

1- Buffy says to Spike" Are you out of your mind?" and her words when she realizes the answer are the same that Spike said in OomM "Oh my god oh no". Interesting no?

2- The whole red riding hood story. On the sofa by her house Buffy is sitting in defensive pose when she talks about Spike loving her. She's sitting with her legs under her. Her mother brings her a jacket and sends her to the wolf (do I need to say that Buffy wears red?)

3- In the train Buffy sits down on the seat where there was a dead guy and says "it's creepy"! The fact that she has chosen that seat is in fact really creepy!

4- Buffy says to Dawn :"Why doesn't it register with you?: crypt+vampire= bad". She's really talking about herself here... who was she coming to see to seek help in finding Dawn?

I know I've been very upset with the article at first. I haven't read the chat and probably won't. With all the stuff they put in that episode... all the question that they brushed... the writers will have to come with answers one day. The wonderful thing that happened is that Buffy's world is now very shaken. She'll have to think over the whole vampire thing and her duty as a slayer. More good episodes for us to see!"
"Hmm so the writers are possibly reading this board eh? I kind of wondered about Angel's reference to people wanting him to wear plaid in Happy Anniversary because at least twice on this board I have mentioned that if I was a vampire people who wear plaid would be on my "to do" list. Not that I hate plaid all that much I was just being facetious."
Since I agree with you all:) I'll just say that the fact that the DF interview referenced Masq's site *cannot* have been a fluke. What surprised me the most about the episode was that on the surface it seemed to provide trite answers to the Buffyverse's *big* questions it really just set all those questions in a row for Buffy to have to deal with sometime.

BTW I too loved the OomM reference. I have to say though that my favorite thing about the episode was Buffy's heart-shaped red lace top. It just screamed oxymoron don't you think? LOL.
"Curiouser and curiouser as Alice would say.

I know I did kind of jump a little when Dawn equated Spike's chip with a soul.

Here's a thought:
What if David Fury *does* lurk on this board took ideas/theories/wild guesses posted here and incorporated them into the script for "Crush?" Then because he can't possibly admit that he got his ideas from a bunch of fans (heaven forbid!) he blows smoke by dissing those very fans?? Probably a little far fetched but who knows. Fans have been an influence on other shows (Star Trek Roswell). I'm sure Joss has got the season pretty well outlined with only the details to be filled. (I just read in an interview that Joss already knows how Season 5 will end.)"
"Okay here goes. Not that it excuses some of the remarks David Fury said in the chat but (you all knew there was a but) I found some statements he posted after that and he seems really frustrated. He said he likes to joke around and every comment he makes seems to end up insulting someone. (paraphrased of course)

I think much of the problem is he reads the message boards where 80 comments are devoted to "Buffy is a b****h" or over 20 comments on "how sexy Spike and Angelus are when they torture people". This isn't to disparage any other board but as a writer it must be frustrating to read endless "Spike is kewl" posts. (grin)

I still feel he was a little harsh (especially in light of how the 'stalker' theme was dealt with but I was thinking we could find him a cat to pet and send over some chocolate. Surely that would solve the problem?"
"***He said he likes to joke around and every comment he makes seems to end up insulting someone.***

This man obviously needs to think about what comes out of his mouth before he says something. (They have classes for that you know. ;-) ) If his jokes are misinterpreted (which they most likely will be since all most of us saw was the printed word - no voice inflections no facial expressions no gestures no body language) then tell it straight. Don't try to be "cute." He's a writer you'd think he'd know better. I realize that not all writers are good public speakers. Then maybe he shouldn't be allowed to do interviews. Does Joss realize how upset some people are by what DF said in this interview?"
"Ackkk! The statements I was referring to were not from an interview. They were postings on a message board. And I agree as a writer on the show he has a responsibility to his comments about the show. I would just hate to be him and have my every post picked apart for insults or hidden meanings. "David said -green-" "oh no! Green??" "Buffy is doomed green is the color of vengeance in the Maisy Mouse demon clan!" etc. ;)"
I suspect that all the writers at BtVS are also rabid fans -- each with their own viewpoints. They may have discussions much like ours -- but the main difference would be that they have the power to make their particular viewpoint part of the BtVS mythology merely by writing it into the script -- which their opponents would be forced to acknowledge in the interests of continuity. In fact the inconsistencies we see are likely the result of competing philosophies held by different writers.
In fact the inconsistencies we see are likely the result of competing philosophies held by different writers.

Probably the most insightful thing said on this topic yet Malandanza. How could that NOT happen? Well except that Joss is supposed to have the final word. But he can't edit every thing written nor does he have the time to scrutinize scripts with a fine tooth comb to catch every thing that doesn't fit his vision. Plus the way the writers talk they have plenty of meetings where they debate the ramifications of going in various directions with characters which means they do have a say.

Writing by committee. Gotta be a tough job keeping as much consistency as they do.

Okay the vampire slayer's chief duty is obviously to slay vampires. However yesterday Buffy let several vampires go when she could have killed them.

Spike - Okay this is nothing new. He's helpless and killing him would be pointless. So its understandable that Buffy let him live.

Harmony - Okay Harmony isn't exactly a danger to humanity. But she has killed people. And Buffy had a perfect opportunity to kill her but instead chose to punch Spike.

The two vamps Spike leads Buffy to - Buffy didn't even try to chase them.

Druscilla - Druscilla probably would have been a challenge for Buffy to kill. Remeber what happened to Kendra? But it's Buffy's duty to fight and kill vampires regardless of whether she is risking her life in the process.

Bottom line: Buffy let four dangerous vampires get away yesterday. Is she neglecting her slaying duties because of the anguish Dawn and Spike are causing her? What would the WC think of this?
"If Spike is confused Buffy is ambivalent.

She just *stood* there as both Dru and Harmony made their little break up speeches. She *let* Spike follow her home after being tied up in his lair! All she had to say to Spike when she was tied up was "OK you may have a chance someday". A crumb so to speak. But no she wouldn't even lie to get rid of a dangerous predator like Dru (who had killed 8 people in the last 48 hours!).

Buffy is neglecting something. What? I don't know yet. I guess that in good Season 5 form we have to chalk it up to the ubiquitous 'out' statement that Buffy is exploring her dark side;)
"Spike - Okay this is nothing new[Buffy not killing him]. He's helpless and killing him would be pointless. So its understandable that Buffy let him live.

Spike is not helpless and killing him would not be pointless -- it would be good policy (for Dawn's sake). Consider the following possiblilities:

1. Spike goes to Glory and tells her Dawn is the Key. We have no way of knowing why Glory wants the Key -- perhaps merely to escape a dimension to which she has been exiled perhaps to regain her former power to take over or destroy the world. Yet other creatures have tried to destroy the world and Buffy has always won. Spike could safely betray Dawn to Glory (he could even deliver his little friend to her himself.)

2. Dru foreshadowed that it was possible for Spike to break the programming of the chip. it seems as though there are different levels of pain for different actions -- hence Spike's assurance to Harmony that if he shoots Buffy he'll br unconscious from the pain for a few hours but Buffy will "be dead for alot longer." He could start small -- torturing captives to inure himself from the pain and working his way back up to murder. Afterwards all it takes is an invitation from Dawn and he has access to Buffy's family once more (he's probably still invited into Giles' house and he can enter Willow and Tara's dorm because it is not a permanent dwelling.)

3. Dawn isn't human. Spike might be able to harm her. It probably depends on the chip -- is it a human detector or does it cause pain to Spike when he thinks he's injuring a human. I favor the latter -- I think it would be easier to build such a device than to install a sophisticated human detector in a single chip. In any event Dawn may be just inhuman enough."
"Is Buffy neglecting her duty?

Well... yeah! I think too many things are happening to her recently for her to keep up with her normal routine. Slaying was something she "had" to do over the first seasons. She didn't want to and needed Giles to tell her to do so before she would go. It has slowly changed and now it's a job a hunt. She does it quite mechanically. She kills bad people who are a danger to her fellow neighbors.

So what is it that she didn't stake Spike yet (despite the fact that JM's contract is up until the end of the season!)? That's very disturbing. As I said in another thread once you know your ennemy it's hard to kill him. She keeps saying that he's harmless but he's not and somewhere she knows it. She just can't kill him. It's not just the chip that stops her but to kill Spike is in some sort of way a real "kill" for Buffy. Usually she stakes unknown vampires with vamp faces and all. I think she is afraid to make the jump.
I think you are really on to something there. Killing Spike would not be the same as dusting some anonymous blood sucker. Still if I were the Slayer I would dust him. This is the second time this season he has tried to circumvent the chip with the help of allies. He really needs to be put down but then that would not be as entertaining as letting Spike complete his journey (wherever he's going).

I am not surprised that Buffy didn't kill Dru. I am just surprised that even she could survive fighting Dru while chained up.

O.k. maybe Harmony was not worth chasing and she was to appalled at the whole chain of events to try.

But letting those two vampires go earlier on? She really is off her game. I think she was starting to suspect that Spike was playing games with her and was too disturbed to worry about those two small fish getting away.

Maybe her dark journey into the deepth of the Slayer real identity has something to do with this whole Spike thing after all. She might still deny it but vampires have feelings (maybe not human feelings but they feel things). As long as she believed she only killed dead people everything was fine. Now it's more than just the issues with Spike. She will be confronted to the fact that Slayering might equal killing in some circumstances. This has to be very disturbing for her.

"> she will be confronted to the fact that Slayering might equal killing in some circumstances.

Remember how disturbed she was when Dracula called her "job" "hunting"?"
"Just going to address #3. Dawn is human. It was said by the monk that she is now human. And in Spike's eyes "It doesn't matter where you come from." So he sees her as human.
"Dawn is human. It was said by the monk that she is now human. And in Spike's eyes It doesn't matter where you come from." So he sees her as human"

I tend to agree. If the chips works through his senses anything that looks smells feels sounds and tastes like a human would be off-limits. I think it is unlikely that the chip it the part doing the detection (although if it is remember that Adam could see through Jonathan's made-up universe just like the crazies see through Dawn) -- it stretches my credulity too far. "
"For luna (from the post below) on how we never discuss Drusilla. And in seeing her back on Buffy. There is something that I've wanted to bring up since I've been trying to catch up a lot of the posts I missed and the updates Masquerade has done.

There is a sentence note under The Metaphysics of "Lie to Me" that had me question a certain point of the moments of Dru's lucidity and madness.

"...And she displays no genuine disdain for the vampire who aided and abetted her mental breakdown. "

Maybe I'm missing a point and please clarify me if I am wrong or I'm not seeing the scene in the context others may see it but in the scene of What's My Line Part 2 when she's torturing Angel and he's about to (I guess apologize) she says:

"Bite your tongue . . . They used to eat. Cake.
And eggs. And honey. Until you came and ripped their
throats out"

In my mind not only was she enjoying the sadistic relationship that she once shared with Angelus and at that time shared with Spike but I think part of her in moments of lucidity is also torturing Angel for pulling her into the unlife of darkness and madness and in doing that killing those she loved as a human. Or is that just too much of a human feeling for a demon to feel?
Dru as Spike were good persons as humans. I think that there lies the difference.
I have that sound clip of Dru torturing Angel and it really sounds as though she's generally pissed off and wants revenge which she deserves. She is probably one of the most tragic of characters on btvs. So whatever badness she causes I give her leeway 'cause if I were her I'd do the same thing I think. She's just my fav. Character and I like yammering about her. And Rufus--The concept makes me a little angry too.
I haven't seen a lot of the old ep's with Dru just read the transcripts but I've noticed this season that her madness combined with her psychic abilities from when she was human often give her some interesting insights. She can sense the chip in Spike's head and Darla's repressed obsession with Angel. The trick to writing or playing an insane character is to remember that everything they say and do makes sense -to them-. I'm going to have to go over the transcripts for Crush once they're up - doesn't she say something about vampires being able to love?
Yes. And then the scene cuts to Spike and Buffy but Dru is still speaking in the background... wonder what she was saying? Maybe if we play the tape backwards the insane but accurate rantings of Drusilla will provide the key to Season 5:)
"Dru says: "We can love quite well. If not wisely."
"Dru says: 'We can love quite well. If not wisely.'

The Judge said of Spike and Dru that they were tainted by love and jealousy -- he did not indicate that each vampire was tainted by both emotions.

Spike's reaction to Dru and Dru's quote suggests to me that Spike was motivated by jealousy while Dru was motivated by love. Everything else Spike has said and done has been mere romantic affectation ("natural to a poet.") Certainly if Dru had been the great romantic love of his life he would not have been willing to sacrifice her. Even his devotion to Buffy is absurd -- he hesitated before making the "sacrifice " to bargain with her.

His "love" for Buffy is no more real than his "love" for Dru -- had he really been in love with either of these women neither would have found themselves chained in a crypt. Obsession lust passion jealousy -- sure -- but not love.

"His love" for Buffy is no more real than his "love" for Dru -- had he really been in love with either of these women neither would have found themselves chained in a crypt. Obsession lust passion jealousy -- sure -- but not love. "

I've made a great deal of analysis about "what is love" in my life. Wrote so many pages that at the end you are left with the only realization that love is not something you can analyse and label. Love in the pure sense of the word is suppose to be inconditional. Give not take. It's pretty on paper and I believed that for years unable to accept other forms of love. But we are people not sheets of paper covered with statistics on what love should be.

I think that Spike feels love but doesn't know what to do with the emotion he feels. He doesn't want it. He tried to fight it. He can't. It's just there. It's resilient. At least he's man enough to accept it and not refute it.

That doesn't forgive him for what he did in the crypt though. I don't agree with his method. But I don't think that as equiped as he is sentimentally he had other choice. He wanted Buffy to listen to him that's all he found.

Spike's relationships with women seems to be rooted in an archaic way to see women (remember? women are either virgins mothers or whores!) what do we have here? Dru is definitely the mother Harmony the whore (in the sense that she's the sex object) and Buffy is the virgin - the unattainable woman (like Cecily was).

I believe that Spike loved Dru. And to offer to stake her was probably something he couldn't do anyway. She's the mother figure.

Spike caught between the three women of his life (Buffy representing Cecily) is just confronted to his most inner depths. He never was loved as a human and still suffers from love as a vampire and that's the tragedy. There are no way out for him. Love (even if it's not pretty) is just what he thinks about all the time be it as William or Spike."
Obsession lust passion jealousy....

In some circles this is what passes for love. Love cannot be defined. It is nebulous as changeble as the persons and circumstances involved. A twelve year old has a crush on her music teacher. Is this not love? As adults we may shake our heads knowingly insisting that only with maturity can one really understand the depths of true love. But tell that to the twelve year old when her heart is crushed by the news that her beloved is about to marry another.

On a darker note the stalker believes that to possess his victim will bring completeness to both their existences. Unable to achieve that goal his frustation drives him to ever more depraved actions. Is this not love? We rational humans shake our heads assured that love is an unselfish emotion which demonstates itself with acceptance and trust. Yet who among us can say we have never been angered and hurt because our loved one behaved in a manner that violated our ideal of love.

Of course as we mature we do realize that youthful infatuations are not lasting. Of course when we recover from out disillusionments about our significant others we learn to accept them for who they are. And of course vampires can love. What they can't do is demonstrate that love in a healthy selfless way.
Vamps surely do have a defect when it comes to love. But we can't define love anyway it's variant. So I just don't know if Spike really loves Buffy but if he does I feel sorry for him it's just not going anywhere. I think that he does still love Dru (more than he could ever realize) and she finally has love to offer him. Tragedy much? Spike really is Love's Bitch!
"*** "Spike's relationships with women seems to be rooted in an archaic way to see women (remember? women are either virgins mothers or whores!) what do we have here? Dru is definitely the mother Harmony the whore (in the sense that she's the sex object) and Buffy is the virgin - the unattainable woman (like Cecily was)." ***

Very nice insight Nina.

"Okay from what I got she says something like "we can love only we're silly" does it make sense? I should listen to it again!"
Thanks Diana Michelle! Way better than what I said! Bad memory! :)
"That indeed is the quote but Drusilla keeps speaking after that... something about knowing that Spike loved Buffy before he did and ... ?

Dru's line is adapted from Othello's line where he claims to have "loved not wisely but too well". And we all know what happened to Desdemona. Yikes! In The Hunchback of Notre Dame Quasimodo ends up dead; in Othello the 'hero' kills Desdemona. I think we are being set up for some high drama folks.

Othello has got to be the most fatalistic of Shakespeare's plays. The experience of reading or watching it is akin to watching a car crash from afar. You know something bad is going to happen and both you and the protagonists are powerless to charge the course of events the course of pure inevitable tragedy. "
I've never heard Othello described quite like that before - I like it!

So is Spike Othello Desdemona or Iago?
I was *just* thinking about that myself ñ considering the fact that Drusilla not only says the line but modifies it as well... Hmmm. Spike fits the profile for Othello (possessive) but then he doesnít ëhaveí the girl. He fits the profile for Iago because heís the outsider and he has that suave way with words that makes people paranoid. I always thought that the play was more about how Iago screws Othello over (*cough* in the same way Lindsey wants to screw over Angel *cough*). Of course if he were Iago Iím not sure who Othello would be (perhaps an absentee Angel? or maybe Buffy herself?)...

I donít know how useful it is to transpose the plots of Othello and The Hunchback of Notre Dame onto the actions of the Buffyverse characters. It certainly tells us something about what the writers are thinking about though.

For my part I can see few parallels (beyond the all-bumpy factor:) between Quasimodo and Spike. Spike has always been remarkably perceptive and in tune with the reality around him. Yes he is marginal but he is neither as dim nor as single-minded as the Hunchback. Equating Spike with Q is a drastic oversimplification of his complex character mainly because Spike is so much more self-actualised. But then Buffy is no more an Esmeralda than Spike is a hunchback is she! These paradigms provide great tools for analysis but I hope BtVS finds its own unique way of dealing with this singular plot.

Arguing from analogy is always dangerous. We all do it and it's a neat rhetorical trick but it doesn't actually prove the argument. I agree that the writers will come up with an original way to handle this but the literary references sure do add something to the episode. Foreshadowing is fun!
"Serial killer/stalker issues aside I love the way the scene between Spike Buffy and Drusilla was written. Between that scene and the one a few ep's ago between Buffy and Reily I have to say that the writers for this show have the best handle on how these conversations go that I've ever seen on TV.

I may disagree with Spike's choice of display of affection but I know just how he feels when he offers up something he thinks is precious and has it tossed back in his face as worthless. And I can't count the times I've said something in the midst of "The Talk" and it was misinterpreted forcing me to backpedal furiously. I don't think my love life has been particualrly tragic but we all have learned to dread hearing "Honey we have to talk."

I also think the characters handled it in the only way they could. Spike is still very much William given to overdramatic gestures. Of course nowadays he kills people (or vampires) not just the English language but still the principle is the same. Buffy on the other hand is stuggling with all the things in her life she cannot control: Joyce's cancer Glory etc. Now pile this tremendous and sudden change in perspective regarding Spike on top of all of that and it's no wonder she lashes out.

I think there is some sub-conscious attraction to Spike on Buffy's part and that's why she keeps hitting him. Of course violence -is- the natural reaction of the Slayer to stress involving vampires so she kind of gets the double-whammy there.

Now that I think of it Buffy and Spike are very alike in how they handle relationships. Niether is very good with words and their actions tend to be violent. Both also have significant trouble opening up (Buffy stonewalls Reily Spike stalks Buffy). Clearly a match made in...well Sunnydale.

I think the most intriguing part of the whole issue is the potential for and process of growth on both sides. (You were wondering where the philosophical angle was weren't you ;) The need for redemption is more obvious for Spike but it can be argued that Buffy is also in need of redemption as a human being. She has allowed Slaying to become her life and has lost a lot of her connection with other people. (Hey that sounds like Angel doesn't it?) She keeps making progress (the SG as of the end of last season her mom this season) but then Slaying interferes and pulls her away again causing her to try to protect everyone. In doing so she ends up isolating herself once again.

Redemption ain't just for vampires anymore!"
Hi I'm a newbie poster delurking with a quick thought with regards to the whole debate about whether by seeking him out again and subsequently decking him after describing such behavior as a turn-on to him (from now-on I'm going to refer to punches as third base:).

Remember the shallower-than-Cordelia pre-Slayer Buffy in the Becoming flashbacks? She was going on to her friends about being completely over this guy (I want to say Tyler?) and I think something about a unhealthy relationship and then saying she was staying after school to get him to ask her to Homecoming. Teasing much?

Maybe there's more of that self-absorbed teenage beauty queen - the one who adored being the object of everyone's attention- than we thought.
Welcome Greta!

I would say that this characteristic of Buffy (self-absorption) has been steadily diminishing over the last several years as she has gained in maturity and responsibility but I'm not sure just how much of it she is really aware of.

Buffy is a person of strong emotions and convictions and has a good sense of the proper moral direction to take when the ultimate crunch time comes.

That being said I don't think that she is very self-analytical and it may simply not be in her nature. It may come with age and experience.
Do Vampires change as they get older and if so who is older the Master or Kakistos

"I think that Buffy up to this point has considered Spike a thing...not a being. We already have seen how self-centered she is with her friends and family (justified or not). She has dealt with Spike in a largely reactive way either as a villian - or a tool. As a tool she thought that she understood the way that he worked. Now she has been forced to see him as a sentient being with a capacity for feeling. This has understandably freaked her out.

From that standpoint it is entirely in her nature to have treated him the way that she did.
I think that she viewed this (to her) inexplicable change in attitude from Spike as a threat. She often views thing that she doesn't understand as a threat in fact it's her job. It is entirely in keeping with her character to have tried to shut him down/out. And Spike - in typical Spike fashion - went way way overboard..which would be pretty darn freaky you have to admit.

That all said I think that things have come back into balance in the Buffyverse. I think that the way Buffy has been treating Spike - as a tool is far "meaner" than the way she's treating him now. The fact that she freaked out is actually an acknowledgement that he still has power now it's in his court as to what to do with it."
"Jen....you are very right about Buffy and her treating Spike like a thing and the way she has been with her family. Here's where the dilema is going to pop up for her....Dawn is not human and Buffy "cares" about her. There's an arguement for Spike (Dawn hasn't killed anyone but still...) Dawn has feelings and she is not human....hmmm...."
"As Angel said to Buffy "I'm just an animal right?"

Thinking of vampires as sentient beings turns Buffy's world upside down. She kills vampires. It is easy to kill a "thing" or an "animal." When the things she fights are sentient beings it becomes harder to kill them.

With Angel Buffy was able to tell herself that he had a soul and was therefore more than an "animal." Spike doesn't have a soul. So Buffy is horrified by the evidence that he an ordinary vampire is more than an animal."
Gee I just had to burst in and clap my hands here! I just saw the episode and I'm still completely too overwhelmed to come with something sensible to say right now... but I just had to say that I agree with you! :)
"ITA as well. I just saw the show and though I was completely spoiled for this episode wildfeed DF interview and all it still didn't prepare me for the actual thing. As far as I can see what's going on with Spike (and with Buffy) cannot be labelled yet. Talk of Spike having a chemical soul being a stalker being redeemable being damned... it's way too simple. As for Buffy's feelings I have no clue what they are at this point and I don't think she does either.

"This with you is wrong. I know it. I'm not a complete idiot. You think I like having you in here. Destroying everything that was me until all that's left is you in an empty shell. You say you hate it but you won't leave."

WHAT was that little speech about? Is *Spike* the vessel we are hearing so much about? If I'm interpreting this correctly Spike feels like he is being taken over by Buffy... interesting possibilities present themselves don't they?


And what about Buffy's clearly ironic: "You can't love without a soul" - so there (insert Cordelia sticking out her tongue). LOL. Of course Buffy can't admit the possibility to herself. It would be the end of the world as she knows it. But then maybe the world as she knows it is about to change quite dramatically.


All I can say is that after all the hoopla and the controversy I feel that the episode's import cannot be reduced to one or two issues and thank god for that.

Like you Nina I think I'm going to take some time to digest what I just saw:)"
Aquitaine I agree with you too. All I can say is that I saw exactly what I wanted to see without knowing what it was! Does that make sense?

I feel it inside that we are going just into the right track and that it will lead us to one very emotional season finale!
"And you know what the biggest clue to the episode's irony was? It was Xander's fake laughter when Buffy told him (on the fourth attempt LOL) about Spike's feeling. Xander is supposed to be the 'heart' guy and his reaction really caught my attention. Actually Anya did have that one line about Xander maybe having hurt Spike's feelings at the Bronze.

Loved the way Buffy was completely out of touch with the conversation that Tara and Willow were having about Quasimodo and Esmeralda. Talk about being out of touch with your own reality.

"All I can say is that I saw exactly what I wanted to see without knowing what it was! Does that make sense? I feel it inside that we are going just into the right track and that it will lead us to one very emotional season finale!"

I do understand. It really is hard to put the 'je ne sais quoi' into words. Isn't it?
This with you is wrong. I know it. I'm not a complete idiot. You think I like having you in here. Destroying everything that was me until all that's left is you in an empty shell. You say you hate it but you won't leave.

This was my favorite part of his speech in the crypt. Our William has improved I thought it was very poetic :)

Seriously though it seems to me that his love for Buffy has totally come to him unbidden didn't want it but it's there and he embraces it and feels it must be returned by her. He says what they have isn't pretty but it's real. Could this be one of his insights or is he just projecting how it feels to him on Buffy?

I think the unconscious reason she can't bring herself to stake him is because deep down she knows he is capable of feelings and his professing his love to her is making her come to terms with that and she so doesn't want to.

Right on people! I always saw the humanity in Spike so nothing this season has caught me unawares. It's just I got all emotional when Dru walked away like that--Poor Dru she's letting her little boy go. What about Dawn? Drush on Spike!! Since when?? Whocares it's mega-cute and Spike's twisted little bedtime story--brownie points for MT's acting lately she has me conviced for someone so young.
"Dawn is human.

She wasn't before she may not be again but right now she is human. And she loves Buffy very much (even if she would never come right out and say it).

And Buffy doesn't "care" for her. She CARES for her. It isn't about her being some "key". Dawn is her sister regardless of how she became that way. None of us can choose our family. Buffy loves her little sister no matter how much her sister might also annoy her.

Spike is a souless blood thristy demon. If he ever becomes human then perhaps he has a chance with Buffy (not likely though). At the very least he should attempt to get himself a soul."
"Angel and Spike are both killers. They will be killers forever no matter how they change their lives. They have both killed and caused all sorts of terror. Angel now has a soul and has devoted his life to helping others. What does the soul give him? A conscience....the knowledge of right and wrong. He feels bad about horrible things he did in the past. Spike has a microchip. The microchip is like a soul in the way that it makes him "feel bad" when he does something wrong. Just a thought...

Is a vampire capable of loving someone? Is a vampire capable of having feelings? I think so. I know there are different vampire "rules" among different authors etc. (i.e. Bram Stoker Anne Rice etc...) Anne Rice's vampires feel. They want companions (male female children). I think feelings can be more intense for them.

The soul debate makes me think of a new question....do only humans have souls? Do animals have souls? They react out of primal needs (hunger etc.) Hmmm....

Anyone wish to help me organize my thoughts?"
First I noticed than Anne no longer has the half-heart tattoo that she had in the Buffy season opener a few seasons back. How did she get rid of this? I doubt that she had enough money to get it removed.

Second Angel must really be losing it. He kicked the head off of a policeman! And this was before he realized that the cop was an undead something-or-other. I noticed that he seemed shocked and horrified that he had decapitated the man until the head started talking to him. Maybe Angel needs to be more careful about cutting loose.
"About the tatoo: I was reading an interview (with Joss I think) that said she had it removed. But they gave no details like how she got the money to pay for it etc.!! There are some things I just accept by repeating the following mantra: "This is TV this is TV."

"Remember the decapitation of the zombie-cop was not an isolated action. It comes after a considerable build-up. Angel had already seen the cop take a considerable beating and not only get back up again but continue to attack. There is no way that Angel was unaware that "something is up" by the time he got to the fatal move. This fight was a great example of storytelling through movement: Angel starts off with as little force as possible and the cop escalates the level of violence with each new attack. Every time the cop got back up Angel put him down a little harder culminating in the decapitation. Kudos to the choreographer!"
Remember the Brachen demons and Lister demons from Hero? They were the innocent victims of the Scourge. The Ano-movis demons from the Bachelor Party had a few quaint customs but it seemed like they were capable of getting over those. It did not seem like they were pemanently wired to eat the former husband or anyone else. How about the women of the Oden Tal from She? Then there is Whistler whose very function is to be force for balance between good and evil. The Host's reason for being seems to be to put demons and people on their Path (whatever that means). The Prio-Motu converted to Buddhism and became a warrior for good. The Host referred to other champions besides Angel (though they were unavailable) and it would seem that some of them might be demons too. And is Merle evil? Pathetic yes but evil? So I think we have been provided with ample evidence that the demons are more like extra-dimensional beings some of whom have specialized functions (which are not always inimical to humanity). It seems we are seeing something more akin to Stargate than to Lovecraft.
Don't forget the peaceful Kwaini! I agree on the extra-dimensional diversity but it still leaves the taste that although some demons and supernatural creatures are neutral or nice to humans the great majority are not so stay on guard. Personally I find the good demons more interesting than Angel since they've got to have an even more confusing place in the world than he does. I felt really cheated that we didn't get to learn more about the Buddhist Prio-Motu!

I was also wondering about Merl last night. If he doesn't do anything nasty how did he earn all of his underworld information sources? He's a demon but what's so demonic about him? I mean they mentioned he doesn't have a tongue (which I guess explains his bad Christian Slater impersonation) but is that all? I would like it if it turned out that Merl is the one that bit the little girl and gave her a third eye.
"THANK YOU!!!! Christian Slater goodness I have been trying to figure out who Merl sounded like but couldn't quite get it. I'm a little slow...as my daughter would say "duh"
"Ah the Kwaini. I had forgotten about them. I think the "demons" in Joss's multiverse are starting to seem more and more the the Faerie of Celtic legend. There was a Seelie court and an Unseelie court. The Unseelie court was malevolent whole the Seelie court was more benign. However neither court could really be said to be good or evil by human standards. In fact the standards of either court were just inhuman and operating according to a very different and alien outlook. Thus the "evil" of the Unseelie could range from mischievious to sinister and even monstrous. The "good" of the Seelie could range from the kind of help you really could do without all the way up to saving the kingdom from the Unseelie."
I still maintain the women of Oden Tal were not demons but something more akin to aliens. Which brings us to the question of the difference. Are they typed by the type of soul they do or don't have? Or by something else? Now we have opened the same door again with the same questions and the same debate. What is a soul who has it where did it come from.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water the story repeats itself.

Just to add to the self interest point Spike allowed Drusilla to kill at least the guy in the club and possibly the girl too. Why? So he could lure Dru into trusting him enough so he could capture her and make his point of worthiness to Buffy. I think he could have stopped Dru if he wanted to especially as wounded as she was from that fire.

So are we all clear on this now? Ladies I don't care how attractive and cute he is. Buffy's right - he's a killer. Evil through and through. Frankly if I were any Scooby I'd stake him right now. How long before he tells Glory who the key is just to spite Buffy?
No we are not all clear. If anything the water looks murkier than ever. I don't think even Spike realized the extent of changes in himself until Drusilla killed the couple. I think he expected to enjoy it and realized in the moment that he did not.

David Fury did a chat(?) at the Bronze where he insulted what he perceives as a 'we want a Buffy/Spike relationship' crowd. While Mr. Fury is entitled to his own opinion (however harsh it might be) he missed the entire point. This is not about whether Buffy and Spike get together this is about Spike and his journey. Can he evolve into more than he is? Can he learn and grow and control the monster inside him? Is he capable of sacrifice? Can he overcome the inherent selfishness that is essential to vampire survival?

I think the 'oh you all just think Spike is cute' diatribe is wearing a little thin.
I just have this feeling that Dawn has no fears from Spike letting Glory know she is the key. Glory getting the key means end of the world am I correct in assuming that? If so remember Spike is a fan of the world as it is. To betray Buffy in that way would be self-defeating and Spike is a self-serving kinda guy. If he were to get even with Buffy I think it would be in a more personal way. But I hope he doesn't but I'm not in control of the storyline. Which leads me to agree with those of you who feel the writers have painted themselves into a corner giving us a character they obviously enjoyed creating and that the fans love along with a storyline that had the potential to mislead. I never would have imagined such a storyline for Spike and Buffy I would have found a way to exploit that wonderful chemistry without a romance it is possible they light up the TV screen just trading barbs back and forth. I keep thinking of Something Blue when Buffy is wigging about the spell Willow tells her that at least they were getting along but Buffy said that was the thing they weren't :)

As for Angel and Darla and Dru there are some innocents dying from the result of what he did - all the people Darla and Dru have killed since that evening and will continue to kill until he stops them.

I agree that Spike and Buffy are the fun couple of the year. Their relationship with barbs makes for great TV. But looking at Dru and Spike at the Bronze (I assume) they make a visually spectacular couple. Dru's darkness in contrast to Spike's blondeness are a striking image that the camera just seems to love.
I agree Brian Spike and Buffy the couple that fights together stays together :) And they are a hoot always and I hope we continue to see them lighting up the screen.

Spike and Dru yes visually stunning as were Buffy and Angel for the same reason. Do you think the PTB's planned it that way at the beginning? The two major couples of S2 with the same contrasts in appearance.

Good observation Lynn. Perhaps it's a visual image of good and evil that there has to be balance. If so then Buffy and Spike will never work until he goes back to his natural color.
"Or she goes back to hers :) I can just hear Spike: "Now luv beauty before age I've been a blonde far longer than you have so you have to change."

On the other hand Brian maybe they would work - both of them the lighter side of the equation. With their other darker partners things fell apart.

Agreed Brian. The camera does love Spike and Dru. :-) Also Spike becomes just so much putty in Drusilla's hands.

And their on-screen chemistry may have something to do with the actors off-screen (non-romantic) chemistry. JM has said that he enjoys working with JL and was looking forward to her return to the show storyline permitting.
Yes JM and JL are spectacular together! Really sexy!
They work well together and add a depth and tone to the show that I don't think Joss ever expected to have. I kinda miss them together.
Is it just me or was anyone else concerned that Willow was still suffering headaches due to the teleportation spell she used on Glory?

I couldn't help wondering if the headaches are a result of something else like maybe the spell the monks used to put Dawn in everyone's memories. Joyce's tumor started out with headaches and we still don't know (for sure) whether or not the tumor was a physical reaction to the Dawn spell. Could Willow be heading down a similar road?

I find it somewhat alarming that the teleportation spell took so much out of her. She did a similar spell to banish the troll. I can't imagine that opening holes into alternate universes is any easier than sending someone somewhere else in your own universe.
Oooh I hadn't even thought about the connection. Very ominous.
There have been several warnings that Willow's magic is out of control. Her spells are too intense. I think there will be some bad stuff happening to Willow soon and I'm worried. Really worried.
I too am worried about Willow. She's heading for a fall that's for sure. Maybe next season will be the Willow Season as this season is the Spike Season! I know she's not everybody's favorite person but I'm fond of the character and she certainly has the potential for growth that makes for good watching.

The question about opening a door to another world vs. moving things around in our own is intriguing. We don't really know much about the rules magic operates under in the Buffyverse other than that it's important to keep the elements in balance. I have to wonder if the Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy is involved. It may be that spells involving moving things around in a given dimension are harder to keep balanced than cross-dimensional spells perhaps because there is a smaller (by one dimension) pool of elements to absorb the disturbance.

Now that I think of it the mass difference would also explain why de-ratting Amy has proven such a challenge!
Seems to me I read somewhere that true magic does not follow the rules of physics i.e. the Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy. Magic is outside of these laws (or maybe parallel). Hence Amy can become a rat and a rat can become Amy. Or in the Baba Yaga story a comb becomes a forest and a towel becomes a river.
"This is always the hard part about writing a universe that includes magic. What rules must it follow? Anytime there are no rules magic becomes an easy out. That's not to say that the rules have to have anything to do with the laws of physics in the realverse. Either of us could easily be correct. We just don't know yet!

I am pleased that there do seem to be cosequences for the use of magic. Keeps things "real." As to why those consequences happen well we'll find out if the writers want us to."
Back in the 70's I taught courses in Sci-Fi.
As I recall there were four major catagories:

Hard Sci-Fi which was Physics math astronomy.

Soft Sci-Fi which was Biology Antropology Socialogy etc.

Semi-Fantasy where fantastic things could happen but the laws of nature were upheld

Fantasy where magic ruled the universe and anything could happen.
"I think I'm going to disagree that magic means "anything can happen." Yes many things defy the laws of physics but there are laws of Magic. You can't do anything

1. you can only do those things you have the right spell or powers for.
2. if you do the spell wrong there will be consequences. Sometimes there are specific ways a spell can go wrong that are predictable before hand.
3. magic has limitations set by those who use magic. Without sufficient power in the user the spell won't work the way its supposed to. This is no doubt why magic for medicine is a bad idea. Those who try these spells have probably often never tried magic before they used it for this purpose (driven to it by desperation).
4. Magic is especially altered by the intentions (good evil impure) of the caster (witness Xander BBB)

No fantasy story can be well-told and compelling if you can pull a rabbit out of hat at the last moment. Magic must have limitations and rules or you will tell an unsatisfying story.
"For a good explanation on the workings/rules of magic (sorcery in particular) read the the "Bellgariad" series by David Eddings. This is a 10-book series of novels broken into two halves. You could easily just read the first five books and have a finished story. By Brian's classification these books are fantasy but there are rules to the magic."
The White Wolf game Mage: The Ascension has a very intriguing magickal system. In the game the Mages can become attuned to and gain growing control over different spheres of reality - such as Entropy Force Matter Prime Time Space Spirit Life and Mind. Either alone or in conjuction they can manipulate these spheres to bring about various effects. These effects can either appear as coincidental so as not to disturb the concensus reality or they can be blatantly magickal thus risking a paradox backlash. Getting headaches and nosebleeds would be one kind of backlash. Accidently freeing a troll would be another kind. Also in the game the mages focus their will over reality by using different magickal paradigms. Some use Hermetic magick others use martial arts others even use technology or wierd science. Magickal spells can also either be rote spells that are learned from books and/or teachers or they are created on the spot by the mage using whatever tools are at hand and most importantly the Mages own will and imagination. Non-rote spells would of course be the most difficult and only true Mages can use them whereas anyone who has access to the spell books or procedures could potentially perform rote magick. If Willow were translated into the game she might be a Hermetic Mage who mostly relies upon rote magick and is building up a lot of paradox due to her constant and blatant use of spells that defy concensus reality. Beware the backlash!

"This is a wonderful series of books but it doesn't totally deal with magic per se but with sorcery.

With the spells that Willow does there are incantations and certain ingredients needed to make them work.

In the David Eddings realm it deals with "the will and the word" concept which is similar to mind over matter.

So I disagree with the reference but whole-heartedly endorse the goodness of the Belgariad!"
Didn't Tara say something about how Willow has been having problems since the troll incident? I think what's going on is that she got really drained from sending Olaf into another dimension and the teleportation spell with Glory just made it worse.
I agree that it should take more power to send someone to another universe then a 1/2 mile away but CONTROL is another matter the more precise you try to be the more difficult it is. Willow didn't say where she tried to send Glory only that she didn't know where she had sent her. If she was trying to execise precise control (even if in fact she was completely unsuccessful) it could have taken a lot out of her. I first heard aboout how exhausting control can be from a comment by Scott Hamilton on doing figure skating movements with style and polish (sorry I can't remember his exact words). Later I experienced it myself (to a much much lesser degree of course) when I studied ballroom dancing. It doesn't seem that it would use much energy but when you try to control EXACTLY all you various body movements at the same time it takes a lot of concentration and effort.

Another possibility is not how far she sent the person but WHAT the person was. It may take a lot more octane in the spell to send a god than a person or even a troll.
Another possibility is not how far she sent the person but WHAT the person was. It may take a lot more octane in the spell to send a god than
a person or even a troll.

I'm happy you brought that up gds. That was exactly my concern. Glory being a god it must take a lot more energy than anything else!

And does anyone feel that Buffy didn't really cared about the headaches? She said a few words and then went to Ben and she was all smiley face. Tomorrow when I will be rested I'll probably start a Buffy analysis profile. We did that plenty for Spike. She needs one too! A deep one!!! :)

And BTW (not that it's anything philosophical - but you knew I was going to bring this up don't you) there was a great deal of interesting things to remark about the outfits they were wearing! Might just keep that for a Saturday post when we don't know how to wait for next week episode though! :)
Two possibilities present themselves:

(1) Dru killed the girl (we heard her neck snap even if it didn't seem to rotate as far as it should have). Since the girl was dead Spike could drink from her just like he can drink blood from a blood bank.

(2) We've seen that its not whether or not he can hurt someone its whether he thinks he is (ie when he pointed the toy gun at Xander). This is a stretch but if he thought he was helping the girl (ie he fed on her a bit but left her alive like Angel did to Kate during the Museum heist). By feeding a little he saved her life from Dru and thus did more good then harm.

(3) He did feel the blinding pain but managed to tough it out for one bite (because he loved Buffy enough to fake out Dru) and just faked the rest of it.

On a Spike note he was seen being blocked from entering the Summers house even though he'd been inside earlier. Though not shown I assume Buffy had Willow and/or Tara uninvited him. I think the look of surprise at hitting the barrier backs this up.
I go for the girl being dead. I did not see a lot of pain in Spike's face. He did seem aprehensive though which puzzled me a little at the time. But as you say he is trying to make Dru think He is the big and bad again.
I agree that the girl was probably dead. My only problem is that though we heard the sound of the neck snapping the girl's head (and the boy's for that matter) weren't turned far enough and showed no signs of damage. Still as you say the most logical solution is that the producers just slipped up a little.
I agree with the girl being dead. I also think Spike was struggling with his bloodlust. Should I be evil or shouldn't I?
Isn't that Three possiblities? (oh-so-evil-grin)

(Good ideas btw)
>>On a Spike note he was seen being blocked from entering the Summers house even though he'd been inside earlier. Though not shown I assume Buffy had Willow and/or Tara uninvited him. I think the look of surprise at hitting the barrier backs this up.

I can't help wondering how long Spike's uninvited status will last this time. I think its pretty likely that Dawn will let him back in when Buffy and Mom aren't around. She doesn't seem to take Buffy's warnings about him too seriously.

I may be completly out to lunch here but I thought the reason Spike could bite the girl was because Dru had short circuited the chip. In the scene before she talked about how she could feel it all plasticy sending electric shocks through his brain or something to that effect. Later when Buffy comes they have a cattle prod or stun gun of some sort. I just assumed they had somehow used that to nuetralize the chip.
Now that's an interesting idea. If the chip in Spike has been neutralized and he still does good works then the possibility for redemption seems clearer.

All credit to JM for making me like Spike so much. When he was blocked from Buffy's house I really felt for him. That's the second time my empathy for him has overwhelmed my reason.
Neutralizing the chip would have been a much bigger deal than that. The chip is at the core of what is going on with Spike right now. I don't believe that they would have Dru neutralize it somewhere off camera where we couldn't see it. **just my opinion**
"Willow is the one who uninvited Spike... when Buffy was leaving to confront him Willow wanted to go along but Buffy said "No but there is something you could do for me". It took me a while to realize that. I love the subtlety of this show...."

Spike killed her first
Just a thought

If Spike wanted to neutralize the chip there are a few ways he could do it. An EMP (Electric Magnet Pulse) would fry the chip but it might also fry his brain in the process.

Also a large magnet could create interfearnece to destroy it.

Does anyone else have any ideas?
He could probably electrocute himself. A vampire should find it painful but not fatal. It would almost be guaranteed to destroy the control circuits in the chip. Electronic circuits can be so fragile. The EMP idea is a good one but it is usually referred in the context of nuclear explosions - and I really don't want to see Spike playing around with one of those
My feeling is that Dru killed the girl first thereby making Spike able to feed off of her. Also I remember Spike telling Dru how very painful it is when the chip is activated. (I can't remember if this was before or after the him feeding though) This may be the reason Dru would kill the victim and give them to Spike. Kind of like what Spike did for her when she was sick.

I too really felt for Spike when he hit that invisible barrier. Even though I agree with Buffy a part of me wanted her to run into his arms. But Tara was right when she said that people who do things out of love for another are only doing it for personal gratification and It Can't End Well.

I really liked the parallel between BtVS and The Huntchback of Notre Dame. I see Spike as Quasimodo Buffy as Esmeralda but how would be Pheobus? Possibly Ben?

I loved the foreshadowing in the line about knowing it can't end well because the main character was all bumpy! LOL

Seriously the parallel between Quasimodo and Spike is pretty impressive. Very nice touch.
Would you care to elaborate on specific parallels? My Victor Hugo is rusty. : )
"So's mine that's why I didn't elaborate! Ya busted me. :O

I was referring to the conversation onscreen though. I think it was Tara who described Quasimodo as having "no moral compass " and doing everything in the hopes of winning Esmerelda's love. Sounds like the Clockwork Vampire to me!

OK someone up on their Victor Hugo come bail me out please! :)"
Now that you mention it Tara and Willow's exchange sounds a lot like fan discussions of Buffy and Spike.

Willow thinks all that effort should have won Quasi the girl and

Tara points out that Esmerelda had no interest in him and he his attempts to do good were done out of his own self-interest and there was no reason for her to return his affections.
Kind of makes you wonder if they read this board doesn't it? :)
I'll try my best!
Quasimodo acts out of love for Esmeralda without thinking of the ramifications those actions will have on other people; like the Court of Thieves or Phoebus or Gypsies in general for that matter. Spike acts the same way he allows Dru to kill the couple in the Bronze when he knew he was going to set her up later. He accompanies Dawn to the Magic Shop when he knows deep inside that Buffy will thrash him when she finds out also he doesnít tell Buffy that Dawn knows sheís the key.

Both Quasimodo and Spike are failures when it comes to showing their emotions in a good way

They both are confused about what love really is.

Neither one knows how to deal with normal people. One's so hideously deformed that he doesn't dare go outside. The other is a demon inside a once human body.

Both keep souvenirs of their respective loves.

Both are insanely jealous when the object of their love shows another man affection. For example if Spike didnít have feelings for Buffy or a Chip for that matter he wouldnít have exposed Rileyís secret or if he did it may have been in the form of a newly vamped Riley or a dead Riley.

Both are willing to protect their loves to the death if need be. In Hunchback Quasimodo does die time will tell if Spike with make the ultimate sacrifice for Buffy.
Thanks for the save! I'm in your debt.
When I heard the Hunchback discussion in Crush I thought two things.
1) The writer is trying tell me something.
2) Forget the Quasimodo parallel. What about Frollo? Now before I start I must admit that while I knew it was wrong I was totally a Frollo/Esmerelda shipper when I read Hunchback. I'll explain

Frollo has dedicated his entire life to the pursuit of his passion knowledge. (Gosh smart people are sexy). He is articulate driven intelligent. H has had few close personal relationships. He doesn't really know how to relate to people. And then he falls in love/passion whatever. He doesn't know what to do. He thrashes he crashes he burns everything down. He becomes jealous to the point of destroying the thing he loves. And yet he can't stop. He visits her in prison (where he put her) and offers her freedom if she'll run away with him. Offers to give up everything for a price her love. Of course she hates and despises him so you (by which I mean me reading the book) know the relationship isn't going to go anywhere. But when the object of Esmerelda's affections is a shallow and unfaithful man its hard not wish her affections on someone who is at least passionate about her.

Anyway Quasimodo. Mostly blind partially deaf not terribly bright. The poor guy just never stirred my shipper heart

Although glad to see someone is taking some lit classes. I wonder if we should imagine them a syllabus.

OK lit class syllabus. How about this:

Comp Lit 302: Relationsips in Literature

Hugo - The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Dickens - Great Expectations
Shakespeare - Measure for Measure
Leroux - The Phantom of the Opera

I'm missing a lot. What are your suggestions?

And of course the World's Greatest Love Triangle:

The Arthurian Legend

(yup that's where I got the nick although the way my love life goes it's more Elyane--the one who was hopeless over Lancelot--than Guenevere)
Good call Gwen! For sake of consistency shall we use Mallory or Tennyson? I think White's version is more interested in things other than the relationship. Or do you have another version you prefer?
All of the above! : )

But most interestingly there is a story in the French Vulgate cycle been a long time since I read it and I think the name is Morte Arthur (very similiar to Malory) that like the Holy Grail cycle starts to turn the legend upside-down.

In fact the Arthurian Legend now that I think of it may be an interesting analogue to Spike in another way: in the Grail cycle all the values that the knights saw as good: murder anybody who gets in your way ask questions later suddently stop them from achieving their Holy goal. For Spike everything he used to believe and do now has the opposite effect in this Vita Nuovo of loving Buffy.

Damn this board! : ) I read it to procrastinate on all the science I'm supposed to be studying and it makes me want to go back to all the literature I once studied.
For Spike everything he used to believe and do now has the opposite effect in this Vita Nuovo of loving Buffy.

Huh how coincidental. I just reread the Vita Nuova yesterday. (I saw Hannibal over the weekend and he quoted from it. Literature gets me every time. Anyway...)

So do you think they are going to use:

Love as a socializing force (a la 12th cent France) which brings to heel destructive elements in society (young men with swords and nothing better to do)
Love as an spritualizing force (a la Vita Nuova/Divine Comedy 13th cent) in which Eros/Psyche acts as a enabler to a comprehension/turn towards Agappe.

Yes Dante's got to be on the Syllabus maybe some Lais from Marie de France (that's where I get fresne)

Bronte - Wuthering Heights
Coleridge - Christabel
Comp Lit 302: Relationships in Literature

or almost but not quite requited loves:)

Mill on the Floss
The Great Gatsby
The Sun Also Rises

"Who's the author for "Mill on the Floss?" "
George Eliot:)
All right thus far we have:

Comp Lit 302: Relationsips in Literature

Hugo - The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Dickens - Great Expectations
Shakespeare - Measure for Measure
Leroux - The Phantom of the Opera
Malory - Le Morte d'Arthur
Dante? - Vita Nuova
Eliot - Mill on the Floss
Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
Hemmingway - The Sun Also Rises

>whew< I've only read about half of these. I have some reading to do. What over-arching themes do we want to look for?

"It is not litterature... but Jacques Brel's song "Ne me quitte pas" (don't leave me) comes to mind. When Spike says to Buffy "Give me a crump...anything" This is so pathetic like in the song when Brel sings (probably bad translation here):"let me be the shadow of your dog the shadow of your hand"

Let me be anything but *something*."
Maybe my French lit classes are rearing their ugly (o laids) heads but I'm thinking of Madame Bovary (Flaubert). Emma wanted romance so much she destroyed her and her husbands lives then she takes arsenic. (I always though she was a ditz.) Or Germinal (Zola). Lots of Unrequited love and GREY areas. Survival and death and even if you win you lose situations.
OK who did I offend to have my syllabus selections left off the list?? Sniff.

Bronte - Wuthering Heights
Coleridge - Christabel

Someone else on this board compared Angel to Healthcliff in Wuthering Heights. And Christabel is one of the first vampire stories - and deals with relationships.

Shall I take my toys and go home??
Oops! Sorry purplegrrl! You offended no-one I just missed them when I went through compiling the list. I owe you chocolate.

Let's try this again:

Comp Lit 302: Relationsips in Literature

Hugo - The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Dickens - Great Expectations
Shakespeare - Measure for Measure
Leroux - The Phantom of the Opera
Malory - Le Morte d'Arthur
Dante? - Vita Nuova
Eliot - Mill on the Floss
Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
Hemmingway - The Sun Also Rises
Bronte - Wuthering Heights
Coleridge - Christabel

Now how 'bout those themes?

I've been thinking about those themes former English teacher that I am and I hope to post something maybe in a new thread once I get home from work.
"I got to think of a new one. "The marriage of Figaro" by Beaumarchais. There's the famous "women! women! women!" monologue by Figaro that is a real relationship 101 catastophe!! Goes perfectly well with Spike's speech about the bloody women of his life!!!! :)"
Spike acts the same way he allows Dru to kill the couple in the Bronze when he knew he was going to set her up later.

My take on the lingering close-up on Spike's face--the confusion the disgust--when he bit the girl was to allow us to watch the very moment he came to the realization that he had irrecovably changed. There were hints of it before but now he was fully experiencing how his old habits had become repulsive.

She was already dead he could drink so he might as well but he didn't do it with the lustful joy he'd once thought he'd experience. I think up until then he was pretty much in full rebound mode with Dru given her timing just after Buffy's rejection.

Given that interpretation I don't think Spike thought of setting up Dru until later probably when she was trying to kill Buffy--that was the moment when his loyalties over the women became most clear to him.
Are we watching the same show? Because in that moment when Spike vamped and bit into the girl he looked like he was was Really enjoying the thought of being able to bite into someone again. It was all over his face--his lust for the kill.
Hmmm interesting. Unfortunately I didn't tape the show (yeah I know I know foolish dumb pitiful etc... : (

Seriously I am going on my memory of having seen the scene only once. I felt and here's where I'm wondering what I'm seeing--and what I'm projecting--that Spike was really struggling before he bit into her. He may have gotten into the taste of blood but at least I though I saw a whole range of conflicted emotions--and that showing all that to us was the point of the close-up before he bit.

Or was I just overlaying a whole lot of good guy conflict on everybody's favorite serial killer?

You are both correct. The way I read it he was first unsure (disgust may be too much of an emotion) but eventually gave in. The question for me is whether or not he did it to please Dru or to convince himself whether or not he is still the Big Bad (or both).
OnM I do think it's a combination of the both. Spike sees Dru as the person who delivered him from his mediocre life. Then he went around killing all the people he could to boost his self image as the big bad. That image is all important to him and the chip has emasculated him in more ways than one. Add the fact that the first warm person he has fallen for since Cecily has just run off in not terror but disgust well seeing Dru at that moment couldn't help but start all the old feelings again. He is on the brink of his destruction now if he kills again he will have to give up his romantic fantasy with Buffy I wonder when that will happen?
I only watched that part twice now but I really got the impression he was hesitating. Almost as if he realized the full significance of what he was doing by feeding on humans for the first time as a vampire and it made him hesitate. He really looked to me as if he had developed a qualm or two.
Really? I originally saw it as hesitating because he was afraid of being shocked. But then I believe that he was able to bite her because she was dead - something i think he knew. Maybe he is developing attachments to humans.....I don't think he's stopped enjoying murdering humans.
"I originally thought that Spike was somehow overcoming the pain the chip caused but your idea of Drusilla killing the girl for him makes a whole lot more sense. After all wouldn't he have been able to "beat" the chip before now if it was that easy? and why would the wirters make such a small deal out of it when the chip has been a defining part of Spike's character for the past season?"
For anyone who hasn't seen 'Crush' yet skip the post. :)
As enamored as I am with Spike (after all -I- don't have to live in the same space with him or worry about his crazed ex-girlfriends) I was very disturbed by the rabid Buffy-bashing at a couple of prominent message boards. Buffy is a bitch (pardon the word but it was used by all) seemed to be the theme of the evening.

(I don't hold by the 'Spike the Stalker' comments because I see him much more as someone who for over a century never had to control his actions and suddenly he 'must' control them. He strikes me as very inexperienced with women before he was vamped and after years of being 'cool' suddenly he is back to being William the bad poet. He really seems to me to be confused about how to act and what to do.)

Regardless of my impression Buffy Joyce and Willow seemed to consider him crossing the line and possibly stalking so much of their actions are based on this assumption.

I was worried about the episode (mainly about Spike of course-grin) but after watching it Buffy seemed to react the only way possible for her at this point. She found his 'shrine' to her complete with drawings. This -had- to bring up Angelus issues and freak her out. Then he chains her up and offers to kill Dru??? How could she possibly give him an answer he wanted. No matter what her feelings for Spike after all this I truly think she was incapable of telling him anything but go away. Truth or not she looked and acted extremely wigged out.

If Buffy accepts that Spike (who has no soul) is capable of love then she has to accept that Angelus was as well. I am guessing Buffy cannot let herself even consider that possibly. Buffy loved one vampire and that love turned him into a demented and sadistic killer. Attracted to Spike or not Angelus and all the pain he caused has to be spinning around in her head. I cannot imagine she is eager to go there again.

"Regardless of my impression Buffy Joyce and Willow seemed to consider him crossing the line and possibly stalking so much of their actions are based on this assumption.

I don't think that Willow and Joyce take Spike seriously enough. They asked Buffy if there was the possibiltiy that she had unintentionally "encouraged" Spike as if the stalker's victim were somehow partially responsible for the stalker's actions. They also convinced her to go confront Spike a second time. The Buffy shrine was straight out of every serial killer/stalker movie I've ever seen. Very creepy.

I do not agree with the notion that Spike's behavior is indicative of his lack of understanding of the modern world and his inexperience back when he was alive. With the possible exception of Mr. Trick Spike is the one vampire we have seen who has fully adapted to modern times. And Spike's willingness to sacrifice Dru calls into question whether his passion for Dru was truly love or simply lust mixed with a penchant for romance and poetry."
"You bring up an important point. Fury keeps stating that Spike is evil. That he is a serial killer type. But yet he writes in a 'maybe it is partially Buffys' fault she is being stalked' undercurrent to the episode.

As for Spike he may be very up-to-date on with the modern world but his experiences with women are Drusilla. There is nothing about that relationship that was normal. Even for vampires it was out of the norm. Many times he seems to be struggling with "this action would have left Dru swooning why isn't Buffy"? He often appears to be stumbling around in the dark where proper behavior is concerned. After all he may be comfortable in the modern world but he is comfortable as Spike-big bad and wild-not as Spike -chipped and in love with the Slayer. "
"Did you encourage him bothered me too--because it was so damn blame-the-victim. But I chose to interpret it as another example of how often the people closest to Buffy don't really understand her--and how often Buffy doesn't really understand herself. Because she is in this odd state of denial where she does the very thing she knows will encourage Spike.

As far as the show's influence on younger viewers the easy answer is: kids don't try this at home. If some guy's being a stalker you're NOT a Slayer with superpowers call the police.

But maybe there is a more complex answer in Buffy's denial and (one view) Joyce and Willow's attempts at "intervention". I had a college friend who claimed to have been date-raped FOUR times. At that point even close friends have to shift from you're-not-to-blame to "Hon you have GOT to examine your interactions with men." Maybe the lesson is that Buffy *is* in denial and that denial and other unresolved emotions can be very dangerous."
"I have been generating a theory about vampire personality and philosophy (hasn't everyone!). I've been thinking that perhaps what happens when a human is "vamped" is that the invading demon integrates itself with those parts of the particular human's psyche that are most "Demon-like" ( violence will to power lust etc). Those parts of a human least Demon-like (love compassion fellow feeling) will be more difficult to integrate and so will either be suppressed or overcome by the demon or just left lying around in the subconscious with no outlet to the personality.

Once invaded by the Vampire Demon the former human is removed from human interaction both by virtue of the fact that it now feeds on human blood but also that it no longer can relate to humans in any emotional or social way. Most vampires have no reason to deviate from this mode since it would serve them no purpose.

Spike's case is unique then in that he must interact with humans far more than the average Vamp. Those parts of his character that were incompatible with the Vampire Demon are slowly working their way to the surface as he is forced to live again by human rules. It may also be that the human aspects of his personality are more integrated into his demon self since he's had such extensive contact with Drusilla who also was a very loving person before being driven mad and vamped. (Drusilla's a whole other topic...)

Coming soon my theory on the Soul...

Thanks for reading! -jen

Wow. I like this theory. It does make sense based on what I've seen. Living in different worlds by different rules also means different ways of surviving. Humans are very social animals so when dealing with them you have to be social too. Vampires can be social but in a different way and the rules are very different.
(see my post a few pages down on Spike's self interest/torturing)
"A number of threads ago (about 60 if I counted correctly) we discussed the possibility that the philosophy of Sartre had some influence on Angel considering his current attitude about his redemption his role in the coming apocalypse etc. etc. Angel seems to be ignoring signals sent by the Powers That Be believing that he is free of their influence due to recent events (his failed effort to safe Darla to name one).

However I suggest that perhaps Angel needs to balance his readings of Sartre with a little Nietszche. Nietszche may have been an influence for Hitler but I don't think he should be discounted. One quote in particular sticks in my mind and directly applies to Angel:
"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster."

This quote could also apply to Buffy. But she is more centered relying on family and friends to keep her so. Angel has sundered his ties with those who would be considered his family thereby losing his center."
"First a quote from Nietzsche's 'Beyond Good and Evil' that *might* relate to our humble endeavours here;)

"A new species of philosophers is coming up: I venture to baptize them with a name that is not free of danger. As I unriddle them insofar as they allow themselves to be unriddled - for it belongs to their nature to want to remain riddles at some point these philosophers of the future may have a right - it might also be a wrong - to be called attempters. This name itself is in the end a mere attempt and if you will a temptation."

As for Sartre (and Angel)... somewhere between 'La nausÈe' (Nausea) and 'L'Ítre et le nÈant' (Being and Nothingness) he found a path that shows that a form of redemption may be achieved through 'engagement'. That is to say he found that any attempt at connecting with life while not in itself a solution to the condition of absurdity was worthwhile and 'essential'.

I know I have oversimplified in the above but I think that Sartre's 'progression' can offer a clue to Angel's quest. "
"That does not bode well in light of Angel's confrontation with Cordy last night!

The issue of engagement has been raised several times in the past. When W&H decided to raise Darla the first thing they did was cut Angel off from TPTB. Now it seems that Angel has done their work for them!

Worse (from the perspective of moving toward redemption) Angel has also cut himself off from his friends and from humanity. We've been told repeatedly that engagement with humans is important to keep the demon at bay. With Angel now reverting to "lone stalker" mode will he continue to slide into darkness? His actions thus far have not been too horrible (providing Darla with the stationary for her memo notwithstanding). Further he showed signs of humnity in his interation with Kate. However Cordy's scathing "we don't need you" obviously hurt a great deal. This may serve to push him further away from humanity and closer to the Senior Partners' wishes.

More generally is engagement with other people necessary to lead a good life? Sartre is ambivalant on the subject. On the one hand as has been pointed out Engagement can be a path to salvation. On the other hand "Hell is other people." (I think that's Sartre - it's been a while.) I wonder which of Sartre's works Angel has been reading? "
I admit that it's been a long time since I've seen a slayer film (Halloween 20) but this movie was bad real bad. No spoilers here but I feel that it was a waste of space time and money. What was DB thinking? What was WB thinking?
"OK not the greatest horror film ever made. But then I'm not a big fan of slash-and-gore so what do I know! ;-) What little horror I do watch tends to be on the small screen (i.e. TV). Somehow it seems a little less scary with all the lights on and a cup of hot chocolate.

When I went to see "Valentine" I had probably read too many spoilers - I knew who the killer was supposed to be and was just waiting for them to be revealed. But hey we had popcorn we had eye candy we had fun!!

The review in the newspaper here remarked that if AOL had waited until after the release of "Valentine" they could have knocked several million dollars off the purchase price of Time-Warner. There *are* some pretty big logic holes in the movie. And unfortunately the women are fairly typical horror-movie-babes.

Supposedly David B. did the movie because he liked that the director was so passionate about making a horror film. Maybe the movie sounded better on paper. And maybe DB just wanted to do something different than Angel - hey he gets to be seen in broad daylight and it's not a dream sequence!! And instead of "Garbo talks!" it was "Angel smiles!"

"And the only funny line in the movie is:

"He's no angel."
"Ooohkay although I've posted here before I'm not even gonna put my name on this one. But does anybody else out there find the Host uh I dunno I mean not up there with Spike but kind of well intriguing?

Apologies Masquerage I realize that's hardly a philosophical question unless "Why do Smart Women fall for Green-skinned Demons" counts"

"Well I certainly don't have a 'crush' on the Host but I am really pleased that they are giving him more to do. When the season first started I thought the karaoke thing was ridiculous and that the Host was a bit too over-the-top but now I look forward to seeing him. Another example of how you can take something that seems ludicrous on the face of it (karaoke precognition???) and make it into art.

He also got to read one of my favorite lines of the season "I think going to regret this... In fact since I'm precognitive I'm sure of it." (by memory so that may not be exactly it but the jist is still hilarious).

"Amen! He does get the lines--and just gotta love the delivery kids. "What day is today Thursday? Tomorrow's the world's gonna end. Just thought you might want to know."

The Host and Angel in the car was like this hysterical parody of a buddy pic."
I love the Host. He was just what the show needed the way he throws out those pithy lines while keeping us ROFLOAO. Angel can't help but listen to him. Makes me think sadly of Doyle not because they killed him off but for how poorly they used him while they had him.

Funny what you said about that scene in the car. Your right it could have been a take on many movies like 48 Hours or Midnight Run. On that same note I had the eerie feeling they were doing a riff on the original Dragnet in that seedy kareoke bar. And then there's Wesley's imitation of Hercule Poirot. Wonder if there were more?
"Wesley's Hercuile Poirot was right on my mom used to watch those terrible Agatha Christy mysteries constantly and after seeing at least twenty stories with the same characters same plot and same music you get the formula memorized. So seeing Wesley show how the crime had more than meets the eye run through the assembled family from most suspect to least making each one seem guilty until mentioning more evidence that cleared their name and then finally giving the damning evidence for the one person no one really suspected it was just beautifully done.

And of course with all the talk of demons and wizards and the lines "He had reason to do it. but he couldn't have he's just too stupid" and "If you go through the evidence long enough it just hits you" I doubt Diana Rigg would be able to keep a straight face during the post-episode explanation.

"I have to relate this:

Two of my friends (a married couple) were watching the Season Premieres together (I heard this from the wife). The husband was a bit grumpy about BvD. He thought Dracula was taken too lightly. So on to Angel: The lights come up the screen is filled with the face of a big ugly green demon. The husband says: "Well at least THIS is serious!"

...and the Host begins to sing.

He is as Gay as Liberace
LOL. Yeah well I never said I was being really logical about this! Comes from the same school of denial that says gee just 'cause Spike's a serial killer who'd drain you as soon as look at you...

And hey (hoping) the Host *did* drool over Cordelia. OTOH I geuss any male--gay straight mortal vampire or demon--would!
He drooled over Cordelia like a gay guy would drool over Judy Garland. At least that's my take. He flirts with that broodin' hunk of hero sandwich at every opportunity.
He certainly does flirt with 'our' Angel every chance he gets. LOL. It's strange because in doing so he actually brings out an entirely different side of Angel's personality a rather profound one at that. It's as if the Host's garrulity rattles Angel's frosty broody exterior in a manner similar to Cordelia's and Wesley's but in an 'in your face' style that simply *cannot* be ignored. The Host succeeds where Cordy and Wes have failed because he is more detached emotionally from Angel. C&W were just too close to be objective about Angel's actions too close and too... is dependent the word I'm looking for?
Lets be more accurate. If the Host were a human he would be believed to be gay. For his own demon species he might be their version of straight. We can't always impose our human perspective on other life forms-well except for cats. They are nearly human. Just ask one. On second thought don't. You would get the retort that no we aren't nearly human. We are a superior species don't insult me like that again and by the way feed me. Now.
The Host is _so_ rooted in the world though he knows exactly what image he's giving off to other species (especially slash fans!). I think his comment about Cordelia was just him being a sillybuns. ^_^

Does anyone else think the Host was totally sleeping with Ramone the last bartender guy? He complains about the new guy so much that I think Ramone's betrayal was hurtful for more reasons than his drink-mixing skills.
Oh my i love the host he's a sillyhead with a lot of good things to say. He says really deep things with the best comedic delivery and i love how he flirts with Angel. I don't know if he's gay maybe probably i think he's just a swingin demon who likes to have a good time. He was definitely getting it on with Ramone though just the look in his eyes when he mentions his name.
Purplegrrl - You are batting 100% today. I too was quite surprised to realize that many of people on this board are in the over 30 catagory (and we still trust them). BtVs and Angle give my TV watching focus and purpose. I ignore the smirking jibs of my fellow workers who don't get it. They appear to be unable to get past the title of the show. Finding this board was a real plus in my life. My emotions and my brain cells get a workout every week. And we all know that if you don't use it you lose it!
OK I don't know what purplegrrl post you're responding to because I'm not reading the Spike/Crush threads for fear of spoilage but I am pleased to hear (read?) you enjoy the discussions on this board.

I'd be VERY curious to know ages of folks who post here. I'm 37 and have loved BtVS since I was 32.
Everyone here is old??? Everyone here is old and -still- has the brain function to be witty and eloquent??

(excuses herself to go bang her head against the wall for a few minutes)

There goes my wonderful picture of all these college or graduate students who could remember books and philosophies pertinent to the show because they were still studying them unlike myself who was just old and once spent an entire day (off and on) just trying to find the box I packed my Campbell in for the last move. My frazzled and old (36) brain and I will go rest now. ;)
31:) And loving it here at ATPoBtVS.
I'm not able to type a number that large. Suffice it to say the last time I was this obsessed with something I was 14 and it was the Beatles. I'm at a total lose to explain it but I'm grateful for the net. Thanks to the examples I can give them of people more obsessed than me I have been able to convince my family that I don't need to be institutionalized. So far.

I've assumed that most of you post or have posted in the Bronze (probably with different screen names) and are familiar with the Age Game. But for those of you who aren't check out the page below:

I've posted this in the past but for the benefit of all the newbies showing up here recently (thanks to all of you your contributions make this great site even better!!) be it known that I'm 0.047 millenia a mere pipsqueak on the cosmic scale!

Great idea! I should have used the millenia scale too.
I had to have a private tutor for algebra after I was an adult (hey ask me about literature or something) so I have no clever mathematical ability to disguise my age (I don't even know how to count cat years!) So at 44 I seem to be one of the older posters.
As a man at first I felt almost embarrassed to admit loving a show which seemed to be aimed at teenage girls but now I admit I'm a 49 year old Buffyholic.
I'm one of those teen buffy fans Dawns's age or maybe a year older. I'm also kind of new to this thread and it seems there aren't many teens who like this philosophical stuff but I love it. I'm a deep thinker and I'm proud of it!

I'm 29.
"I'm 34 and still studying all the stuff I go on about. When I was in College the professor I studied Buddhism with remarked to another student in reference to me "Oh he loves all of it. Even the boring parts." That remark still gives me a chuckle. Anyway I just try not to make my seminars or posts boring. Buffy and Angel certainly give me new ways to relate to and think about all the big picture existential metaphysical stuff that I am constantly trying to process.

I also have to say that in comparison with just about all the usenet groups folder clubs etc that I post on ... this discussion group has been one of the most rewarding. I have found the posters here to be considerate thoughtful open-minded well-educated and very profound. All this while maintaining a light and good-humored touch. This place really is marvelous. Thank you Masquerade for this disucssion board and for ATPOBtVS."

"Brian keep going and ignore people bad comments about the show! People around me don't get it either. I'm a fairly new to the Buffy world (but I've read and seen all I could in a month and a half) so I know my comments can sound very newbie-like but so far this board is the only place where I've found people who are willing to past the "I like him/I don't like him" kinda thread. I'm really impressed by the deepness of people thoughts on this board. And I take this opportunity to thank you all for welcoming me aboard! :)

So now to answer your question Masquerade I'm 31!"
I'm only 20 but I love philosophy and how deep this sight truly is. I'm sick of the soap opra little 14 year olds that respond to the other pages.
Soap opera can be fun as long as its philosphical subtext soap opera.
Just past 40 though I really think I should go the Rufus route....as you all know Rufus measures in Cat Years.....making her eternal by now I suppose. I'm older than Angel...in Cat Years....
Since in a way I started this thread: I need to post the truth.I must be the old guy on the board at 56. But in my heart I'm still a teenager or at least someone who is open to new ideas and experiences.
I know that teaching teenagers for 25 years has kept my POV young.
I am 28..no..yeah 28. Look a little younger feel a hell of a lot older!!!!

BTW...no fair Rufus....you are not telling!!!

"OnM I work occasionally at a Comic Book Store in Louisville.One of our regular customers Tony in his forties kept telling me that BtVS was a great show. I finally gave in and watch the end of Season 2 "Becoming" and became hooked. Since then I'm at home on Tuesday nights with my VCR so I can watch them over and over again. BtVS and Angel are a joy in my life and when I watch or talk about them I feel young and hopeful."
I am 33 and the father of four. I have never watched an episode of Friends ER Seinfield JAG The West Wing NyPDBlue Law and Order Chicago Hope and I can go on and on. But I never miss Buffy and Angel. If I am not home I tape them. If I am home I tape them and cut out all the commercials so I can rewatch them later. I have seen Angel cut off Lindsey's hand probably 50 times. Lol. Pehaps I am demented but at least I am having a good time.
When you say demented is htat a reference to Dr Demento?
I am originally from Indiana. I do not believe we got Dr. Demento on the air. I have heard of him though so I am not at a total loss.
Actually you did in the mid 1970's. I listened to him when I lived in Indinapolis.
It's sort of depressing to think that I am probably the same age as Joyce and yet identify with Buffy. I don't need philosophy I need psychology!!

It's true though that few understand our obsession with BtVS and Angel certainly not my mother! I have a few friends that watch but do not take their viewing to the obsessive depths that we do here. (At least one watches mostly for the cute men. Not that there's anything wrong with that! ;-) )

At 30 I am one of the older members of my group of friends (many of whom are fans of BtVS and AtS as well). I'm relieved to know that there are lots of other grown-ups watching the show who are as intrigued by the philosophical and ethical aspects of the shows as I am. Woo-hoo!
Being the BIG 40 I chose the name Miss Marple because I often feel like an old lady watching Buffy. I started watching with my son. We often have to battle my husband for the TV. It airs on Saturday nights during the big Hockey Night in Canada timeslot the holiest of nights for the Canadian male.

I saw somewhere that Joss Whedon was 36.
For Masquerade et al. FYI: Using the 23 responses to the Age question I calculated that the average age is 36.
Brian I guess that makes you the official ATPoBtVS statistician! I never would have guessed that the median age would be so... median. LOL. I feel even more at home:) Thanks for doing the math.
Is not every major character on BtVS & Angel on a journey in and out? Sometimes for every step forward a character may take two steps back and have to regroup. It is the difficulty of their choices decisions and eventual consequences that make these shows so interesting to its viewers. I often think of these shows as express trains headed for a final destination. There's no getting off until jorney's end but along the way what wonders to behold!
"Yes it's all about the journey! When you take season two for example who could guess that Angel would lost his soul? He did. Some wackiness ensued and the plot resolved itself in the end.
We are about to be swallowed into this "after Buffy's birthday" syndrome. Things always take a new path then. We are about to see episode 14... still 8 whole episode to follow. Many steps back and many steps forward. It's like a dance. And the dance changes from mambo to slow to disco to alternative each week...We all want to dance don't we? :)"
***We all want to dance don't we? :) ***

I don't have anything brilliant to add (everyone else is stealing my thoughts-grin) but Nina gave me a mental flash of Spike singing Springsteens' 'Dancing in the Dark'. I must go now and ponder the er..uh..hmm...the...cough..philosophical..yes yes the philosophical implications.

"Not to typecast but I see Spike rocking to "Dancing by Myself."
" You know what I think that whatever happens with Spike it will not be his end I choose not to give up on him. In the middle of season three I made a comment to myself like "I have faith in Faith" And I'm pretty happy with how things turned out. I never really knew how much I liked Spike's character it just never really occured to me how popular he was getting. I can't really imagine btvs without him so I have to have faith that Joss won't "Crush" us on Tuesday. I've been getting bad Buffy vibes for a long time now--I think it's just me though--Sometimes I think they should just vote her off the Hell-mouth. Oh well. I just need to ajust I guess."
Oh yes definately more Billy Idol than Bruce Springsteen!!

Although maybe not dancing. Perhaps demon bashing instead. He could do a drum solo on someone's head!
"I just read the shooting script for "School hard". I wish it didn't but it made me think even more ("make it stop make it stop"!!! LOL) I know it's been discussed for ages but if I want to keep what's left of my sanity I've got to write this. You're all such wonderful people that I hope you won't mind me rambling for so long!

I've been thinking about the influence of the Sire vs the Sir-ee. The parents vs child relationship they have. In the first episodes of Season two while Dru is insane Spike has to cover for her. He's bringing her food he has to be strong he has to be the parent figure (like a child would be with a sick parent). So he's violent and anarchist. He feels he has power even more than before because he's more powerful than her.

Then an organ falls on his head Dru gains her strenght back and their roles come back to normal. Not really normal because now Spike is the one who is incapacitated. Incapable to be the vampire Dru is dreaming of. We've seen them when they were both at full capacity and there was a balance in their power. Now there's none. Dru is the strong one and he's ashame not to be able to give her want she wants. He wants to leave and go to Vienna (the choice of the city is quite romantic BTW). He looks more like a guy who'd rather have a good time with his sweatheart instead of fighting against bad odds but he'll stay for her. He'll even prepare her party (not his - he doesn't care about "Big Blue") He'll destroy the world with her if that's what she wants. Considering he can't do more stuck in the wheelchair!

"Father" Angel comes in the picture and Dru acts like a child around him. She wants to attract his attention. The only way out for Spike is to leave Sunnydale.

I don't know if it's common for a Sir-ee to get dumped by his Sire but if the Sire gives meaning to the life of the Sir-ee it's no wonder that Spike was so affected. It's not only love that he lost but his only link to the vampire world. It's the ultimate nightmare of the child: to discover that their parents don't love them. The only way to get back the attention is to be like the parents wants you to be. Dru wants him violent. He'll be violent. All he wants from this relationship is love.

Chipped Spike is like a wild animal who has been tamed. He's reluctant at first and slowly adapts himself to the new circumstances (away from familly). You can tame a lion love him give him affection but he'll remain a lion (maybe that's what DF meant in that article after all). He will always remain wild at heart. It's been seen that "good" lions ate their masters it's also been seen that they didn't. How much of the wild remains?

Now if the parental figure comes back... how will the child (Sir-ee) will respond to that? Does he closes his eyes and just goes back to what he was... or is it even possible to go back to what you were when you've been tamed (even by a chip!)? It might be interesting to see what happens to wild animals that have been tamed and then released in the wild.

Okay I'm pushing this methaphor a little on the edge. Vampires are not lions. And a Sire is not a parent per se... but considering all this... I do believe there's a way to redemption for Spike. (I know I don't have to convince you! :) maybe I'm just trying to convince myself after all! :) From what I can see he's been violent to get his way to Dru's heart.

What becomes really interesting in the episodes to come is the choices that this wild animal that has been "tamed" will take. It's not about a romantic journey.. it's a journey inside the self. What you really are. Same journey Buffy's taking. They can both stumble make mistake the road to self-discovery is a long one!

I hope I did bring something new.. if not... just ignore this!:)"
Can't ignore it Nina it makes a lot of sense :)(See Austin's take on Crush on the C&S board if you haven't don't want to post spoilers here)

I have always thought that Spike's bad behavior was mostly for Dru's benefit some male posturing and perhaps some of it was turning his back on what he was as a human. But the chip has suppressed the demon and his more human feelings have surfaced not always though for the demon is still there and can cause trouble. But he may have gone too far forward to revert back to his old evil self. At least I hope he has.

Oh I'd love to read what Austin has to say about it... but I'm afraid of too much spoilers. I'm already too much spoiled right now!!!! :)

I don't know that board but if I go back there next Wednesday I guess I could read it. Then I might just get hooked! Not good either! What a misery to be so addicted to a show! LOL

The fact about being able to go back to what we were in the past is very fascinating. One thing for sure is that whoever we are things can never be the same. We are all dependant on our actions. They mold us they make us become someone else at every second.
I never intended to get this obsessed Nina but here I am :) I guess we could be doing something worse so I'm content to be obsessed :) And I never liked to spoiled either and I told myself I wouldn't be for Crush but I did and I'm kinda glad.

I think you will find it interesting.

I'll try to wait a little... how long I don't know though!

Thanks for the tip. If you insist it must really be worth it. Makes my hell to spoilering-land even closer! Let's just call it Spoil-Paradise! Feels better like that! LOL
"I agree with your theory Nina.

"We are all dependant on our actions. They mold us they make us become someone else at every second."

Indeed. We have seen in Season 5 just how much Buffy is affected by her choice of actions whether it is to face Dracula's thrall battle Glory the deity extract information from Spike uncover the secret of her sister's existence... A few months ago we talked at great length about Buffy's new darker more mature side. We also discussed the ethics of her spear-slaying the vamp hooker. In the space of just a few episodes Buffy has integrated this action into her being and as viewers we seem comfortable once again with her as a hero-type. But change (a many such changes) of this sort is constantly working itself into the fabric of the Buffyverse.

Which brings me to Spike where else (lol) and the issue of redemption. As far as I can gather he like Anya is experiencing major growing pains. Anya continues to exhibit some rather childish tactless attributes but seems to be more in touch with the finer human emotions lately. As was pointed out elsewhere Anya is fortunate enough to have the love of a good man and can explore or unleash her inner child at will. Spike has a different problem on his hands. We have seen him act like a lovesick teenager and collect personal items of Buffy's on one hand and we have seen him interact in more sophisticated ways in Blood Ties ITW (his talks with Riley and Buffy) and FFL. Where Anya *never* passes as 'normal' Spike sometimes can. I think that's what makes him interesting and frightening to us the viewers and to the SG and Buffy.

The big problem for Spike is that he's never achieved his goal of finding love and acceptance. He is more motivated to please than is Anya. IMO this need for acceptance is what constitutes seeking redemption. But what do you do if you are Spike and you've done everything you know how to do to 'please' and you are still not accepted?

Oy. This was rambly."
The big problem for Spike is that he's never achieved his goal of finding love and acceptance. He is more motivated to please than is Anya.
IMO this need for acceptance is what constitutes seeking redemption. But what do you do if you are Spike and you've done everything you
know how to do to 'please' and you are still not accepted?

Wanting to please to get love is what most human struggle with all their lifes. Not only a vampire thing. Psychologically many people are still children even in an adult body. The child needs affection and inconditional love. That's what William was craving for that's what Spike is still craving for. But we all need to get past that to really achieve a real none destroying love. Love is about giving... not taking.

That's a long struggle for anyone. And I don't know how Spike will be able to deal with that!
I think Spike's need for acceptance is his overriding motivation for nearly everything he does. I think redemption is something different.I think redemption is finding peace. For Angel that is gaining his reward-being made mortal. Since he already has a soul that works out. But how does it work for Spike? If he is given a soul he is a souled vampire. That is no redemption! If he is made human he is a human without a soul. That isn't redemption either. Can lightening strike twice? That is two vampires both be given souls and mortality. Seems like a rare enough gift the first time. I don't think Spike will be redeemed. I haven't read any of the spoilers but I think he will live out his unlife as a lookin-for-love-in-all-the-wrong-places vamp until it permanently ends for him. I'm sorry to see that because he is so appealing on every level (except that kill and eat humans part that he is currently having to work around). BtVS without Spike would lose its...bite? ;)
I might have just used the wrong word by calling it redemption. Maybe it should be called some kind of inner peace... I don't know but your comments sound right. I might just be looking for another way to say it then! :)
"I think redemption is finding peace. For Angel that is gaining his reward-being made mortal. Since he already has a soul that works out. But how does it work for Spike?

How indeed. I'm not convinced that redemption is reserved for the souled. It smacks of humanistic chauvinism. Also I have a real problem with the fact that it is somehow 'just' for Angel to seek or obtain Shanshu if... he does xyz while it is 'impossible' for Spike to find some measure of peace within his own frame of unsouled-vamp existence by choosing to behave in a more human manner. Perhaps we all (including Angel) have an unrealistic vision of what constitutes redemption. You call it peace of mind; I like Rilke's line about "the possibility of Being". In the end redemption is not only a personal journey and choice. It is also a self-defining and self-fulfilling process.

IMO at this point because of the chip and because of his personality Spike is far less likely to regress in his progression towards redemption than is Angel. Why? Quite simply Angel has a great deal more to lose (a shot at Shanshu). Spike is already at the bottom of the barrel. He can either choose to stay hidden away in its depths or he can choose to get out. If he does manage to crawl out of the barrel escaping the barrel will be its own reward. I don't expect there will even be a box of chocolates waiting for him let alone Buffy. Wonder what Spike'll do?


Judging from his low tolerance for boredom I'm thinking he'll find a creative way to hoist himself out of the pit:) if only to watch Passions. LOL. "
"Okay I've been looking in my French and English dictionaries and haven't find anything convincing about "redemption". From what I've gathered it's either a redemption of the sins or in larger meaning a redemption of your actions: asking for penance. Do we need a soul for that? Hmmm... difficult to imagine what it is to be souless. We can speculate but not really know. I'll think about this over and over during the night... so I'll give you my thoughts on it tomorrow! LOL

Now something else caught my attention. Whistler says to Angel :"You don't wanta go all bloody revert to your demon roots then you better start getting' involved with others - that's what keeps you humanÖ" (in "City of...")

So with Spike hanging around humans for a year and a half... does that "keeps him human"? Or do you have to win the soul lotterie to have that privilege? ;)"
It's all a confusion for me. Angel's soul hasn't been able to keep him on the straight and narrow this year which doesn't make him any different than any other human being. I think the jury is still out on Angel for now but I hope he gets his equalibrium back soon.

As for Spike...I think this is a case of his having retained more human feelings and emotions than the average vampire - maybe some sort of mistake in the transition :) But he still has to do battle with his demon which undoes all the good he tries to do. I think he's smart enough to realize it but doesn't know what to do about it. He's so immature in so many ways - the clothes and picture stealing sounds like something a teenager would do. But then he has that keen insight into people and a way of speaking the truth that hits home.

I don't like to bring fanfic into this discussion but one story I read had an interesting premise - Whistler comes to town to claim another vampire to retain the balance of good and evil - Spike. The premise is that there are degrees of evil in demons and the demon that possesses Spike is not totally evil. It also goes onto say that when a person is vamped they do not lose their soul but the demon takes control. And because his demon is not totally evil he has retained more humanity than the average vampire. An interesting premise I thought what do you all think?

This is getting philosophical. I'm not a formally trained philosopher (background in classics & critical theory) but it seems to me that all the main characters in the Buffyverse have 'souls' by any common definition (Aristotle's 'psyche' or the New Testament for instance). If we're going to talk about 'souls' in this context (or 'redemption' for that matter - Redemption of what exactly?) we need to establish a narrower more specific definition.

Having a soul gives Angel the ability to have compassion to love and to be altruistic. Spike is dangerously sociopathic - moderated by an artificial chip. Faith is also pretty antisocial but is able to be redeemed by Angel (so it seems - though she always shows glimmers of compassion).

Does Cordelia have a soul before the end of the first series of Angel (on the rainy side of the Herring Pond we haven't seen further than this yet)? She's a bit crass and can't really form relationships. Angel 'redeems' her too (is he a Christ like figure perhaps?)

What are we talking about here.

I like to think Cordelia always had a soul corrupted by being spoiled and rich. But she came to follow the scoobies around like a whiney puppy strangely and inexplicably in the beginning of season 2. No good explanation why since she disdained them so much in season 1. Except she saw a place she felt good for being good. It gave her a sense of purpose she didn't have with the popular shallow crowd. This is also what made her join up with Angel so quickly when she moved to LA.
Since there seem to be so many questions dangling regarding the journey to redemption I thought Iíd post these definitions from the Oxford Concise Dictionary:

1) the action of redeeming someone or something or of being redeemed.
2) A thing that saves someone from error or evil.

To redeem:

1) compensate for the faults or bad aspects of.
Redeem oneself: make up for oneís poor past performance or behaviour ñ save from sin error or evil.
2) Gain or regain possession of in exchange for payment.
3) Fulfill (a pledge or promise)
4) Buy the freedom of.

And a few random thoughts:

Angel is in a reverse-kenotic position ñ his imposed or superimposed soul suppresses the immortal demon self and the result is that he appears and acts human. Still he has a long way to go before he attains any kind of redemption. In fact he needs to find a way to redeem himself before he can help others on the path to redemption. That others such as Wes and Cordelia chose to ally their destinies with his is very interesting particularly in light of the fact that Angel has currently given up on his quest. Are Cordy and Wes also seeking a measure of redemption? If so what have *they* done to need redemption?

While I firmly believe that in order to be redeemed one must redeem oneself I do think that having companions in arms in ëthe good fightí makes the journey that much more rewarding.


For his part Spike has certainly tried to ëgain or regain possession of in exchange for paymentí. LOL. Playing the definition game can be an eye-opening and downright funny experience at times... Furthermore IMO he bought Druís freedom in B2. He also kept Giles from getting killed in Passion by non-intervention and by keeping Dru out of the mix (the same is true about him helping Buffy in B2). Iím sure there are more examples I am not thinking of at the moment. I hope other posters can add some. Spike also has a habit of fulfilling the promises he makes. Of course there is no evidence that Spike has ever tried to ìcompensate for the faults or bad aspects ofî. Yet:)


How can you redeem something you never had or which you may have lost forever? Does Angel have a greater shot at redemption because he has a soul or does Spike because he knows he needs people?


The dynamic between Dawn and Spike is very intriguing because they are both at the same stage of development in a way. Moreover Spike can also serve as a much-needed father figure for her. The dynamic between Angel and the Host has a similar energy to it. No-nonsense no holds barred. Both relationships are refreshing to watch.

"Those definitions strike me as astoundingly commerce-like. Redemption = trading good deeds for bad until they are somehow erased. I'm thinking of Ryuei's post on the Buddhist notion of redemption "Angel's Karmic Baggage & Angulimala" below that I hopelessly chopped up and put on my site. What interested me most was the notion that you could never redeem yourself in the "commerce" sense of the word--its much too long and complex a task.

Some Christian notions of redemption are like this as well--redemption isn't about "making up" the bad deeds with the good deeds until they're erased. It's more a change of attitude that means you go on from that point in life no longer being the self-centered person you were the person who committed those deeds.
***Redemption = trading good deeds for bad until they are somehow erased***

For some reason this makes me think of Green Stamps and those little savings books that we used to paste them into.

Not only is Angel not currently collecting Green Stamps but they've taken his little book away as well. If he doesn't shape up he'll be getting the Cosmic Barbeque rather than the lawn furniture.
I'm not quite sure why there's this discussion over the definition of 'redemption'. It simply means 'buying back' something that you should rightfully have possession of i.e. like a ransom payment or getting something back from a pawn shop (remember those?). It has a religious (specifically Christian) meaning in that God demands a blood-payment for sin which Christ paid thereby 'redeeming' all of mankind.

Also in Classical Tragedy Oidipous the 'original and best' tragic hero (according to aristotle) 'redeems' his people from the curse brought about by his own uncleanness by taking the penalty for it.

What is interesting and important is that this is not a moral thing. Oidipous' 'sin' was in simply being who is was and redemption came in facing this truthfully.

Angel is able to redeem both himself and those around him in a very similar way: he has not only faced evil but actually carries it with him (presumably this is how he was able to 'escape' from 'hell' - though this is possibly taking it too far).

It is interesting (on a slightly different note) that the metaphysical world of BTVS is exactly that: other dimensions are 'meta-physical' as opposed to 'spiritual' so metaphysical threats can be dispatched in more or less physical terms. In this the cosomology has more in common with Classical Greece than the New Testament (or indeed Judaeo Christian culture generally). Someone mentioned Gnosticism recently and there may be something in that - but I'm still looking for oriental analogues.

"Aquitaine I think what you said here is a step or two before redemption.

>>IMO this need for acceptance is what constitutes seeking redemption. But what do you do if you are Spike and you've done everything you know how to do to 'please' and you are still not accepted?>>

There is the comprehension that you've done everything you can do on your own followed by the realization that you can't do it for yourself. Most major religions have the concept of "Let go and let God." Even Buddhism I believe has the concept of total abandonment of self before the cycle of reincarnation can be broken.

With the mention of souls demons and demi-gods on BtVS I think it is impossible for us not to consider the topic of redemption. We may call it a journey or some other term but it's pretty much the same thing. To have a character like Spike unable to complete his journey because he lacks the nature to do so would be a tragedy.
I also have to accept the possibility that may be the ultimate fate intended for Spike by his creator Joss Whedon.

Next week's program is supposed to be about a robot who falls in love with her creator and is consoled by Buffy (not meant to be a spoiler I think that information is widely published). This surely cannot be a coincidence that it follows an episode where Spike professes his love and is rejected by her.

I'd like to think that this week's episode also shows that Buffy on her own journey just isn't ready to accept Spike at this time.
"Great post Dalwes. You makes excellent points regarding self-awareness and 'letting go'. You may be right that Spike is still in a pre-redemption stage...

"There is the comprehension that you've done everything you can do on your own followed by the realization that you can't do it for yourself."

That is a 'fateful' identity shattering moment. It can be your ultimate salvation or it can squash you into dust.

"To have a character like Spike unable to complete his journey because he lacks the nature to do so would be a tragedy. I also have to accept the possibility that may be the ultimate fate intended for Spike by his creator Joss Whedon."

It would be a tragedy but I have to agree that it would certainly make sense thematically.

I think the problem I am experiencing right now as a viewer (and I don't think I am alone in feeling this way) is that I feel more empathy for Spike's quandary than I do for Buffy's. Buffy is becoming more and more strident and forceful. She has been a bit difficult to like this season. In many ways Spike seems more human than Buffy at this point. A strange state of affairs:)

Where can I find Austin's Take on Crush? I love to be spoiled :)
Please feel free to vent any and all your pet theories regarding any Buffyverse storyline or character in this thread. Consider it a generic pick-me-up thread.

OK all start us off here. My brand spanking new theory posits that there actually *is* a chip. It's a pretty conventional aversion therapy sort of contraption and Spike's pretty much up Titicaca's Creek without a paddle. He wants it removed pronto. After much prevarication he decided his best bet to get the chip removed and protect Dawn (I know I know - please let me wallow in denial a bit) is to convince Glory that his chip is actually the key! By the end of the season Glory does her finger voodoo on his brain to try to retrieve the key. Miscellaneous messiness ensues.

Voil¦! Isn't the simplicity of the concept a beauty to behold? LOL.
"Love that! ;) Let us all wallow in denial with Spike and Dawn. Since Dawn told him "mostly I think Ewww" (hilarious!) in Checkpoint I felt there was an interesting connection between those two. He's definitely concerned when she tells him she's going away in BT. It's not only the music! (more denial here!!!)
I'd love it if at the end Spike would have to do an altruistic act and save Dawn. That would beat Dru out of her feet!

So why don't we all forget about S/B and all become Dawn/Spike worshipper!!! LOL (Not romantically of course!)

At some point they have to bring back the chip... your theory Aquitaine would be just great. Does anyone know if fans ever have been able to predict the end of a season? We could give you an award or something! :)"
And if Glory tries to use the key by putting it in her own brain (just a thought)....
And if Glory tries to use the key by putting it in her own brain (just a thought)....

The chip seems to prevent to kill or hurt humans... I'm not sure Glory would like that! :)
Now wouldn't that be something Glory getting the chip and not able to hurt humans - but I wonder if that works on gods as well as demons? :)

Love your theory Aquitaine it makes perfect sense :)

Hmm if Spike did get the chip out to protect Dawn it would be something Buffy should consider as the Knights of Byzamtium are human and with his super strength he'd be a big help. But as of right now Buffy is not thinking of asking him for help ever again.
Chiped Glory trying to hurt humans: LIke OWWW!
Sadly though Glory just might be crazy enough to enjoy the monstorous headaches.
Did anyone else notice Anya's emotional reactions about Dawn? When they me in the magic shop she was so uncomfortable she turned away and then finally found an inane (if you didn't know Dawn was the key) compliment. Has Anya ever complimented anyone before (except Xander). Has she ever been afarid to speak her mind before? She was also affected in the Dawn-Buffy sea shell scene and she was sad and concerned when Buffy told the SG that Dawn had left.
"Didn't especially notice it at the time gds but you are right now that I flash back on it.

Perhaps this will be a subject of future contrasts especially if it turns out that Spike is going to do more of the evil-thing in future eps. That is the contrast between two 'ex-demons' (the jury's still very much out on Spike of course) and their ability to *genuinely* have empathy for others. Now that Anya's human again there has been debate whether or not she has a soul (I'm voting yes at least for the moment) and of course we know Spike doesn't whether or not the chip emulates one.

So Anya may grow and become more and more 'soulful' and Spike??

Thus these two characters would serve to mirror one another's growth process in interesting ways.

I'd like to take a brief moment to pat myself on the back (doesn't happen too often so I'll go for it while I can! ;) by saying that there was something about Anya that I liked from the day she asked Xander out to the prom that part about him being "less obnoxious than most of the alpha males around here."

Good call Anya. The Xan-man's been very good for you and that's been good for humanity."
Love can move mountains. Despite the fact that Anya is selfish (note the remark she says about Buffy's dress! :) despite the fact that she's over interested in money and sex despite her way to talk to customers her usual lack of compliments to others she has something that other demons don't have. Love. Xander is her miracle in some way. Someone who hasn't known love can't love. (well that's my opinion) I believe that Anya is changing because whatever she does thinks or says... she feels complete support from Xander. Was Xander to diappear from her life I would bet she wouldn't change that much anyore.

As for Spike rejection can only lead him to become violent again. To see what someone has to offer you have to love them. When you are always rejected you can't believe in love anymore and there's no point to do good. The fact that he's a vampire makes it all more difficult. Would Spike changed if he was really loved for himself? I don't know but it seems that love is changing Anya slowly so we could still wonder about that!
Anya knows more about alternate universes that the rest of the group (having had a hand in creating them over the centuries). It may be that Anya understands that whether Glory is defeated or not a day will come when Dawn will cease to exist and be forgotten.
that's kinda what happens to all life though from the point of the living. Depending on what you believe eternal after-life with God karmic rebirth etc.
"First let me get this out of the way (the caps are mine):

Marya on the ATPoBtVS Board:
"When the vampire demon aquires the memories and personality of it's victims it also gets ECHOES of the soul and conscience.... [and].... those echoes might get IMPRINTED on it's soul"
David Fury in Zap2it interview:

"We feel like there's a GHOST of the person you once were inside them -- a phiisophical ghost...[and]...the demon is INFUSED with some of the characteristics of the people that they possess."

Echo/ ghost. Imprinted/infused. 'nuff said?

Ok I read the article. I don't think DF was condemning Spike as a serial killer while exonerating Angel. Nor do I think he ever meant to imply that Angel was a more suitable lover for Buffy. It looks that way because of the way Ms. O'hare places her comments among the quotes but such are the hazards of journalism. We can't know for sure but I think in that part of the interview he was focusing on Spike's role on BtVS. He was reminding us that all this excitement about a potential love affair between Buffy and Spike is just so much hormonal romanticism. Spike is "charasmatic " a "good looking guy" and "does carry a lot of ... romanticism." And the way JM plays him all swagger smoldering eyes and flaring nostrils is just well hot. But he "is in fact a demon .... infused with some of the characteristics [the person in this case William] that they possess." So basically we're reminded that although Spike has remnants of the mushy poetic William in him he's still a vampire. And vampires like to be bad. They like to do damage. And they like to kill.

DF of course does make comparisons between Angel and Spike later in the article. There I think his focus was to preserve the uniqueness of Angel in the Buffyverse. But in doing so he does kind of murky things up. In defending Angel's singularity he says that "other vampires can[not] choose to fight evil or choose not to be evil......To afford that kind of conscious choice on a character like Spike would diminish both of them." Yet we know Spike can in fact fight evil and choose not to be evil. Because we've seen it starting with Doomed. But what I think DF was driving at here was a matter of motivation. Due to the curse and his restored soul Angel is "driven by guilt." He reminds us that Angel is tormented by his desire for redemption and his unsurety of it's possibility. These don't neccessarily prove Angel to be good but we have to agree they are compelling motivations to at least not align himself with evil. He also says he is "driven by blood lust" aknowledging that there's still a lot of evil in the old guy putting him in constant conflict with himself. So what motivates Spike. Mostly that danged chip. Can't kill can't feed. But we've clearly seen it doesn't diminish his desire to do violence. The only thing he can do damage to are demons hence the fighting evil. And now he has that randy infatuation with the Slayer. And she's really into the not being evil. Hence the choosing to not be evil. Or at least look that way.

Mostly I don't think the article had anything new to say. Just reinforced what we all really know even if our attraction to Spike and the actor that plays him makes us want to believe differently. Personally I don't think having Buffy and Spike getting together romantically would ever work. It's just not good storytelling. DF sums it up when he says "It cannot end well." But how the writers get themselves and us out of this moral quagmire is going to be interesting.

It's very late and I should have been in bed hours ago but I know I won't sleep it I don't finish this so here's another point about some of the things that have come up in these last few threads. Many of you especially those who lean toward the romantic resolution for Buffy and Spike seem to argue for the possiblity of redemption even for vampires. This often leads to one of the many discussion of the nature of vampirism and the role of the soul. It seems to me that whenever we get into these discussion no matter how great the theories we come up with the stumbling block is always Angel and that cursed soul of his. I've come to the conclusion that the problem is we always end up using Angel as both the foundation and a kind of litmus test for our theories. I have come to the conclusion that herein lies our mistake. If we are reminded of anything in that article we've all gotten so excited about it's that Angel is unique in the Buffyverse. Not just because he has a soul but because he's CURSED with a soul. The goal of the curse was to make him suffer. To make him feel horrific guilt and remorse for all the evil he had done. We all assume that the soul is what created that guilt and remorse. But I've come to believe that's not so. It is the curse that makes him experience these painfull emotions. Among the magics involved was the requirement that his soul be restored. The soul is not the source of his guilt it is merely a device to facilitate it's delivery.

For those of you debating Angel's desire for redemtion and why he should need it you've made some very good points. But I was wondering if you've all read the mini-thread by Ryuei a couple pages back. He says things simiar to some of your points from the Buddhist perspective. But he says it more elequently than most of us can ever hope to. I suggest you all take a look.

Ok now I can sleep.

BTW what's this wildfeed thing you all are on about?

Where's the discussion on the wild feed? I find only Brian asking about the feed--no discussion.
Dalwes we don't really discuss the wildfeed at ATPoBtVS. But if you're feeling so inclined you can find all sorts of discussion and speculation at the Buffy Cross and Stake Spoiler Board.

for Crush. You may not be able to stomach watching the show afterwards. I am cringing at the thought of the visuals that must accompany some scenes. *shudder*

In case you were wondering the DF interview appears not to have been disinformation:(
Me too Aquitaine. I won't get into it on the other board though just too upset for words. *Shudder* is right.

"I love the way you put things into perspective Marya. I just wanted to add that I know that I am always (not only with Buffy) trying to see good in people. Well that's the way I am and I'd try to reform the devil himself!

LOL Even though the romantic side of me would like a romance between B/S I wouldn't like to see it. It would be too easy. And if I were on the writer's staff I'd make Spike change in "Crush"... make him turn to his evil way just the way they did it (that's what Aquitaine confirmed!) It's the best scenario possible for now. He can't stay all mushi-mushi for rest of the season. I'm really looking forward to see him bad. BUT I am also looking forward for some realization on Spike's part after a few "angst" episodes. It can wait until the 100th episode if they want... but I want something (or a better explanation for all we have seen so far)

"And if I were on the writer's staff I'd make Spike change in Crush"... make him turn to his evil way just the way they did it (that's what Aquitaine confirmed!)"

Wait just a minute there... I will neither confirm or deny such rumours. LOL. Seriously though I don't think that it was made at all clear *what* Spike's mindset is at this point and his next move is not at all clear. It could still go either way and I suppose that if I look at this from the most positive angle I can think of (I took a nice long nap to recover from the wildfeed so I am better disposed to think about this rationally:) the fact that he has been stripped of every last vestige of his social connections (Harmony the SG Dru Buffy other vamps) makes him as compelling a wild card as ever in the Tarot deck that is the Buffyverse.

Remember how he told Buffy in FFL that her social connections were the reason she was still alive? As with many things he said that faithful night I think the statement about family and friends can just as easily be applied to Spike himself. Spike has no reason to 'live' at the moment. He'll have to find one or do himself in. What do you think of suicide by Slayer?

Hee hee! I just meant you confirmed it in the wildfeet post. Don't want to say that you posses all the power to predict future! LOL

Of course I was a little too rash to involved you in that! :)

Buffy and Spike journey might just take a parallel road. Buffy loosing people around her and Spike as well. They may will both be put into positions where they will have to answer some unresolved issues. The famous grey zone!
"He was reminding us that all this excitement about a potential love affair between Buffy and Spike is just so much hormonal romanticism. Spike is charismatic " a "good looking guy" and "does carry a lot of ... romanticism." And the way JM plays him all swagger smoldering eyes and flaring nostrils is just well hot."

More like Gothic Romanticism -- like Wuthering Heights where the "hero" (Heathcliffe) is a thouroughly wicked individual. Yet at the same time there is something romantic (I'm not sure why) about a doomed love than spans two generations.

"If we are reminded of anything in that article we've all gotten so excited about it's that Angel is unique in the Buffyverse. Not just because he has a soul but because he's CURSED with a soul. The goal of the curse was to make him suffer. To make him feel horrific guilt and remorse for all the evil he had done. We all assume that the soul is what created that guilt and remorse. But I've come to believe that's not so. It is the curse that makes him experience these painful emotions. Among the magics involved was the requirement that his soul be restored. The soul is not the source of his guilt it is merely a device to facilitate it's delivery."

I share your opinion. A soul is not enough to create guilt -- the gypsies cursed Angel with both a soul and a high performance conscience. I think the soul was necessary for the conscience to function -- the demon animating the vampire is an amoral creature. A conscience would serve little purpose for a monster that didn't understand that it was doing wrong.

I do think the article puts to rest the notion that the soul of the victim is still in the victim's body -- just supressed. Everthing from Joss & Co. points to the soul's flight when the demon takes over.
Thanks for explainng the wildfeed. I like to be a little spoiled but I'm afraid that would be too much. So far I'm resisting but with every post I read I find it harder and harder. OTOH I used to get a double dose of Buffy when my cable carried WGN. I always thought I enjoyed the second showing better because I didn't have to worry about what was going to happen. Maybe reading the wildfeed wouldn't be much different. (See I'm weakening already.)

I'd also like to apologize for the atrocious spelling in the opening subject of this thread. My only excuse is that if you look at the time I posted it was very late even considering my being on the west coast. It makes me cringe every time I see it and I'm sure it bothers some of you so please accept my apologies.
"Rufus mentioned in her earlier post that there's an article on Buffy at this site:

http://tv.zap2it.com/science fiction/otherworlds.

Mr Fury says in that article that it could be a possibility to send Spike as the big bad in "Angel".

I do have some serious doubts about the success of that transfer:

1. It would mean that if Spike is all big bad we've really been misled all season hoping for redemption (or something!)

2. Maybe it's just me but whenever Spike and Angel have had scenes together... it was never Angel who won the day. It may be a question of taste but David Boreanaz doesn't have great actor's skills (sorry for David's worshippers). He is okay but not great. With James Marsters joining the show... how would it affect his image as the hero if the show?

Many fans have asked to see more angst from Spike and making him part of "Angel" might just bring that on but what does it say about everything that happened so far?"
I'm not sure it's a question of acting talent or style. DB and JM have very different approaches to the craft. That's a given. The thing is if Spike were to go to Angel it would be a one-joke gag. Angel has the stronger body Spike the stronger wit. One episode of that was enough (In the Dark) IMO. Actually I find that both Angel and Spike become caricatures of themselves when they play off each other...

Besides A:tS already has 3 criminally underused actors (CK AD and AR - Lindsey Wes and Gunn). Also BtVS cannot afford to lose any male characters at this time. I really don't see bland Ben filling Spike's boots. LOL.
Also the dilemna of second-half story arcs.

In order for Spike to be a 'big bad' he needs that pesky chip removed. He can't actually pose a threat to the human race personally and that takes away a lot of his scare factor.

Btw I completely agree about the severity of the underuse of the actors and the fact that Spike would be beyond difficult to replace on the show.
I don't know about the ratings but maybe they are hoping to get more viewers into watching A:tS!

It just that turning Spike into Lex Luthor would be reducing the show to something it's not.

That's why I was wondering... I just hope it will stay on the table and not get more support!

BTW I don't want to be mean to DB when I say he's only an okay actor. It's only a constatation. A writer made a wonderful and hilarious Buffy parody in which she says that Angel has 2 faces and that when he becomes Angelus et gets 3 more for a total of five.
Maybe playing the brooding guy isn't something easy to do. You can't have a happy moment. Can't really smile. Doesn't give you a lot of option to play with.
Just so you know I'm not skirting the issue... LOL... I do know what you mean about DB and that fanfic you refer to was absolutely hilarious wasn't it?

However I can't imagine anyone but DB playing Angel. It is no small feat to carry an entire show. His character is so 'larger than life'. It can't be easy to be in perpetual brood mode. And while JM *seems* to have a greater range of talents to work with I can't imagine that there is a Spike: The Series in the works if you know what a mean. LOL.
Oh... for those of you who don't know what we are refering to you can read the Buffy parody at:


It's hilarious really!

Hmmm... If every Buffy character had to have his or her own series who would stay on Buffy? Instead of having the Slayerettes she would be left with fighting cranky demons all alone! We wouldn't want that do we? :)
I agree with all of you Spike belongs on Buffy there he is a big fish in a small pond and a great contrast to the other characters. The actors on Ats are getting more time now that Angel has set them free so I hope that once he comes back to the fold (as we know he will) they will continue to.

In The Dark was a perfect episode in that it was a one-shot deal all that makes both characters (Spike and Angel) what they are. But to repeat it every week would be monotonous. Love the Lex Luthor analogy I use it myself :)

As for acting styles JM comes from a stage background that emphasizes more versatility and ensemble work which makes him a great co-star at this time. DB has that big dark presence which bodes well for a leading role. Different approaches same result we like watching them.

Spike belongs on Buffy there he is a big fish in a small pond

Maybe that's why he has burning baby fish swimming around his head! LOL.

Kindred Lynn where have you been hiding lately? Missed you.
LOL! Somehow I knew you would mention that :)

Thank you kindred Aquitaine missed you too. I've been busy and work and a little under the weather (arthritis - it's a pain ;) ) But I'm feeling better and glad to be back to discuss our favorite unsoulded vampire and wonder what in the world is going to happen to him?! I was not going to read the wild feed but I think I am going to need to be forewarned regarding the next episode in order to maintain my composure while watching it. My sister too :)

Ergh. Sorry to hear about you being under the weather:( Glad you are back though.

Rufus contracted Riley to keep me from reading the wildfeed but he backed out on account of some bogus mission to Belize. The Host was his backup but he's gotten pretty tipsy on Sea Breezes so I think I will 'cave' once again. I have absolutely no self-control. Time to change the battery in my chip no doubt!
How typical of Riley to bail out :) We'll excuse The Host he was out saving the world and needed something to calm his nerves :) I never used to read them but I am now officially addicted. What kind of batteries do you need I have some extra lying around.

Thanks it's good to be back :)

With all the ups and downs around here I'm thinking lithium batteries are in order:)

"I read in an interview with Joss or JM (or maybe both) that JM is contracted on BtVS through this season (5) and possibly next (6). Buffy/Angel crossovers are always a possibility but I seriously doubt Spike will go to L.A. permanently.

Even if Spike does turn evil again I don't think he will be two-dimensional. He wasn't before he got chipped why would he be now?? I can't ever decide if I like Spike better chipped or unchipped. He has had some of the best lines on either show - one of my favorites is his voice-over on top of the building when he goes to L.A. to get the magic ring from Angel talking about "Nancy-boy hair gel" and all. LOL! Also his little speech to Buffy and Angel in "Lovers Walk." Etc. etc. etc.

Actually I think David B. is a pretty good actor (or maybe I'm partial ;-) ). The interviews I've read/seen with him make him out to be a fairly goofy guy. So playing brooding Angel is sort of opposite of his personality. I also recommend going to see "Valentine " David B.'s new movie. Not a great horror flick maybe not even a good one - fairly formulaic. But worth the price of popcorn. As my girlfriends who saw it with me said we went for the eye candy!

On another note:
I definately missed something. Where was this interview with this Fury guy?? Was it over at BC&S? I don't go over there much except to read the fanfic."
It's at www.zap2it.com. Click on TV then Science Fiction buttons on the left. You should see a picture of JM under Poll. Click that and you should be at the article.

I agree with you that DB is a pretty good actor. . When Angel was announced I was one who had doubts whether DB could carry a show but I have been pleasantly surprised. And his abilities have grown along with the series. It's not easy playing a character where so much is interior. I think JM is very talented but with Spike he really gets to use those broad strokes while DB mostly has to stick to those fine details. OTOH I will say as dialecticians JM seems to be a master while DB well it's much easier when the flashbacks don't involve his Irish accent. :-)
Well that's what I get for avoiding spoiler threads. Why din nobody tell me the gal who wrote the article about this ep for zap2it mentions my site? The author sure didn't tell me she was going to give me free publicity in a big spoiler article!

Masquerade did you find it strange that such a 'black and white' article would plug your very beautiful shades of grey site? LOL.

Congrats by the way. It's great to know that your site is getting the recognition it deserves:) Also I'm sure we will be seeing a lot of new faces around thanks to the advert. That's gotta be a good thing.
Oh I didn't actually read much of the article. As soon as they started giving details of where the actors were on the set I went to the bottom to find the button that took me back to the article list and saw my URL and site name! I only went there in the first place to copy the article to read tomorrow AM. It is the one where they quote Fury right??
Yes it does contain the now 'notorious' Fury quotes:) I think you'll find it a very interesting article though more 'spoilery' than seems wise to me... which is probably what led to all the 'fake interview speculation'. Fake or not the plug for your site made me 1) very happy and 2) got me to thinking about what exactly the article was designed to do...

Things that make you go hmmmmm.

"Allright this has been bothering me for a long time. How could a few monks be able to think up 14 years worth of memories and physical evidence for the key's human form? Even if there were thousands and thousands of monks it would still be impossible to do because of how complex and unpredictable life is (especially on top of a hellmouth) and how many people it would affect. The only way I think "making" Dawn's life could work would be if they went back in time and took the moment when Joyce first became aware that she was having another child and use that as the "seed" for some kind of alternate-dimension spell to generate the momories needed for everyone who would be invloved with the slayer's "little sister" put together Dawn's room and belongings and then use another spell to tie together all the loose ends. For instance in the memory-verse from the first spell Dawn learns to ride a bike and falls over so the monks put a bike in the garage and the loose-ends spell puts a scar on dawn's knee.

If that's true wouldn't the "fake" memories everyone has be just as good as the real thing? And wouldn't Dawn really and truly be Buffy's little sister in every way except genetically? "
I always thought the monks' spell was like a computer program that used a template to create a data group. The data being the existing memories of the people who lived the current time line. It may still be a work in progress because you don't remember all of your memories at once. Of course she did have those diaries ... hmmm.

If they time-traveled Dawn into the past she'd be 14 years old not 6 months.

We are indeed the result of our memories and I think yes Dawn's 'fake' memories are just as good. Especially if everyone around her remembers them too.
We are indeed the result of our memories and I think yes Dawn's 'fake' memories are just as good. Especially if everyone around her remembers them too.

I suspect that if the memories were examined extremely closely there would be some inconsistencies. Certainly I believe that Spike at least must be confused about why he never thought to use Dawn in a scheme of his. Although one of things about memories is that not everyone remembers the same thing in the same way so a few inconsistencies might go unnoticed.

What I find intriguing is the apparent lack of inconsistency regarding people's memories of Dawn. Clearly the 'real memories' the SG had had to be altered so that the 'new implanted memories' made sense. How is it that no one feels violated by this little trick? I mean their realities and perceptions are irrevocably altered too.

And let me just throw this little tidbit into the mix once again: We *still* haven't had any contact between LA and Sunnydale. Maybe Dawn hasn't risen in LA yet?

As to whether Dawn's life really happened I wondered that myself especially when I saw all those diaries spread across her bed. Somehow the diaries made her non-life seem tangible. But like the fake-Swami said Angel could see his reflection in the people around him so can Dawn. She exists because she and those around her share the knowledge and memories of her existence.
"A couple of weeks ago I was reading in the newspaper about a German woman who had come to the United States to meet a convicted serial killer in prison. She had seen him on TV in Germany as a model in a commercial for a clothing line. Let me restate that for emphasis. The commercial had used convicted American serial killers currently serving time to attract buyers to their clothing line.

I personally can't think of anything more tasteless than that commercial but whoever thought up the idea must have a keen insight to some part of the human psyche. I don't even want to get into the whole blame thing about a commercial like that only being possible in Germany since American women have been falling for convicted killers for generations. Ted Bundy received tons of letters from women up to his execution.

The German woman did meet with her convicted killer and they are now "in love." She believes that he is a changed man and that anyone with his eyes couldn't possibly still be evil. I'm sure she helps him relieve the tedium of prison life but I have no idea as to his current state of "grace" or for that matter his real feelings for this woman. I don't think he has any chance of parole but they hope to marry.

Well it looks to me as though something very similar has occurred on BtVS. Many of us have fallen prey to the seduction of another serial killer the character known as Spike. Every so often an actor in this case James Marsters does his job so well that the audience can't get enough of him. We are so fascinated by his voice his mannerisms and his personal appearance that we even want him to possess the star of the show Buffy. The fact that he is a vampire and she the vampire slayer only adds to the fascination. Anything less than full involvement with the Slayer would relegate Spike to a minor character and many of us want him to have more airtime.

We create various excuses or scenarios that would make it possible for Buffy and Spike to have a romantic relationship. Is it possible for a souless vampire to love? Can Spike be redeemed? Will Buffy be able to overcome her instincts and give that peroxided hottie a break?

Well I don't think that is the intention of the writers although they would be smart to play it as a possibility for as long as possible. From everything I've read it was never the intention of the creator Joss Whedon to have Spike win & keep Buffy's heart. The vampire seems to be able to read Buffy better than any one else because he is just that good a predator. Right now he has a chip that prevents him from killing anyone human.

It's kind of like that American serial killer I mentioned earlier. Those prison walls restrain him from doing what he would really like to be doing as well as giving his German sweetie the opportunity to see his beautiful eyes in relative safety.

Will I tune in next Tuesday to watch Buffy & Spike do their dance? I wouldn't miss it.

the dancer from the dance!

Buffy and Spike are dancing around something. It could be love; it could be death.

Spike is smitten with the idea of love and it is virtually impossible not to find *that* an endearing quality. But Spike seems just as committed to 'killing things' as he ever was. I noticed when reading the shooting script for Blood Ties that they cut some of his lines about still needing to hunt and kill things...

I have some problems with the serial killer analogy and vampires though because it assumes that vampires are human. A human who kills other humans is a serial killer but it is in a vampire's nature is to kill humans to feed. Therein lies a difference I can't really find the words to explain.

Of course Spike does not make human-like moral choices. He's a vampire. With his chip he is learning to mimic moral choices and to look at things from the perspective of others. It is artificial conditioning.

It must be very confusing to be Spike at this time and I think most of us can relate to his generalised confusion about love and life. Spike's fascinating because of all the characters in the Buffyverse his world offers the most opportunity for change (for good or for bad) in the most entertaining package.

As I was just going to point out--though you did a better job than I could Aquitaine--Vampires and serial killers are very different though we as humans seem to have the same sort of attraction to both. I was watching The Silence of the Lambs last night and couldn't help thinking Hannibal Lecter scary...yet o so cool at the same time...it's in all of our natures to want a little monster in our man/woman not just Buffy's because she's the slayer. I think we all fell for Angel before Buffy did nevermind he's a vampire but I hate people using his having a soul as an excuse because it really makes no difference. I look at Spike and Angel equally they both have a shot at redemption though whether they reach it is up to them-and Joss ofcourse.
" nevermind he's a vampire but I hate people using his having a soul as an excuse because it really makes no difference.

Sorry i'm compelled to add my take again -
In the buffyverse the soul does seem to be a conscience and the defining essence of who we are. Angel is a dead unrotted human body with a demon soul and vampire/demon power that had the human thrown back into it as the dominant being. It has the memories of it's pure vampire existence and we are also the sum of our memories. Angel is a different person in the growth of personality way from Liam and that his mind is a human mind contaminated by the dark impulses that are the demon part's attempts to resurface and control. An urge to be evil but repulsed and horrified at the same time; a human trapped in a demon's existence. I remember that a soul doesn't guarentee being good but for the human Liam he was at least opposed to evil deep down. I don't see Angel as responsible. And assuming a "christian" universe I don't see the human part as being cupable to the sins of the vampire.

Redemption.....well i don't think Spike is not given as much of a chance as Angel. Can a demon"soul" reform? What's the nature of evil?
Too much..........urgg"
same here but i guess in the end that's up to Joss
"I think the point that some of us are missing is not that Dalwes is calling Spike a serial killer but rather rather that s/he is comparing this German woman's fascination with/romanticization of an American serial killer to BtVS fans' fascination with/romanticization of Spike-the-character/James-Marsters-the-actor. Whether we are fascinated by the character of Spike or appreciate JM's acting (or both) many of us have slipped into a romantic (see definition below) view of Spike overlooking to a certain extent that he *is* a vampire. And the only reason he is not out killing drinking blood causing mayhem and generally making a really big nuisance of himself is because he has a chip in his head (presumably) that will not allow him to harm humans.

romantic -
Marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic adventurous remote mysterious or idealized.

If BtVS and A:tS were not so well written and acted would we have such an emotional investment in the characters and how they interact with each other?? We identify/empathize with these characters. To some extent we fantasize/romanticize about the actors who have given us these characters. Some may argue that these characters are written strongly enough that any good actor could play them. Possibly. But can you imagine "Indiana Jones" played not by Harrison Ford but by Tom Selleck (Lucas and Speilberg's first choice for the role)? The actor brings something of himself to the role either consciously or not making the character his/hers such that we could not conceive of another actor in the role. So our attraction/appreciation for the actor colors how we feel about the character they play.

All of this may have to do with our "need" to see the good in another human being - or even a vampire a monster that appears human. Despite how cynical some of us can get we all still want to see the good in others. Sometimes this "good" is based on truth and sometimes it is based on a romantic view of the person or situation. I'm not saying that either way is right or wrong. It is just a human tendency that we must see for what it is and deal with it as best we can. "
"As to how we romanticize the characters in BtVS and A:tS:

On this board alone we have:
* Offered up chocolate-covered (with or without sprinkles) versions of our favorite characters.
* Offered to let Riley swap psychotherapy sessions for housework (and offered to swap Riley himself!).
* Offered to make Angel "cheerful."
* Considered canonizing Spike and/or James Marsters.

Granted all or most of this has all been good clean naughty fun. But it shows the depth of emotional investment we have with these shows and their characters. I venture to say that a goodly number of us who post regularly on this board are in the over-30 demographic. You'd think we'd know better!! ;-) We're not just silly schoolgirls/boys pining for the lastest cutie served up by the Hollywood promotion machine. We have made an investment (of time emotions thoughts etc.) in these shows and want to continue believing in the characters portrayed on them.
Guilty as charged purplegrrl. LOL.

And now not only am I exposed as a hopeless romantic and a character dipper/swapper I was also caught cackling unbecomingly at work while I read your post surreptitiously:)

Work at home so no surreptiousness involved. Just unbecoming cackling.
Purplegrrl - How right you are. Many years ago I used to watch a certain set of soap operas. Occasionally when one of the lead actors was sick. etc there would be a substitute in the role. The character was different and I felt cheated. I taught acting for years and used to tell my students this formula:
the role multiplied by the actor equals the character. So RxA=C. The equation is always unique. Different actors bring different qualities to the role. Think how many different actors have played Hamlet in the last 20 years and how different each character appeared. Our thoughts about Spike would be quite different if it were to be played by another actor rather than James Marsters. No matter how good the written word it is the actor who brings those words to life.
What is nice about BtVS is that there are so many good ones.

There has been quite a lot of debate on this board about the Watchers Council particularly as to whether
or not the motives of those within it are benevolent or primarily ones of self-interest. At the moment it
seems that Our Heroine has the upper hand with the WC but of course they could just be playing along
until they get the chance to restore the balance of power in their favor.

What me paranoid? You betcha! In my humble opinion itís generally a good idea to have at least a *little*
paranoia in oneís life it keeps your senses on edge just enough to prevent your getting burned by various
and sundry individuals/organizations who may not have your best interests at heart.

Of course you have to know where to draw the line. This morning on the way to an installation job I
stopped at a mini-market to get some coffee and a danish. Most of the clerks in these places tend toward
the grumpy side which I probably would be too if I had to work in some place where the wages are low
the lights are flourescent and the chances of armed robbery are high. But the lady in this mart was not only
not bummed out she was positively cheerful. And friendly. So friendly in fact that as I strolled out of the
store I found myself wondering what she was up to!

Ah yes. Paranoia...

...and there has never been a better film made about paranoia than this weeks classic film *The
Conversation* written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Starring the great Gene Hackman this 1974
release is now available on DVD in the original widescreeen presentation and with a commentary track
both by the director himself and also film editor Walter Murch.

Hackman plays a surveillance specialist Harry Caul one of the best in the business. He takes a job that
involves investigating and collecting evidence on a young couple who are planning... what? Neither the
viewer nor Harry knows at first but as the plot develops Harry begins to lose his professional detachment
and become more and more involved-- and more and more paranoid. Everything builds (or unravels?) until
the question finally becomes who is the most damaged by all this-- Harry or the people he was hired to spy

The final scene which takes place in Harryís apartment is one of those ëperfect momentsí in cinema.
Released in between *The Godfather* and *The Godfather Part II* few people got to see this film but
anyone who has will certainly remember it.

* * * * * * *

Next week-- Are they zombies? Aliens? Evil government agents? Who knows? But theyíre taking over the
world (again???!!!) and itís up to one ex-wrestler type to save us all in this much-better-than-youíd-expect
B-movie classic. Stay tuned!

E Pluribus Cinema Unum

"Not to mention that "The Conversation" stars a very young Cindy Williams and Harrison Ford as the couple that Gene Hackman is tailing.

Interesting movie. A character study rather than an action film. Has a definate 1960s-paranoia/big-brother-is-watching sort of feel to it.

Hey OnM. No fair looking at the TV Guide to pick your Movie of the Week - I think this one was on AMC over the weekend. ;-)"
purplegirl it was Frederic Forrest who was walking around in circles in that park with Cindy Williams. Harrison Ford played the assistant to the rich and powerful executive that supposedly had hired Harry Caul.
Sorry it's been a while since I've seen the movie. Thanks for the correction.

I *knew* Harrison was in there somewhere!!!
Until you mentioned I had forgotten Harrison was in it. But I knew he wasn't the one walking in circles.
Ahh there goes that synchronicity thing again! Actually I had picked this film as my second posting before I had even finished my first so either I am being possessed by the Caritas demon or else AMC is reading this board! ;)

Was this the first time you've seen the film? One thing nice about AMC is that they usually letterbox the film and while on some flicks this doesn't make a huge difference FFC did use the whole frame very effectively in *The Conversation*.

(I know that some folks don't like this technique especially if they have a smallish TV screen but it is one of the few things I am kind of picky about. I still owe a great debt of thanks to Siskel & Ebert many years back for turning me on to the way films were being butchered just to 'fit' on a standard squarish-shaped TV screen.)

(Rant over now! ;)

So if Joyce is the cast member who leaves (dies) will it be by natural causes or because she is some part of the Glory-Ben equation? If that is the case will Buffy be forced to destroy her to protect Dawn? I shutter to think of her emotional state if this happens. There are links and parallels between BtVS and Angel.
Will Buffy join Angel on the dark path to retribution and/or redemption?
"There was a cartoon in the newspaper here yesterday that proves that Buffy/Angel fans are everywhere.

The cartoon went like this:
Two men obviously down on their luck are sitting on the ground next to a brick wall surrounded by junk and trash. One man says to the other "I was a wealthy divorce lawyer until a gypsy put a curse on me and gave me a conscience."

I'm at work just dying to answer some of today's posts but I am doomed to the tedium of work instructions...

The fact that it's a lawyer... Cackling unbecomingly. Must sign off now.

One of the stranger things I noticed during this week's Buffy and Angel episode was on a Pepsi commercial. It was set on a subway train. A homeless man held a sign which concerned the Nag Hammadi Library and the Jung Codex. Those were Gnostic texts found in Egypt back in the 1940s. (I've studied Gnosticism in some depth.) The sign is easy to miss. In order to read it I had to use the freeze-frame on my VCR.

Gnosticism has become fairly well-known and would fit into the Buffyverse but I hadn't expected to see it mentioned in a soft-drink commercial. The movie _The Matrix_ is very Gnostic in outlook and I've read that Joss Whedon loves it.

The commercials shown during Buffy and Angel are somewhat off-topic but this was weird enough the warrent a post. This year 2001 is Post-Millennially Weird except for vampires for whom it is Post-Terminally Weird.
"In "Blood Ties " there is more evidence that the Knights of Byzantium are actually Christian. They pray to "God": "The Key is the link. The link must be severed. Such is the will of God." As they pray they hold their swords as crosses. Confusing matters theologically the "god" Glory and her minions break up their prayer circle.

Religion in the Buffyverse is complex.

It probably wasn't intentional but the name "Knights of Byzantium" could indicate either Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Within the Roman church there is the "Byzantine Rite " which uses the Eastern Orthodox liturgy and other customs but is also under the Pope and agrees with the Western church on such theological matters as the filioque."
"When the Watchers Council told Buffy that Glory was a god they didn't say of what of who or of where. The spoilers I've read say that Glory is a demi-god of Hell.

In the Buffyverse there is a "rich pantheon" of gods goddesses and beliefs not adhering to any one world view. Personally I think that's what makes it interesting - there is a little something for everyone not matter who you are or what you believe in or how your world goes around.

Do the Knights of Byzantium know that Glory is a god or just that she is evil and must be destroyed? Since they believe so fervently in their own god I suspect that they view Glory as a demon devil or other evil entity - since recognizing her as a god would conflict with their world view.

Personally I think the Knights of Byzantium are a cross between the knights of the Crusades (Knights Templar Knights of St. John etc.) and the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword from "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" (note the similarity of each group having an identifying tatoo). The name "Byzantium" sounds exotic and vaguely church-like therefore a good choice for a group crusading knights looking to battle evil to glorify their god."
I'd guess that the Knights would likely consider Glory to be a devil. The way they refer to 'god' clearly suggest to me that they are monotheistic and so would never consider Glory to have true 'god' status.

In Christian theology after all Satan was cast out of heaven but he was never considered a god. (There is only one or three-in-one depending on your interpretation of the 'Trinity' concept.) Satan is very commonly referred to as the 'anti-Christ' but reaching waaaayyyy back to my Sunday school lessons I remember the nuns stating that Satan's powers were always inferior to Christ's.

Glory kind of follows in the tradition of taunting believers in (whatever) god that 'how come he/she isn't saving you?' therefore supposedly proving their godhood status.
Okay okay. Maybe not Aquitaine induced but she did bring up the question that is threatening to drive me bonkers. IS there a chip?

I have only seen one episode from seasons 1-3 so all my impressions of the characters are from the way they act in seasons 4 and 5. Aside from the fact that a trip to Blockbuster is in order I have been diligently searching the net for shooting scripts and episode guides to try and get an idea of what Spike was like before he got chipped.

Questions my search has brought up. At what point does Spike make the change from deadly enemy to uneasy ally? Does Dru dump him because of what she sees in the future or because she is hurt he doesnt share her desire to destroy the world? Did she think she could cause him to be obsessed with Buffy if she told him he was? Does she do this hoping to hurt him back?

Why didn't Buffy kill Spike in 'Harsh Light of Day'? Knowing he would go to those lengths why did she let him get away?

When spike wakes up from -the dream- why doesn't he just assume it was a nightmare? Why does he accept that it was showing his true feelings?

and finally (grin) Why did they try to drug Spike after they installed the chip? What were planning to do to him? Why wasn't there an override or control built into the chip? Why were they so motivated to get him back? Was it just because he knew of them or did they still consider him a danger?

Please help so I can sleep again. :)
"I'll do my best to answer some of your questions.

>>Questions my search has brought up. At what point does Spike make the change from deadly enemy to uneasy ally?

The first time Spike made such a transition was near the end of season 2...I believe the ep was Becoming pt.1. Angelus was planning on giving the entire world a trip to hell and Spike allied himself with Buffy to counter this threat. After all Spike likes the world...something about dog races and happy meals with legs.

>>Does Dru dump him because of what she sees in the future or because she is hurt he doesnt share her desire to destroy the world? Did she think she could cause him to be obsessed with Buffy if she told him he was? Does she do this hoping to hurt him back?

My impression is that Spike's obsession with Buffy was fated and that Dru could see that in his aura. She is pretty psychic. She dumped him because of it.

>>Why didn't Buffy kill Spike in 'Harsh Light of Day'? Knowing he would go to those lengths why did she let him get away?

Good question. My best guess is poor judgement. Buffy was under considerable emotional strain from being played by Parker and before Buffy managed to take the Gem from him Spike gave her some first rate beatdown. Another possibility is that she didn't want to risk the Gem falling back into Spike's hands.

>>When spike wakes up from -the dream- why doesn't he just assume it was a nightmare? Why does he accept that it was showing his true feelings?

This wasn't merely a picture show for Spike...he actually felt love for Buffy. You can feel emotions in your dreams...fear love guilt etc. He knew that it was true when he awoke. At the same time he wasn't ready to accept it yet. In "Fool for Love" Spike set forth to kill Buffy and I think he was more surprised than anyone how much seeing her tears affected him.

>>and finally (grin) Why did they try to drug Spike after they installed the chip?

Spike shoved around scientists and Willow after being chipped...it wasn't until he tried to feed on Willow that the chip took effect. The scientists probably knew that he was still dangerous.

>>What were planning to do to him? Why wasn't there an override or control built into the chip? Why were they so motivated to get him back? Was it just because he knew of them or did they still consider him a danger?

They didn't consider him a danger. (foolishly) However he was a prototype and an experiment. Probably a very costly one. With him running amok in Sunnydale they're missing out on their valued research data.

There can be only one purpose to the experiment. Chipped Hostiles (a la Spike) can not harm humans in any way but they can beat maim and kill demonoids. Seems to me that it was part of the Initiative agenda to harness the sub-t's as a weapon.

>>Please help so I can sleep again. :)

Hope that helped. If not try some warm milk.

"Jolly's post covered things very well but another thing to keep in mind if you have only seen recent seasons is that Spike has *always* been atypical as a vampire one reason I personally find it so puzzling that some fans find his most recent behavior so 'impossible' for a vampire.

As to why Spike would be both so terrified of and yet accepting of as 'truth' that he would be in love with Buffy is based on the famous "I'm love's bitch and I'm man enough to admit it" speech. Just like Dru has her visions Spike seems to have an inner awareness when it come to human emotions even though he's technically a vamp. So if he feels that it's 'real' he won't try to deny it even if it's something he's not especially happy about. It's this same 'gift' that allows him to manipulate others to his benefit so easily.

This explanation's a little clunky sorry but I think you can get the gist of it.

Someone commented a little while back on whether Riley had somehow 'passed the torch' to Spike as far as Buffy was concerned just in a kind of plastic-stake-through-the-heart sort of way. As we know Riley played the part of the 'Salesman' in 'Restless' (a rather clueless one maybe?)

Salesmen are sometimes characterized as manipulating people for their own needs. Is the 'Death of a Salesman' now referring to Spike and whether or not he will stop manipulating and start treating Buffy in a more honest selfless fashion?

I know I'm reaching but hey 'Restless' does that to you! ;)"
"I have to disagree that Spike is "atypical." Over the years we've seen a lot of "red shirt" vampires and minion buffoons but only a few that we really got to know well. And each one has had a very unique personality. The overriding similarity seems to be that they're really a fun loving bunch in a "we like to kill maime and generally cause as much havoc as possible" way.

I really do think the chip exists. We saw one physically when Riley pulled his out of his chest. Excuse me while I pause to say Ewww!"
"But we don't really know that much about the chip's functions other than giving Spike a whopping headache when he tries to hurt something human. And does it come with an un-lifetime guarentee?

BTW Riley was "Cowboy Guy" in the play. He was looking for "a man. A Sales-man." Now if we apply the characteristics of a salesman to Spike and we add the dead darkly clothed figure on the floor that Harmony was crying over what do we get? I have no idea but I'm sure it's something important.

Back to Spike's not being atypical. The whole ending the world thing mostly seems to be a priority for the other demons. The ambitions of vampires seems to run more in the wanting to rule the world category. Or at least thier little corner of it. Although I'm not quite clear on why the Master wanted to open the Hellmouth in the first place. Think Trick Sunday Dracula and even Darla. So Spike's attitudes seem to fit right in with the average havoc wreaking wanna be the big honcho in town type of not so dumb vampire. The chip hasn't really changed that just put a big dent in his ability to accomplish it. So he allies himself with whoever he thinks can.

"*** "BTW Riley was "Cowboy Guy" in the play. He was looking for "a man. A Sales-man." ***

Egad! You're right! I forgot that Riley was 'Cowboy Guy' not 'The Salesman'! So this would make even more sense if you figure Spike is the 'salesman' that he was 'looking for'!

Darn it now I'm going to have to watch *Restless* again! ;)"
"We talked a bit about Riley and "Cowboy Guy" and the dead "Salesman" a while back. The thread was called "Thoughts about Riley...and Buffy (long post)" It was the beginning of January and it's about 13 pages back but it's still there.

Not that we can't discuss it here too. These are interesting ideas."
"So sorry my theory was insomnia inducing... Welcome to the land of TtM (thinking too much)! I pretty much agree with most of Jolly's answers to your questions. I'm only a bit fuzzy on Drusilla's motives no surprise there! Can Dru really see far into the future? It seems she is more in tune with proximate things and vibes. I don't think that she was seeing into the future when she said Buffy was all around Spike. IMO she was aware of Spike's subconscious leanings at the time.

I *definitely* don't agree that Spike is just a typical vampire. Whether it is JMs performance or the material they write for Spike he's just not 'ordinary' in any way and the fact that his insights into Buffy's behaviour are so dead on just amplifies that fact.

"What Spike was like before he got chipped"

I have come to the conclusion that he was pretty much exactly the same except once in a while we got to see him kill something. I say 'something'
because despite a whole lot of effort we didn't really get to see him 'chow down' on too many humans. Even before getting the chip (or should I say pre-Initiative tampering) he seemed quite as happy doing away with demons or other vampires who happened to annoy him. Also numerous times he was easily distracted from killing Buffy on very flimsy pretexts. He has always seemed more than a little impressed with her with her fighting style with the fact that she has family and friends... Spike seemed to prefer interacting with humans even then. Right from the start in Season 2 he is shown as
being ruled more by his human-like whims than by his bloodlust. For example when he kills the New York Slayer he doesn't even bother to drink from her. Something else is up with him. Too bad there is no prophecy to explain Spike to us...

I don't know if you read my rather rambling posts above but just in case...

When I said I don't think Spike is an atypical vampire I didn't mean he was your average run of the mill vampire either. Just that his behavior is not particularly un-vampirelike. He is certainly a very unique individual as are all the major vampires we have come to know on BtVS. I've proposed in earlier threads that this is due to the absorption of the orginal personality and possibly more. The more interesting the original the more interesting the resulting vampire. Spike is a really good expample of this.

I agree the chip didn't change who he was just his activity level
"From the David Fury interview:
"But one wonders looking at Spike's little Buffy shrine (complete with photos drawings Hershey Kisses and stolen lingerie) how much of William still exists? "That's a good question " says Fury. "We've talked about that as well. We feel like there's a ghost of the person you once were inside them -- a philosophical ghost not an actual spirit. It is in fact a demon but the demon is infused with some of the characteristics of the people that they possess."

It looks like at least one writer agrees with your Vampire personality hypothesis -- a demon animating the body plus fragments of the original victim making up the personality.
Don't read any further if you don't want to know who dies in episode 16...
BC and S confirmed today that it's Joyce who will die(not just leave) in episode 16. Anyone want to speculate on the ramifications of this for both Buffy and Dawn?
"Well I personally think that it could lead into Buffy being very protective of Dawn... but in the long term it could lead to the "dark side" of Buffy which was supposed to come out this season. I think (if they're still going to go with "DarkBuffy") it will start to come about late this season leading into next season. I can especially see this happening if Dawn is destroyed in the fight against Glory or whoever the Big Bad is at the end of the season. It would be like the end of s2 - a darker ending with not much of a positive future (in contrast to "The Future Is Ouors!" at the end of s3). As much as I love Joyce and will hate to see her go I think it could move the storyline in wonderful places. Joyce dies. Dawn dies. Buffy gets in touch with her darker side demons are rampaging throughout Sunnydale because the Slayer's not doing her duty... it would be absolutely amazing. I don't wanna see Joyce go but the consequences could make for some amazing storylines. And I've always thought that the best way to improve on a god as the enemt is to have one of the core Scoobies go dark of their own free will. Back to some of the angst the we haven't really seen all that much of the past couple of years.

RIP Joyce.

On a different note though wasn't KS contracted for 16 episodes? Is she going to truly die and stay dead or just "leave" as the spoilers say? Ormaybe there'll be flashbacks or a ghost or something... I don't know. Anyway as much as I try to stop myself from being spoiled and as much as I like Joyce this is going to be one heck of a storyline. Season 5 is shaping up as something truly amazing. There hasn't been a death of a major character for a long time - it will certainly shake them up. I think they've become rather complacent (although it's all changing now with Glory being a god and all).

I just realised something - yet another possible romantic interest for Giles is going to die. Poor guy. I hope he gets back together with Olivia sometime."
They decided to reveal that Joyce is going to die in The Body because they fear that viewers will be upset by Buffy 'rejecting' Spike in Crush and want viewers to feel 'advanced' sympathy for Buffy? The timing seems very strange. Methinks Spike's popularity has created quite an interesting problem for BtVS... The blatant irony and misrepresentation of the A Buffy Valentine promo is quite delicious. Talk about a Sales-man 'ship!

I'm also going to forego the wildfeed this week even if I had to pay someone to tie me down from Sunday to Wednesday. LOL.

"when dawn ran away that night...she was at some sort of playground. and then she was all having flashbacks of her "memories" with buffy. and there was this one flashback that showed two girls playing on the swings one older than the other and i inferred that it was buffy and dawn.

buffy didn't move to sunnydale until she was sixteen right? but in Dawn's flashback the older girl pushing the swing--which again i inferred as buffy looked SO much YOUNGER than sixteen! what's up with that..."
I haven't seen the episode so I'm going by the shooting script. If I remember correctly the script said that Dawn was ten in the flashback... which would make Buffy sixteen. Maybe they should have just used SMG to play this particular sixteen-year-old Buffy - after all she played sixteen-year old Buffy when she was about twenty a few more years wouldn't make much more difference. ;)
And that playground scene... seems to come directly from Xander's dream! First time we see one at least!
Wow! I didn't think of that! Man I love Restless.

Damn Australian delayed s5... I really wanna see.... *pouts*
"Just because Dawn was in a Sunnydale park when she experienced the memory doesn't mean the incident "took place" in Sunnydale. (Although with Dawn/spell/memories this gets a little tricky.) The visual stimulation of seeing a swingset made Dawn remember a time when she was considerably younger and Buffy was pushing her on a swingset."
I vaguely remember after watching last night's show after Tara and Willow transported Glory somewhere else and Buffy ran to Dawn when Dawn mentioned Ben being there and then Glory showed up and she said she didn't *remember* what happened to him or where he went. I'm wondering did she actually forget this or was she covering up the fact that Glory took over Ben's body. Her expression seemed as if she actually couldn't remember. I wonder if that whole Ben/Glory body exchange affected Dawn somehow in a way that she is unaware of. Maybe that body exchange or the presence of both gods (or all 3 gods) affects her human state. I don't know. I haven't ever posted anything but it's been bugging me.
In the shooting script for the episode it's clear that she was affected somehow so that she doesn't remember Ben morphing into Glory. They don't make that clear in this ep though.
Wow! You must have been typing that as I was typing my little theory. But affected by what? Hmmm
"I too found that little bit very intriguing. At first she suddenly remembered Ben and was very concerned with what had happened to him. Then it seemed she had second thoughts about revealing the truth. It did seem she was deliberately holding back. I thought perhaps she wants to think it out get it clear in her head before she reveals what happened. Or perhaps she thought "Aha! Now I know stuff they don't know." But then like you I saw her expression change. She seemed genuinly confused. Maybe the memory was beginning to slip. Or maybe there is a quality about Ben that induces some sort of amnesia. Or maybe and this is my favorite there is something in Dawn/the Key's nature that compells her to protect Ben. It would explain why she started to talk but them suddenly changed her story. And that perplexed look on her face. Maybe even she didn't understand why she wasn't telling the truth. It will be interesting to see how much of what Glory told her gets to Buffy "
Just wondering if anybody has any idea about that.
Of course he had a soul. Soull-less persons are not in the habit of dying to save countless innocent lives. 'Sides he loved Cordy and I believe that anything that can love has a soul.

And the last bit of that was a shameless paraphrase from what show?
So you like Andromeda too eh?

Of course he did. It was from his Mother's side.
Has anyone noticed that Doyle was just POOF forgotten? Since Angel's been all broody with a lot of time to think... and think... do you think Doyle was crossed his mind? For one of his only friends he's had since the Scooby Gang he sure hasn't depressed the least bit over him since Wesley pranced into the picture. I miss Doyle!
Alas you're right. Doyle seems to have gone to that great TV Valhalla--right up there with the infamous older brother on Happy Days.

Which is unusual considering that characters tend to reappear so often in the Buffy/Angelverse. Perhaps there's still hope...

You gotta love a man who can look like a rose bush at will!
"The reason i was wondering is that apparently all the "demons" on earth are really tainted by Humanity. So does that mean that all Demons have souls and doesnt that make killing them murder?"
If you've read some of my other posts you know I think there's evidence in the text that demons do have souls whatever they are. I think in the Buffyverse there are different types of souls; human souls demon souls and who knows maybe even energy matrix souls.

As for is it murder to kill a demon just like killing a human it depends on the perspective. Is it an evil being killing an innocent or at least well meaning one? Or is it the good guy killing a villain?
"What's up with Anne's saying "I'm not naive" to Lindsey in reference to the existence of supernatural creatures. And now the Karaoke bar owner's comment "We don't get many of your kind here." Then thinking back Buffy's whole graduating class knew that Buffy was fighting monsters and demons even before the mayor tried to eat them. The government and the military (or portions of it) obviously know. It would seem like the existence of demons and vampires is either a big open secret or just an unspoken fact of life in Joss's world. Very odd. But then again lots of horrific or just awkward stuff goes on in the real world that we just don't talk about or acknowledge in polite company unless we have to.

In Anne Rice's novels for instance (especially the Vampire Lestat) she draws parallels between the vampire community and the formerly underground gay community. I wonder if in Joss's world there will be a demon liberation movement? Equal rights for the undead affirmative action for demons the "coming out" as it were of the supernatural community. It certainly seems as though it's going that way at times. Of course there are big differences here. Racial sexual ethnic and religious minorities are not out to drink blood and bring about the apocalypse (though mainstream cultures have often depicted minorities of having these traits).

At the end of season four of Buffy the government committee seemed to be concerned about keeping the existene of "subterrestrials" a secert. It certainly seems to be a moot point though if even karaoke club owners in LA know about them (or was that just a commentary on the owners and clientele of karaoke bars?) Having been made to sing in one once (I actually chose Scarborough Faire - ouch!) I would agree that there is something demonic about them. "
Perhaps these bars are the seedy underside of LA or Sunnydale and if you are a barfly you might just think it's the alcohol giving a good high? That is the only explanation I could think of on seeing demons and vampires.
Joss's world is something parallel to our world and it's an interesting view point. I don't truly understand it but then I don't want to. It's pure enjoyment on my part and I don't want to dwell too much on it. I may end up with a mighty migraine.
"One reason I ask the question is a street-wise cop like Kate had never seen these creatures before Angel and Penn and the other demons who popped up after that. Many characters like Kate think of their world much the way many think of our world--they don't believe in the supernatural.

Now maybe we get the wrong impression of how plentiful demons and magic are because the people we view this universe through are the ones most invested in fighting the demons to protect the normal folk.

But when the Host stood in the university library in full view of everybody chatting with Angel I was just like will somebody please turn and look at him and say "fraternity prank?!"
"I can only speak for Anne here. We have seen her exposed to a couple of different types of demon on BtVS. Anne first shows up as a part of the vampire cult in 'Lie to Me' (BtVS Season 2) but there she is known as Chanterelle. We then see her in "Anne" (BtVS Season 3) but here she is known as Lily. So she has seen vampires and been in a demon dimension. Fortunately Buffy helped her get her life turned around and "Lily" took on Buffy's former identity of Anne."
"I think that in the Buffyverse demons have always been on earth to some degree but the amount of them has gone up and down through the centuries form various spells slayers hellmouths openeing and closing whatever.Right now they're on the increase. Also since Sunnydale is on a hellmouth and LA is well LA there are going to be a lot of demons running amok in southern California more than almost anywhere else in the world. So now the whole world has more or less gotten used to demons "not existing" because of there being very few of them many people will be in denial while on the other hand some people in the demon hotspots of the world are catching on to the existence of supernatural beings."
"There were a lot of things about Happy Anniversary that intrigued me but I'll start with Angel's comment to the Host that he had 100 years of evildoing that he can never atone for and 200 lawyers out to push him over the edge. Angel's predicament is a universal one according to most religions but I will (of course) look at it from a Buddhist angle.

In Buddhism it is said that if one collected all the tears we have shed in past lives it would fill an ocean. Likewise our past evil deeds (actually akusala = unwholesome) of body mouth and mind are said to be vast and uncountable. So the point is there is a heavy karmic debt which would take countless lifetimes to pay off. In addition to that whenever we do try to escape the wheel of karma (karma means the unfolding of our actions and their consequences it does NOT mean fate or destiny) and rebirth we immediately draw the attention of Mara and his seductive daughters and demonic armies. Mara is almost the Buddhist equivalent of the Devil but there is a difference. The Old Testament devil is the Perry Mason or prosecuting attorney of the heavenly court. The New Testament devil is the Che Guavera or cosmic rebel against heaven. Mara however is more like the cosmic jail warden who wants to make sure we don't escape the prison of karma and rebirth in the six realms (as a hell-dweller hungry ghost animal fighting demon human being or heavenly being). So from the Buddhist point of view we are also burdened with a karmic debt we can never pay off in this lifetime and belaugered by demonic forces who want to keep us from trying to free ourselves or atone for past wrongs.

Now here is the kicker though. During the Buddha's lifetime a serial killer named Angulimala was converted by the Buddha and became an Arhat - that is a saint who was free of rebirth and whose karmic debt was therefore considerably mitigated. Let me be more specific. Angulimala was a fanatical devotee of a false guru who demanded that he collect the finger bones of 100 victims. Angulimala had collected 99 but was having trouble catching his 100th. He was on the verge of going home to kill his own mother when he happened upon the Buddha. Now killing one's parent's or even harming (let alone killing) a Buddha are viewed as unpardonable crimes that will instantly lead to the deepest hell in the next life. He could not catch up to the Buddha though even though he was running and the Buddha was walking. Finally he called out "Stop! Stop!" The Buddha turned around and said "I stopped long ago. When will you stop?" By which he meant "I stopped creating karmic actions that will lead to rebirth whether good or bad. When will you?" Angulimala was deeply impressed and renounced his evil ways and became a monk right then. He soon attained insight into the true nature of things and became an arhat. Shortly thereafter the local Prince came looking to catch and kill Angulimala but the Buddha convinced the Prince that the serial killer was now a saint. The Prince then allowed Angulimala to continue to live as a monk out of respect for the Buddha's judgement. Soon after however an angry mob lynched Angulimala who forgave his attackers because he knew that he had brought this upon himself and that this was the last karmic effect that would come to him because he would not be reborn having severed with spiritual insight (vipassana) the clinging to actions and their results which bind one to the wheel of rebirth.

So the lesson here is that even a serial killer can escape his karmic debt if (and only if) he lets go of the "self" that accrued that debt through awakening to the selfless nature of things. One must repent not only of one's actions but even of the self that did them and the self that futilely seeks to atone for them. In Buddhism it is clinging to self that motivates all our greedy angry and deluded actions and on a subtler level it motivates our attempts at self-improvement and self-seeking efforts at salvation. Only letting go of the self completely will bring about liberation from the endless cycle of actions and their retributions. Once the delusion of self is let go of the reality of interdependence with all other beings and phenomena becomes clear and can become manifest in our actions.

So Angel has not reached this realization yet. He is still stuck on himself. He still thinks that he can save himself when what he really needs to do is let go of the self which is causing this predicament. He needs to awaken to that which is selfless. This selfless nature is at the same time the source of genuine compassion altrustic joy loving-kindness and equanimity as well as generosity virtue patience effort calm and wisdom. This realization of selflessness also puts one beyond the temptations and intimidations of Mara and his daughters and armies.

Here is a final thing that just occured to me. In some vampire lore a vampire can not cross a running stream. They are stuck as it were and can not enter living waters. In Buddhism however someone who has begun to actually live the Buddha Dharma and is on their way to full sainthood within 7 lifetimes is known as a "Stream Enterer." So it would seem that Angel is stuck on himself whether through giving in to his vampire nature or through wallowing in guilt and depression. What he needs to do is let go of that self-conception and "enter the stream."
"Thank you for your long and intriguing post.

To me what's being asked of Angel almost seems more Jewish (well the incessant guilt certainly is : ) the idea that the only way to really atone is through good deeds. In Judaism it's not enough to say "I'm sorry God I screwed up please forgive me." You need to go out and ask forgiveness from the person you injured and you may have to work a long time to earn that forgiveness.

Although that does brings up another question--most of his Vampire crimes were committed in Europe yet most of his good works are being done in America. There's no attempt to atone directly to the descendants (probably mostly collateral descendants) of his victims.

Unless I'm terribly misunderstanding it and my deepest apologies if I am the Buddhist story you describe sounds like many Christian stories where accepting Christ as a savior is enough to be redeemed. (With any number of denominational variations on whether or not you can then go straight to Heaven or have to spend several millennia in Purgatory.)

Similiarly in the Buddhist story--there's no this world atonement to the families of victims. From this western Jew's perspective that loss of self seems very selfish indeed. Once again I apologize that statement's not meant to be rude or provacative just a full admission of my incomprehension. I welcome your explaination. "
"I think you understood the story very well because you are asking the right questions.

In Buddhism one does not necessarily pay back one's karmic debts to those one has harmed in this lifetime but one may end up doing it in other lifetimes or in one's relationships with others. So the person I kill in this life may be my killer in the next. It does not always play out in such a tit-for-tat way. Similarly this idea could occur in a Kabbalistic perspective through the process of Gilgul (reincarnation).

The Budhist idea of liberation is very different from the Christian idea of salvation however. In Christianity one is saved from sin and death through reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ. In Buddhism one is liberated from delusion through attaining right views which allow one to vanquish the greed anger and ignorance which bind us to the wheel of birth and death.

Is this selfish? The Mahayana Buddhism (which is the camp I'm in) says yes it is and excoriates the goal of becoming an arhat and leaving the world behind as a Hinayana (Small Vehicle) goal because only one person is liberated. Mahayana (the Great Vehicle) teaches that the true meaning of no-self is that we are all interdependent and bound up with one another. In other words we're all in the same boat together and the seperation between self and other is delusional. So for one to be liberated all must be libarated. The bodhisattva who works to liberate all sentient beings and not just him or herself then becomes the ideal as opposed to the spiritually "selfish" arhat who is just looking to their own liberataion. The bodhisattva ideal of staying in the world indefinately to liberate all beings could be compared to the Kabbalistic idea of Tikkun (the restoration of the world).

The idea that one can atone through mitvot or good deeds is one that Buddhism would raise question about however. On one hand with a huge backlog of karma from innumerable past lives how could we ever presume to do enough good deeds to make it all right? In addition by trying to rely upon the self that has caused all the problems in the first place we actually dig ourselves in even deeper. So the idea is that by recognizing the selfless nature of things through right views we can then act in accord with reality and open ourselves up to that greater reality. Our finite efforts then merge with the infinite efforts or activities of all buddhas and bodhisattvas. So here again because there is no real seperation between self and other all our efforts become a huge pool of merit that is shared by all beings. The key to this might be - the less self-centered our actions (whether for good or evil) the more reality-centered we become and that reality is interdependent and therefore the locus of true compassion and loving-kindness. So in Buddhism right views transcends mere worldly ethics (based on dualism and the finite efforts of individuals). This true nature of reality then unfolds in people's lives as supremely loving and compassionate actions for the benefit of all beings. I would wonder if the Talmud or at least the Kabbalah does not also teach that there are levels of understanding Torah that transcend mere worldly ethics and the imperfect efforts of human beings. Perhaps the teachings relating to the Shekinah (presence of G-d) in respponse to mitzvot (good deeds) would be relevant here. Not being an expert in either of these I can not say.

Getting back to Angel I think that he is too wrapped up in *his* guilt and *his* own ability to make it up and he has forgotten that he is operating in a larger context than just his own problems and shortcomings. I think it was very telling when The Host told him that he had gone from helping the helpless to hunting the guilty. Angel has gotten off-track because when he was following the agenda (possibly the wiser big picture agenda) of TPTB he was regaining his humanity and atoning for his past evil (though not necessarily directly to those he harmed but at least he was working to help people and in a selfless interdependent universe that counts) but now he is setting his own short-sighted and self-absorbed agenda that is not as healthy and may have many unforseen destructive consequences both to himself and those around him. So from my point of view he needs to let go of himself and get back on track with the bigger picture that was being provided on a need to know basis by TPTB through Coredelia's visions (right view?). "
"Something I noticed in last nights ep was that in terms of body language mannerisms and speech habits Dawn seems to be acting more and more like Buffy. For example climbing out the window and upon meeting Spike give forth the pithy response "Lurk much?". This comment in particular struck me as very Buffy-like.

Later in the scene where Joyce and Buffy are arguing over how best to handle Dawn's new knowledge of her Key-ness (right before Dawn freaks and leaves the house) Buffy sounded awfully Joyce-like. Then even more Joyce-like when they burst in Dawn's room and discover the fire ("She could have burned the house down!")

(I know one of the scarier things that happens as you get older is that you start to recognize yourself acting and sounding like your parents! ;)

Anyone else see/hear the same and if so some other examples?"
"Hi OnM. Thanks for welcoming me the otherday on my reply to the pain of repeats. I came across this board quite by accident and soon became very impressed with the ideas and disscussions flying around. I like the way you all are able to see things and express yourselves without flying of the handle like other forums that can get quite nasty. There's alot of maturity here.

I'd like to reply to your observations. (My humble opinions) Yes the idea of getting older and becoming the parent is always a horrific idea. Although I think it happens to everybody in the sense of developing responsibility and acting on it. You're right in saying that Buffy was somewhat 'parent like' in her manerisms but it could as easily be her sense of protectiveness. I always saw my elder siblings as 'parentlike'.
I think though that Buffy's way of handling things is nothing like that of Joyces. I really like Joyce but she seems rather clueless to me most of the time. She tends to bury her head in the sand where Buffy's concerned and tends to want to fix things with with making food soup (i.e. for Dawn) or dinner followed by four course snacks (i.e in the episode after Anne. I forgot the name). I know its her way of offering comfort but Buffy's right. Some things you cannot force and fix by hugs and kisses. It takes time. I think Buffy knows this better than anyone. She's gone through so much trauma that she knows when to back of the onslaught. As for Dawn I'm not surprised that she's acting like Buffy. The are both willful and stubborn. It's also quite common for younger siblings to emmulate their older siblings too. O.K. this way way too babbly but I rushing it a bit to get off to College.

P.S. So in my twisted way of thinking is Dawn really Buffy's younger sister or way way older sister you know having existed "just this side of forever'? "
"Buffy's ability for compassion continues to grow with her growing maturity. She appears to see the bigger picture and have more ability to empathize with friends and family.

Her scene with Dawn when they were both wounded by Glory reminded me of a line from Spoon River Anthology by Edgar Lee Masters "Blood calls to blood." They share the same blood the same family no matter who the creator. Buffy has moved past Dawn as Key and sees and understands Dawn as sister.

Side note: During this tender scene I kept wonder what Spike was thinking with all this blood being tossed about. There was never an insert of his reaction so I all I can do is speculate. Does Spike's blood call out to Buffy's?

"This is a little off the subject of Buffy/Dawn/Joyce and more to Brian's -side note- of Spike.
Does anyone else find it interesting that Glory even referred to Spike as "boyfriend"? Didn't she say somehting like "Next time tell your boyfriend to..."? And the trailer for next week...WOW!!! Any thoughts?"
Spike was knocked out by Glory. She threw him against a wall right before Xanders crowbar entered the fight. He didn't get to see the blood flying.
"Some things you cannot force and fix by hugs and kisses.

Actually in this case Joyce was right and Buffy wrong.

They shouldn't have left Dawn alone for a second.

Dawn might have felt like she needed to be alone but the exact opposite was true. She needed to know she belonged.

Hugs and kisses might have not "solved" anything but it would have made things better. No matter how loud Dawn would have screamed they should have stayed there in her room right with her. Should have stayed there until she was too tired screaming and fell asleep and then stayed there until morning. There would be enough "alone" time later to process. This was "hugs and kisses time" and cookies and hot chocolate time to boot."
Is it possible the spell/ritual used by the monks to form the Key into Dawn used Buffy as a template? I think Dawn is more focused on mental pursuits than Buffy but they do share many similar traits. (including the conversation with Spike where she sounds like Buffy)

As an aside... Niblett? (rofl) My hubby and I didn't know whether it was cute or creepy for a vampire to call you a little food item.
"Is it possible the spell/ritual used by the monks to form the Key into Dawn used Buffy as a template?

I think the spell went even further. I am a believer in spells following the path of least resistance when particulars are not explicitly specified. I think it would be easier to steal a few of Buffy's memories and personality traits to create the new person than to manufacture entirely new memories which would certainly have affected (and required to be altered) existing memories. So when we see Dawn speaking about gathering sea shells with her father this could have been Buffy's memory transplanted into Dawn's mind with a simple name change. Perhaps Buffy is so much more mature because Dawn "inherited" most of the immaturity in the family. "
"This isn't necessarily an example of Buffy becoming more Joyce-like but definitely a sign of a new-found maturity which is kind of what you're talking about. When Buffy tells the SG about Dawn's identity and Willow gently chastises her Buffy starts to defend herself then stops and simply apologizes. That showed some personal growth. Even the whole idea in Checkpoint of Buffy whisking her family off to safety is generally something you would expect the "mom" to do. Buffy telling her mother the best strategy for how to handle Dawn is another example of their role reversal."
"Buffy's outfit (yeah I'm a real outfit fan LOL!) in BT in the first scene shows also a new side of her. Red and Gold... very mature look. More like a women and less like a girl.

Dawn and Spike also have this weird relationship. She's not afraid of him. She even competes in badness with him and obviously Skike follows her by saying "who's bad now?"( a weird and twisted contest!). Did anyone else found that Spike looked very mature in that episode too. Lots of frowns serious looks. He looked like a father to her (a surrogate father at least).

And what's with the cigarettes? He's been smoking so much in that episode as if they wanted to tell us: don't fool yourself...this guy is bad to the bones.LOL. Cigarettes in Buffy are smoked by bad persons (I guess it's their way to keep teens out of smoking) is it a way to tell us that next week something bad will happen? (a little out of subject here I grant you that!)"
"as for the smoking although Spike is frequently seen smoking(I'm guessing to alleviate the boredom as he spends countless hours outside Buffy's house LOL) I think in Blood Ties it was primarily used as a plot device to let Buffy know who helped Dawn break in the shop.

I agree Spike did seem somewhat more mature (although the "who's bad now" line was typical immature Spike) as he helped Dawn make sense of Giles' diary. I was a little disappointed that we didn't get to see what was said between them on the way home. Did he try and comfort her at all? He must have known that it would devastate her. "
Spike smokes so much now because of the chip. He can't kill so he smokes to alliviate his cravings. He definately seemed more mature especially when he blew up at Buffy. No more take out my anger on poor helpless Spike for Buffy. But I think that we paint Spike alot darker than he really is even when he first arrived in Sunnydale(School Hard)I never saw him as much of a threat. I fear her Druness I also revere her She loony creepy and E-Vil. But she's my fav. character. Spike's never been the Big Bad he cant fill those shoes anymore so he'll fill another. I guess it's just real easy for me to see Spike as a good guy I accept it.
Spike did seem to have a brother/sister or father/daughter relationship with Dawn. Was calling her nibblet a nickname or a threat?
"I saw "niblet" as an affectionate nickname especially since he used the same term when talking to Buffy. But it's funny how many of Spike's pet names have to do with food and/or drink: Niblet Pint-sized Sweetbreads just to name a few. I say you're nobody on the show until Spike has given you a nickname. :)"
I'm in Canada and Buffy isn't coming on before 7pm tonight... so I'm gonna go for something not spoilery! :)

There's been a discussion earlier on costumes and Buffy's cross around her neck. I'm interested in the color they choose when they dress Buffy! Wardrobe designers and prop masters always work closely with the director and there is usually a reason for choosing one outfit instead of the other.

The color white as made me wonder... Buffy is wearing white in Spike's dream in OomM and she's wearing white again when she asks him to take care of her mother and sister. Drusilla used to wear white when she first arrived with Spike in season 2 (until she changed for red)

White is the color of purity. White against black...maybe I'm rambling... but maybe there are other occurences that you've noticed about colors in Buffy!
White is a symbol of purity. But in the Buffyverse it may stand for innocence clarity of purpose light Good (as in Good vs. Evil).

Some of this color symbolism in the Buffyverse may be done consciously - vampires in black/dark colors Buffy in white/light colors. But I have a feeling that most of it is done subconsciously or unintentionally. And we are just reading more into it than is there! ;-)

I have several books on color symbolism. I'll try and do some research and get back to you.
Dru's white dress symbolized her weakend and vulnerable state at the time. I think Buffy wore white symbolically making herself vulnerable to Spike so that he would do what she asked.
"I know that when I read "Restless" script some details on the colors were very intriguing. First there is a description of the ball the kitten is playing with in Willow's dream. There is red and gold around (Glory wears red and gold dresses) then there and other mention of color: the dead man in the theater play is wearing a black suit. (Maybe it's Spike who will die at the end of the season...) It's just that when color is used in the script we can be sure that it means something!

But I do agree with you that we could see and dig way too much in these kind of matters! ;) "
Buffy also wore red in BT red with a gold and red scarf with a red cross (more crusades paraphenalia).

I also thought that Spike getting squished in the sarcophagus was a bit ominous and hopefully not premonitory.

On the whole I thought Buffy was made to look very mature in BT.

BTW. Does anyone know what item Spike pocketed from the countertop at the Magic Box?
Aquitine if you go to the Buffy shooting script site you can read the script for BT. They say it's a cristal (from memory!)
Oups! Sorry for the misspeling here!
"I kept trying to see what he pocketed. Thanks Nina.

I have a Restless color related costume idea. Buffy's wearing that white dress with the red cherries on it in her dream. I always thought the cherries looked like splatters of blood. That dress had a 4" crimson hem like Buffy's been standing in blood up to her knees and the stain is creeping upward.

Is the white supposed to be Good Innocence Justice and the Red stands for the Violence that she must do and also endure? (Implying that she can't do her job without getting the stains on her.)

For some reason I think of the Inferno where Dante and Virgil have come to the boiling river of blood and the sinners at that level are standing in it. Their level of 'badness' was indicated by how deep they stood. (Only up to their knees or all the way to the scalp.) I think he put a couple of Popes there. (No wonder he was excommunicated.)"
The following definitions of color symbolism are summarized from ìAn Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Traditional Symbolsî by J.C. Cooper.

General: primordial darkness the Void evil corruption grief Time chaos night
Buddhist: the darkness of bondage
Christian: the Prince of Darkness Hell death sorrow mourning humiliation spiritual darkness despair
Egyptian: rebirth and resurrection
Hebrew (Qabalism): understanding
Heraldic: prudence wisdom
Hindu: sensual and downward movement
Mayan: death of an enemy

General: Truth the Intellect wisdom loyalty fidelity chastity peace coolness sky water
Buddhist: the coolness of the heavens the wisdom of the Dharma-Dhatu
Christian: Heaven eternity faith fidelity
Chinese: heavens clouds Spring
Hebrew (Qabalism): mercy
Mayan: defeat of an enemy

General: the earth
Christian: spiritual death death to the world (as worn by religious communities) renunciation penitence

General: sun divine power the splendor of enlightenment immortality the highest value glory the masculine principle
Alchemic: the essence of the sun congealed light turning base metal into gold is the transmutation of the soul
Celtic: fire
Hindu: life light truth immortality

General: ambivalent as both life an death in the vernal green of life and the livid green of death; youth and hope but also change transitoriness and jealousy; the color of Venus; Spring; Nature; the Green Knight (from King Arthur) denoted death as impartiality and represents treason as slaying youth and beauty
Buddhist: vernal green is life pale green is the kingdom of death
Celtic: earth goddess
Chinese: interchangeable with blue
Christian: immortality; hope; life; triumph over death and Spring over Winter; good works; pale green is associated with Satan evil and death
Hebrew (Qabalism): victory

General: neutral depression ashes humility penitence
Christian: death of the body and immortality of the soul hence a color worn by religious communities
Hebrew (Qabalism): wisdom
Heraldic: tribulation

General: fire flame luxury
Chinese and Japanese: love happiness
Hebrew (Qabalism): splendor

General: royalty pride truth justice temperance
Aztec and Inca: majesty sovereignty
Christian: royal and sacerdotal (of or relating to priests or a priesthood) power truth humility

General: the sun and all the war gods fire love joy passion energy ferocity sexual excitement health strength blood blood-lust blood-guiltiness anger vengeance desert and calamity supernatural power
Red with white: death the Devil
Red with white and black: the three stages of initiation
Alchemic: man sun sulfur the zenith point of color
Aztec: fertility blood desert evil calamity
Celtic: death disaster
Chinese: sun joy Summer fire happiness luckiest of all colors
Christian: Christís blood and passion zeal in faith love power dignity priestly power martyrdom cruelty
Greek: the active masculine principle as opposed to the purple royal and passive principle
Hebrew (Qabalism): severity
Hindu: activity creativity energy of life
Mayan: victory success
Roman: divinity

General: moon feminine principle virginity
Chinese: purity brightness
Christian: chastity purity eloquence

General: intelligence knowledge religious devotion sanctity sobriety humility penitence sorrow temperance nostalgia grief mourning old age
Christian: sacerdotal rule and authority truth fasting sadness obscurity
Hebrew (Qabalism): foundation

General: the undifferentiated transcendent perfection simplicity light sun air illumination purity innocence chastity holiness sacredness redemption spiritual authority surrender truce friendship goodwill; associated with both life and love death and burial; in marriage it symbolizes death to the old life and birth into the new; in death it represents birth into the new life beyond; a woman robed in white carries the love-life-death connotations
White with black and red: the three stages of initiation
White with red: death the Devil purgatory
Alchemic: woman silver quicksilver (mercury)
Aztec: the dying sun night
Buddhist: self-mastery redemption the White Tara the highest spiritual transformation through womanhood ìshe who lead out beyond the darkness of bondageî
Celtic: the terrestrial goddess
Chinese: Autumn metal mourning
Christian: the purified soul joy purity virginity innocence the holy life light integrity
Egyptian: white with green depicts joy
Greek: mourning love life and death
Hebrew: joy cleansing
Qabalism: the Crown
Hindu: pure consciousness self-illumination light upward movement manifestation
Maori: truce surrender
Mayan: peace health

General: ambivalent light
Golden yellow: solar/sun intellect intuition faith and goodness
Dark yellow: treachery treason jealousy ambition avarice secrecy betrayal faithlessness
Yellow or yellow and black flag: quarantine
Yellow cross: the plague (in the Middle Ages)
Buddhist: renunciation desirelessness humility
Chinese: the Earth the lunar hare metal
Christian: golden yellow ñ sacredness divinity reveal truth; dull yellow ñ treachery deceit heretics
Hebrew (Qabalism): beauty
Hindu: light life truth immortality

Another good source for color symbolism is ìSymbol Sourcebook: An Authoritative Guide to International Graphic Symbolsî by Henry Dreyfus.


A number of these color symbols are relevant to the Buffyverse whether consciously or subconsciously. The meanings of colors are very ingrained in our lives. We use them and wear them often without thinking about what they mean yet use/wear the appropriate color in a given situation.

Dressing Drusilla in white and then later in red symbolizes her renewed energy and health (remember she was weak from being attacked by a mob in Prague when she and Spike first came to Sunnydale). Buffy wearing white to ask Spike to look after her mother and sister symbolizes her feelings of truce. Vampires wearing black symbolizes their evilness and corruption and their alliance with the night.

Iím not sure that all the use of color is symbolic in the Buffyverse ñ it may be just what photographs best for that particular scene what the wardrobe mistress bought or the latest trendy color. But on the other hand I wouldnít put it past Joss & Co. to use some color symbolism deliberately.

Wow purplegrrl I didn't know I would give you such work to do by posting a simple thread! :)

Thanks for the research! I agree that to try to give meaning to insignificant details will bring to madness... and we don' want that do we? But as you mentioned some colors really do have meanings withing the Buffyverse. I'll keep your post for further research on other subject! Thanks again! :)
I just saw Invisible Girl for the first time and I noticed that Buffy was wearing a white skirt with cherries on it a virtually identical pattern to the Restless dress. I was completely freaked out by this. What can it mean? It can't be a coincidence. Some of the themes of Invisible Girl are: the idea of alternate realities the concept that what we see becomes our reality and the fact that people aren't necessarily what they seem on the surface. There was also a desert-y wind heard in the background of certain scenes (of course the version I saw was dubbed in French so maybe the sounds are different). What else... words as metaphors painted on walls and curtains. Argh. Thinking too much.

This show may drive me crazy yet. LOL.
"Spike is evil. Anyone who still doesn't get that needs to stop kidding themselves.

Whether Spike "loves" Buffy or is merely obsessed with her is irrelevant. The romantic notion that love cannot exist in an evil being is tripe. Whether or not it can exist in a soulless vampire in the Buffyverse is a different topic.

In any event evil serves it's own self interest. Obsession or love Spike has deigned that getting on Buffy's good side is that self interest. He walked with Dawn to the Magic Shop hoping for a chance to win brownie points by saving the little brat and stayed in the shop for kicks. His yelling at Buffy while justified was saving his own skin. And being reinforcing guy while searching for Buffy? Again in his self interest.

If Spike wasn't evil he'd have seen Dawn home and warned Buffy what Dawn found out. Buffy'd be pissed at him...not in his self interest. But he's smart enough to know that that kid might have really killed herself that night. Instead he hid in his den hoping he wouldn't get busted.

Evil will always act in it's own best interest and until Spike does otherwise I'll see him as evil."
"Spike did a few moraly questionable things in last nights show:

Spoilers coming up

1. He certainly was not reluctant about breaking and entering and didn't for a second try to dissuade Dawn from that course of action.

2. The excuse that if he hadn't gone with her she would have gone anyway reminds me of a pimp I saw on Jerry Springer who excused his pimping of 14 year old girls by saying they would turn tricks anyway so better that he is around to watch over them. Sorry that dog doesn't hunt as a friend of mine likes to say.

3. As far as we know Spike did bring Dawn back home. But it certainly didn't seem like he tried to warn anybody about what she found out nor do I think he did anything to calm Dawn down. Spike is good at pointing out the ugly truth but he is not so good with comforting words (though he tried last night with Buffy).

So given all that Spike is certainly not a "good guy." More like a helpful bad guy due to circumstances.

I also agree that even an evil person can know love or at least romantic desire and/or sentimental affection."
At least Spike didn't try to auction Dawn off to Glory when he discovered she was the key.
Perhaps he's waiting to see just how that will be in his self-interest. His evil isn't about doing whatever is nastiest it's all about Spike. Right now he had no way of knowing if helping Glory would help him.
"Jolly I do agree with you. Skipe is lead by self interest and has always been. I wouldn't say that Spike loves Buffy right now. He's obsessed with her. But many psychologist would say that "get the attitude right and the rest will follow". Joss wouldn't bother to show us Spike that way if he wasn't getting somehwere with it.

Maybe I'm too much like Jean-Jacques Rousseau and I like to believe that everyone has good inside them (even Angelus - okay I push far here... but I'm an idealist!) The fact is that even if you act out of self interest it doesn't mean you can't be affected by things that are happening around you.

I still believe that Spike even with a chip is dangerous but some looks he has can make us wonder if the ice isn't melting inside. Those little looks very rare and very short seem to indicate some changes. I'm far more interested in the good vs evil dilemma then to know if Spike is going to go with Buffy. The whole dilemma being "what is really a vampire"?"
"Jolly I do agree with you. Skipe is lead by self interest and has always been. I wouldn't say that Spike loves Buffy right now. He's obsessed with her. But many psychologist would say that "get the attitude right and the rest will follow". Joss wouldn't bother to show us Spike that way if he wasn't getting somehwere with it.

Maybe I'm too much like Jean-Jacques Rousseau and I like to believe that everyone has good inside them (even Angelus - okay I push far here... but I'm an idealist!) The fact is that even if you act out of self interest it doesn't mean you can't be affected by things that are happening around you.

I still believe that Spike even with a chip is dangerous but some looks he has can make us wonder if the ice isn't melting inside. Those little looks very rare and very short seem to indicate some changes. I'm far more interested in the good vs evil dilemma then to know if Spike is going to go with Buffy. The whole dilemma being "what is really a vampire"?"
Don't forget about the Judge who burned the book worm vampire (I forget his name) because he had too much humanity. The Judge also mentioned that Spike and Drusilla were tainted by humanity as well. Only Angelus passed with flying colors. It would seem as though there is a continuum among vampires running from the very human vampire who got burned all the way to the thoroughly inhuman Angelus with maybe Spike and Dru in the middle. Now however it would seem as though Spike is drifting ever closer to the human end of the continuum.
The book-worm's name was Dalton. And I wonder what would have happened if the Judge had touched Spike and Drusilla. I'm sure that Spike would have gone up in flames but I'm not so sure about Dru. She did have some feelings. But wether there would have been enought to burn her is another question.

Spike is a selfish jerk no doubt and if he got the chip removed right now the only thing that would keep him from killing the SG is the fact that it would destroy any chance of getting close to Buffy. But he can feel and he does do some unselfish things. Eg he kept caring for the girl in the Bronze even after Buffy walked away.
"I don't see Spike as evil. I see him as a work in progress. I don't know why people expect him to be this white knight now acting purely selfless as if totally evil or totally good are his only choices. That would be no more credible than saying he's a total villain with no redeeming qualities. He's somewhere in between sitting on the fence in my opinion and about to be pushed off in one direction or the other. Or I should say he's about to jump off because he's been set up to have a choice in what he wants to be. That may not be true to vampire mythology and I'm the first to say they're making an exception for Spike because of his enormous popularity. But now that they've introduced the concept of a creature without a sould nevertheless being able to choose his state of being I'm going to go with it.

And I disagree about some of the examples you used. Spike has no moral center. It didn't occur to him to tell Dawn not to steal(or later steal something himself). We'll never know why he didn't warn Buffy about Dawn knowing--maybe it was self-preservation. But that's a very human response not necessarily an evil one. When Dawn told him where she was going Spike immediately had a look of concern on his face; it took him a few minutes to think about "Big Sister" not liking it. His first reaction was to Dawn not to Buffy's sister. That's not self interest. As for comforting Buffy in the park I could see him fighting him own inner demon before he could even utter the comforting words to Buffy; this shows me a creature struggling against his own worst nature in order to do the right thing. Any SG member might have uttered similar words of comfort under the circumstances; why is it more sinister because it's Spike who's saying it? I don't think Spike is as black and white as you paint him. "
"Dawn has been alive for six months. When we first saw her in "Real Me" (the 10 second glimspe in BvD doesn't count) she was basically an infant. Now she's a toddler. Physically mentally emotionally she's a 14 year old girl. But she came into this world with the personality of a typical 14 year old and she's developed since into something more.

An infant learns to walk to talk etc... by emulating those around him. Dawn has done the same. Dawn was a coward in "Real Me" against Harmony and in the face of one crazy. Since then she's grown. She was one of the first to stand up to Tara's father in "Family" she fended off the Queller in "LtF" and now she scored the first real victory face to face with Glory standing up to her and playing her for information about the key. Dawn has learn to be a hero. Is it any surprise? EVERYONE in her life is a hero.

Tonight's episode mentioned that the demon universe where Glory is from was ruled by three gods. Smacks of a trinity to me. I'm assuming Glory is one person Ben is the second and I wonder if we will get to see the third? The morphing of Ben into Glory was a bit of a surprise to me although I'm not sure if they are actually sharing one body or are two separate entities that can switch bodies. It's probably more likely that they are sharing one body because Ben made such a big thing about Glory never causing him any harm and didn't she take that dress out of a nearby locker?
Last night's episode seem to re-enforce my belief that Ben and Glory are the ying and yang of power. Ben does good; Glory does bad. Is Dawn the key the power that merges them into one? Is Dawn the third demon of that demon universe. That her power is all about balance?

sorry for the unintentional post - what i was going to say was that something may have happened to this mysterious third and it is that which will give buffy the clue to defeating glory
I wonder if the third might not be connected to the Knights of Byzantium. It would explain their obsession with the key. Also it would explain why their prescence alarmed Ben and Glory so much even though Glory defeated the advance force with ease.
"Ben does good... like dealing with the crazy person problem by killing them off? Or beating the stuffing out of Glory's minion apparently just for the Hell of it?

Ben clearly isn't allied with Glory but he just as clearly isn't good either.

(My theory? Well whatever Ben is (and his being one of the other three "Hellgods" seems a reasonable supposition) it's likely that if Glory leaves our dimension he goes too. Which I doubt he wants; note that being here doesn't seem to have the same deleterious effect on his mental state as it does on Glory's. So his goals coincide with the good guys' in that he also doesn't want Glory to get the Key - but the fact that he's willing to kill to achieve his goals indicated that he's just as evil as she is if less dangerous.)

Good point. I've had trouble seeing Ben as a good guy from the beginning. He seemed to be lurking an awful lot. And what was the point of summoning the Queller? It sure didn't stop Glory. And why is Ben in the hospital disguised as an Intern? Just so he can count the crazies as Glory stacks them up?
Oh mighty spoilers below.....

In AD&D there is a character/storyline device called alignment. Each character you play or encounter has a moral designation and certain behaviors they are likely to follow. Good and Evil get broken down into subcategories like Lawful or Chaotic or Neutral (which is a balance between law and chaos not an absence of them).

Ben and Glory definitely seem to be polarized with Ben as law and Glory as chaos. Glory's feedings and the resulting insanity would be considered chaotic as well as evil while Ben's calling of the Quellar(sp) is a Lawful act even though is evil. My question is where is the neutral face in all this?

In AD&D there is a character/storyline device called alignment. Each character you play or encounter has a moral designation and certain behaviors they are likely to follow. Good and Evil get broken down into subcategories like Lawful or Chaotic or Neutral (which is a balance between law and chaos not an absence of them).

Ben and Glory definitely seem to be polarized with Ben as law and Glory as chaos. Glory's feedings and the resulting insanity would be considered chaotic as well as evil while Ben's calling of the Quellar(sp) is a Lawful act even though is evil. My question is where is the neutral face in all this?

I like your AD&D anaology of Order vs Chaos rather than Good vs Evil with Ben and Glory. As for the NE God -- I never really saw neutral as being a balance (except for Druids) but rather as a more utilitarian approach -- that is a Neutral Evil creature was willing to serve either Law or Chaos as long as he was doing evil in the process.

The problems with Glory and Ben being two of three Hell Gods are:
1. Ben has done nothing miraculous
2. The third god is missing
3. Ben has no interest in the key

We know that Glory is one of three Hell-Gods but we do not know how she came to be confined to the Buffyverse -- perhaps she was on the losing side of a war with the other two gods and they banished her. The key would be her portal back to her realm where she might regain her place in the demon dimension. The problem with this theory is: why does everyone want to keep the key from her? -- why not just let her go? Buffy and her friends have a reason to keep the key -- it's Dawn -- but what about the monks and the knights?

I think the key must be an object that will allow Glory to let something in rather than let her out. Perhaps she was the first of the Hell-Gods through the portal and the monks sealed the passage (with the key) before her fellow dieties got through.

Warning: wild speculation ahead.

I see Ben as a formerly mortal follower of Glory's. Glory's enemies incapacitated her by binding her into the body of a mortal -- namely Ben. He now has an extended lifespan (as long as Glory is there) and when Glory fails to get her daily dose of sanity she reverts to Ben -- although I don't know what might trigger the transformation back -- maybe it's random. And maybe the key to defeating Glory will be by destroying her mortal host (or maybe that will just release her).

The one thing I don't understand is why Buffy and her family moved back into their house...
It seems to me we have a god with a multiple personality disorder for 3 reasons:
(1) the morphing
(2) we have NEVER seen Ben and Glory at the same time
(3)Ben says Glory knows she can't harm him
(4)Ben feels Glory's personality starting to manifest.

We have seen 2 of the personalities but I expect at least 1 more. These 2 personalities are unaware of what each other are doing but in many movies & TV shows (I don't know about real life multiple disorders) there is a personality which does know about it's other personalities.

MPD's are interesting...there are actual cases where for an example one personality h as cancer...and the others do not. The mind is amazing isn't it? Yes I've heard that there may be a personality that is aware of the others but perhaps that is a therapeutic point to be worked toward...to re-integrate many of the personalities.
">>We have seen 2 of the personalities but I expect at least 1 more. These 2 personalities are unaware of what each other are doing but in many movies & TV shows (I don't know about real life multiple disorders) there is a personality which does know about it's other personalities.>>

That's a very good point! Isn't that what all the TV movies show us? There's always a more well adjusted personality that overseas or controls all the divergent personalities at least when there's a happy ending.

I'm really going to step out on a limb now. Have we ever seen Joyce in the same scene with either Ben or Glory? If that is the case then I'm shot down right away. Two weeks ago Glory left the house and there were a few moments before Joyce walked into the room but I can't remember if she and Ben have ever been in the same scene.

Anyway we know that Joyce is supposed to be leaving the series this season and in a few episodes Buffy is supposed to experience something unlike anything she ever has before. This is tied in with someone close to her "leaving." What if Joyce is the third personality the third person of a very strange trinity? This is the most shocking thing I can think of in order to have Joyce leave rather than die.

Imagine the effect this would have on Buffy. She would be an offspring of a demon god! How's that for a walk on the dark side. "
"Oh my god! Very interesting point here! So far the best theory that could explane the third entity!

Maybe there's something to look deeper into "restless" again. What was Joyce doing between two walls?. Was she caught between Ben and Glory? Could be a hell of a metaphore!!!"
"I find the idea of a MPD diety with 2 or more non-interactive personalities hard to believe in this instance. Ben and Glory kinda have to be able to exist at the same time. The first time we see Ben he's holding down the now insane security guard that found the Dagon Sphere and he talks to Buffy about her Mom's headaches. At that same time Glory is at the warehouse torturing the monk to find the key. (Not to mention that Ben'd lose his job if he's only at the hospital when he's not Glory and not his scheduled shifts.)

I think Glory is connected to Ben possibly by parentage and since she is way more powerful she can co-opt his body when she wants.

As for what the Key does does anyone else think that Glory's pregnant? The first time we see her go 'crazy' she rants "Someone's gotta sit down on their tuffet and make this birthing stop!" Maybe she needs the Key to have 'a hellbaby' on Earth. That would certainly cause lots of death and destruction. Another clue is the way she clammed up about the Key when Dawn asked what it was for. Glory talked about her "Unmentionables." That always makes me think of underwear and bodily functions.

I could be wrong though. We'll find out."
I've never thought about Glory being pregnant-- great idea though! Perhaps the crazy episodes are hell-god equivalents of morning sickness! ;)

Further rampant speculation on this theme-- Glory has to get the Key because she can't give birth while she's trapped in this dimension she has to get back to her own plane of existance to do so and as a result the birth keeps getting indefinitely prolonged with nasty consequences for her.

Another (even weirder!) possibility is that the 'birthing' refers to us i.e. humans. Perhaps we are 'taking over' in her former dimension like we took over from the demon races in our own and the 'birthing' of humans is what she wants to get back and stop. (Humans in her dimension may have been responsible for expelling her from it).
"Nina's post below (Is *seeing* enough?) got me thinking.

In Xander's dream Giles makes the comment about Spike that "he is like a son to me." Elsewhere on this board it has been postulated that this meant that Spike would turn good/human and become a Watcher like Giles. But I give you this theory: Each of the four dreams (Willow Xander Giles and Buffy) had a nightmare element to them. What if this was Xander's nightmare? That Giles thinks so little of Xander that Giles would consider Spike an evil blood-sucking vampire who has wrecked havoc and tried to end the world more of a son than Xander. I think Xander despite a lot of his remarks to Giles looks up to Giles like a father - the father he doesn't really have due to his inadequate homelife. Xander would like to be more like Giles. Not a Watcher necessarily. But a confident knowledgable man who can get things done in a pinch. Yes we have seen Xander come a long way since Season One. But due to his insecurities I'm not sure Xander sees the progress he has made. Perhaps he has some understanding of this after Buffy defended him to the Council in "Checkpoint."
"Very interesting reflexion here! There's also one more thing that is puzzling me about that watcher's bit in Xander's dream. Spike says that he's going to be a watcher and Xander answers that he was into that for a while but that now he has his thing. It's been hinted that "watching" here means that Spike is watching Buffy. He is watching her back saving her from attackers (Familly Triangle Checkpoint) He's looking for her safety like a watcher does with the slayer. Now if watching means to watch Buffy (having a thing for her too) Xander's answer could mean that he once was attracted to Buffy (as we all know) but that now he has his own "thing" (that would be Anya)

I think that Xander is the character who will probably face the more changes this season. "The replacement" wasn't just there as a fill in episode. And the fact that the CM emphazise his being only a boy will definitely bring us to explore something more in Xander. We want him to stay a joe normal... but Joss once said that he wasn't writing what we want but what we need..."
"*** "He's looking for her safety like a watcher does with the slayer. Now if watching means to watch Buffy (having a thing for her too) Xander's answer could mean that he once was attracted to Buffy (as we all know) but that now he has his own "thing" (that would be Anya)" ***

I like that it makes very good sense at least in the context of the dream. Xander has been changing quite a bit this season.

While we're discussing Xander's dream what do you think the meaning of Anya's statement about 'steering with emphatic gestures' is? Taking into account what we've seen so far this season is this about Xander Willow the SG's in general or about Anya herself?

Along that same line of missing elements we've yet to seen Xander's heart torn out. While Anya is enjoyable to watch as a character the two seem more bonded by sex than anything deeper; it's hard to picture a split between these two as a heart break much less a gaping chest wound.

Any theories on this one?
Another thing caught my attention. The Xander/Joyce interaction. Joyce is wearing a red silk robe (Glory wears red silk dresses) and she is acting really sexy-Glory like.
That part mixed with Buffy who sees her mother between two walls... may mean that Joyce is sharing her body with Ben and Glory (unknowingly).
"On various occasion people have made some parallel between Buffy and Star Wars. Spike himself considered Angelus as his Yoda. But there is something very interesting in the way both universe consider evil creatures. In Star Wars once you enter the dark side you are lost. That's what Yoda and Ben taught Luke. Neither Ben nor Yoda believed that Darth Vador had some good inside him. Ben says in the return of the jedi:"he's twisted and evil". Luke chooses not to believe that theory and wants to *see* the good inside Vador. And when he does and believes in him Vador can become good...someone has giving him the chance to change. Someone has *seen* what was inside.

In Buffy we have something similar. You have the Watcher Council (Yoda) and then Giles (Ben) who have told Buffy since the beginning that vampires were bad people and that her job as a slayer was to kill them (like the Jedi has to kill creatures of the dark side to protect the humanity).

Is *seeing* the way to save someone from the dark side or from being a vampire? Is that enough?

In FFL Spike wants to be *seen* for what he is. Drusilla sees what he wants and he lets himself fall in her grip. But if someone like Buffy wanted to see the good inside him... could he turn good? He said to Cecily "I'm a good man"... is it possible that even as a vampire he longs for someone to see this side of him?

About *seeing*... there are other very interesting example.

- In "The little Prince" by St-Exupery it is said that we have to see with the heart not with the eyes. Even more interesting to see that the WC test was to make Buffy fight with something covering her sight in "Checkpoint"! So she has to feel and see from the inside.

- In "The X-files" a few years back there was an episode called "Folie a deux". Only Mulder could see the zombies who took control of human bodies because he chooses to see. Once Scully wants to see...she sees it too. Mulder said something like "you have to believe it to see it"

As we are exploring shades of grey this year... Buffy is learning more about her dark roots as a slayer but maybe also she will learn more about what is really a vampire. After all Joss does what he wants... he can go a lot farther then what all the movies and litterature have done so far and break a barrier!

And it could maybe explain Giles' dream in "Restless" when he sees Spike making poses in the crypt. He is photographed making threatning poses like an actor would. That's the surface of his being. With the flahes the black and white it looks irreal. A facade. Inside he may just be the good man who wants to be rescued (the one we see in Xander's dream. The good mannered guy who comes from the same kind of milieu as Giles - hence the "Spike is like a son to me"). Okay that sounds mushi-mushi for Buffy but it would bring the comprehension of demons and vampires a notch higher! :)"
"Good points Nina...I like your ideas. I have been wondering about the Spike posing as a vampire and "going to be a watcher says I have the stuff"....It's a very interesting change for Spike's character. I think you're right that William was "a good man" and that on some levels so is Spike. Spike is already affected by popular culture...look at the punk remnants of his clothing/chipped black nail polish etc....And what are we to make of the garden gnomes? Is it Spike's wish for middle class Englishness? And home? "
If you think about it this all could relate to the 'reality as collective unconsciousness' theorem. Buffy jumps out a 2nd story window carrying a monk falls on her back and isn't killed or even seriously injured.

She believes she can do this so she does. *Seeing* would be another way to refer to this a kind of internal 'sight' that then begins to mold reality.

If she would begin to *see* Spike as potentially good then would Spike change to conform to the new reality? This seems very possible at least for Buffy.

It might be interesting to know on a statistical basis whether these instances of Buffy 'changing reality' have increased steadily over the past several years. For some reason I suspect they are.

The use of 'magic' might even be a round-about way of doing the same thing. The incantations are like calling a subroutine on a computer program. You send the correct 'message' the machine responds-- otherwise the routine lies dormant. What Willow and Tara do would be analogous to writing a script in Visual Basic. What Buffy would be doing is like making a call to the kernal or BIOS. (Sorry if this leaves non-techies baffled but it's the best analogy I can think of at the moment! ;)

Last question-- Wonder who the powers are/were that wrote 'the big program'?
"Now you're getting into the territory of my all-time favorite White Wolf role-playing game - Mage: The Ascension. In Mage the characters play people who have awakened to the ability to alter reality at will to varying degrees - and they get more powerful the more insight or "arete" they attain. Yes arete is the Greek word for "virtue" and is I believe the same word used in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance which is one of the influences on the game. Anyway these mages can alter reality by using coincidences to their advantage or by blatantly altering the laws of the concensus reality. If this sounds trippy - that's because it is. This game is a struggle over who gets to shape reality and what do you do with reality once you have that power? The game also draws upon all world mythologies as well as the Cthulhu mythos and Asian paths to enlightenment - so it does end up resembling Joss's vision in Buffy and Angel.
"I've been musing over the episode 16 spoiler which says Buffy will go through a trauma unlike anything she's ever known when someone she knows leaves. Most of us assume it's the death of Joyce including me. But the more I think about it the more I wonder how carefully the word "leaves" was chosen as opposed to the word "dies".

I'm wondering if what really happens is that Joyce does leave the show in ep 16 without being killed. Perhaps Dawn is somehow temporarily transferred back into her energy form which I'm assuming makes her a portal to either heaven or hell or both and Joyce is accidentally sucked through. Maybe she's in some sort of purgatory until she can be rescued by Buffy in the season finale. For some reason I just don't see them curing Joyce's brain tumor only to have her die at the hands of Buffy's enemy(unless Kristine Sutherland has just ticked off some of the BTVS writing staff) :) Nor do I see them making Buffy totally on her own for the duration of the show. We can't even be sure Dawn will be sticking around. Would they really leave Buffy all alone like that? I know the SG is in a sense her family as well but there's no substitute for your mother. Anyway that's my farfetched theory. "

"Could we go with the foreshadowing from last night and say that Glory will suck thebrain co-heesiveness out of Joyce's head - not killing her but she would no longer be "there"
Borrowing a lead from matthew I'm voting for a character to get vamped and going with Willow. Thus Willow 'leaves' and VampWillow takes her place.

(Side note: In a poll I read some months back when asked what character they would most like to see brought back into the series for some additional appearances guess who was the top vote getter? That's right we bad... ;)

Of course Buffy is devastated and furthermore she simply can't bring herself to dust the creature who previously was her best friend. (BTW note how this would mirror Angel's problem with Darla and how their tactics would differ on dealing). On the other hand she can't let VampWillow go about killing and maiming et al. So...

She goes to Spike and offers to get his chip removed (he's returned after a little fling with Drusilla who btw is how our favorite redhead get the bite put on her). He's happy to say the least but then again if the chip's out.. might he not end up killing the woman he loves? (*not* Dru after all...) Oh man *still* more Spiky angst!

Guess who the chip is for and who isn't very happy to think about getting one...

Now is *that* farther-out enough? ;)

(OnM grins evil grin and then says... G'nite!)

"Well it would certainly come from out of left field. There hasn't been so much as a hint that something like that might happen(which might make it a good idea). All indications are that this is Xander's year for a big story. Could that be a red herring? I just don't know if they would do that to Willow who is one of the most beloved characters on the show. Even if she were chipped I think some fans could have a problem with it. I see plenty of fans still smarting over her becoming gay.Anyway if your theory is correct Dru would follow Spike back to Sunnydale and vamp Willow in episode 16 right? It would certainly explain why Willow hasn't been featured very much this year. And a good explanation of the "leaving" without the "dying". In fact it could tie into the whole Buffy sees that there are exceptions storyline. Maybe it's not just Spike who she has to change her thinking for; vamp Willow would make that gray area even grayer. That's a good theory!"
"Some interesting ideas and as much as I loved the Alternate-dimension Vamp Willow and the chaos she created in her short time with the gang I don't want to see Will turned.

I went back to check out the spoilers and my mind too niggled on the fact that the word "leave" was also used instead of "dies". But as purplegrrl stated in another thread I also rewatched "Checkpoint" and went back to my 2nd favorite part in the final scene. When the Watcher who had intereviewed Anya and Xander stated quite snobbishly that Xander had no special powers I couldn't help but feel this might be some forshadowing for what is to come for my favorite member of the gang. But then again what makes him so lovable is that he is just a regular joe doing his part to help his friends and help save the world. He shouldn't change.

But then you have Cordelia who was presented with her gift in that fight against evil. (Always wondered how he'd react in knowing his ex had a superpower while he had nothing.)

Oh heck I don't know just rambling anxious to see what does come of all these spoilers and the interesting theories that I've read."
Maybe Joyce in episode 16 will have a very close call with Glory and Buffy and everyone else will agree that she's the most safe far away from Sunnydale. Joyce going away would prevent Glory from using her as a hostage. Even though Joyce might leave Dawn would stay because the slayer has the ability to protect her the most. I can't imagine that anything odd like getting sucked through a protal would happen to Joyce but her leaving like Riley did would make more sense.

but that wouldn't be a tragedy beyond anything Buffy's ever known which is what the spoilers say. It's got to be much worse than that IMO.
I saw in an earlier thread that many of you liked the Council Member women (and so do I!) but where the hell did she took her informations to write a *thesis* on Spike?

It's a great and funny moment in the episode but it seems that it opens a door to something else. A thesis is a very long work. And she did it without actually meeting the man. Did I miss something or does this make sense to you?
I can imagine the watcher's council found out about the vampire that killed two slayers and whose name origionated from killing with railroad spikes and the seemingly British scholarly types anlyzed it in every possible way. I'm guessing the CoM could use Spike as a good example to relate this to psylogical reasoning Freudian techniques and uninportant facts that look good on paper.
Don't forget a thesis is not a doctoral dissertation. I did a thesis to get my B.A. It was 30 pages long and analysed Italian literature.

#1) She could not submit that thesis to Oxford. It was probably to fulfill her requirements to become a Watcher.

#2) It depends on the topic she chose. It could have been a psychological analysis of his choice of first victims. (And we know why and probably who he chose.) Remember Angelus complained that 'William the Bloody' liked the 'attention' so he probably got written up by the daily newspapers as some wacko who signed his kills. The Watchers would recognize the deaths as being by a vampire and took note.

#3) She didn't have to get any of her facts right either. The Watchers don't know him at all.
What about the Watchers' Diaries? Spike's killed two Slayers... if Spike was into stalking his Slayers first (I don't think he was but I haven't seen FFL yet) then maybe the Slayer/Watcher saw him around a lot took note of him and his patterns (after all Buffy noticed that Angel was following her way back in Welcome to the Hellmouth when she wasn't that strong a Slayer). Even if he wasn't the stalker type I'm sure that there would have been *some* information gathered on him. Plus he probably bugged other Slayers as well - I doubt that someone like him who enjoys killing Slayers so much would have only gone after those three (Boxer Rebellion Slayer/Subway Slayer/Buffy) in his whole existence.

I'm not saying that information gathered by Watchers would be enough for a thesis - but I'm sure they had something. After all in 'Angel' and 'Hallowe'en' the old Watchers' Diaries have information on Angel(us) so why not Spike?

Plus as Isabel said newspapers and the like may have had information too. And I'm sure that the CoW has people - maybe not Watchers but agents at least - around the world. I mean Kendra was trained as a potential Slayer well before she became an actual one. You've got all these CoW assassins running around such as the ones that go after Faith. And Sunnydale is on *an* Hellmouth - implying that there are others elsewhere. I'm sure the CoW would keep an eye on these too if not actually taking steps to reduce the evil there. I'd be very surprised if an organisation as ancient and knowledge-oriented as the CoW (sorry that sentence just makes me laugh) didn't have people around the world taking up positions from high-ranking powerful types down to the common person in order to gain knowledge. And this ramble has gone on longer than I intended. Sorry.
Wensleydale you don't have to worry about being too long here. We're not afraid of the long posts.

BTW: Am I right in guessing you're a Wallace and Gromit fan?
"LOL... I am... but I actually got the name from the Monty Python Cheese Shop sketch. Cheese references abound (although that wasn't my intent. My first-ever post here was on Restless and then about an hour later I thought "oh god Wensleydale was a cheese man" :) )."
I watched this episode again last night (in preparation for tonight!) and what struck me as bizarre was not so much that the woman had done her thesis on Spike (Spike was probably fairly notorious and there was info to be had in the Council library) but that the Council would go and talk to Spike about Buffy!!! How weird is that?!? The Council wanted to stake Angel back in Season One when they found out the Slayer was hanging out with a vampire even one with a soul. So why would the Council go to a vampire even a chipped/neutered one for scoop on the Slayer??

Also did the Council know Spike had been chipped and could no longer harm humans? If yes then why the big show with the giant cross and presumably other precautions?? If no then what the heck were they questioning Spike for in the first place?? Did they think they were going to get reliable answers from an evil creature of the night??

More weirdness in the Buffyverse!
I doubt they would have questioned Spike if they didn't know about his chip. They were being the WC through and through--Giles says your chipped and harmless but you're a blood-sucking creature of the night and we don't trust you.

Sort of the way they treated souled Angel.
"I presumed that Xander "accidently" told the WC about Spike. One of the Watchers is asking Xander about how the Slayer protects her friends from 'all' the demons in Sunnydale and Xander gets a weird look on his face then cut to Watchers interviewing Spike.

Fill in the blanks between scenes and Xander told them about the chipping.

Also I don't remember the WC trying to kill Angel on the Buffy show. When Wes and the Watcher's come to get Faith in Season 3 they have crosses and a net not stakes. In the Angel episode where they (again) are trying to get Faith it is Council Operatives not Watchers that try to kill Angel. It's clear that they are acting on their own initiative here. There was no council order to kill the vampire with a soul.

Despite all their flaws the Watchers Council does seem to agree with Buffy's philosophy that you don't kill a vamipe that isn't killing humans (currently). Otherwise they would have staked the notorious William the Bloody right in his own lair."
I think the CM woman didn't become a watcher for the power trip of controlling the slayer like the head of the council or because of family tradition like Giles. I think she probably came from upper-class british society and found it so stuffy that she became interested in demons and the dark side of life but still didn't want to let go of the perks of being in control of the situation so she became a watcher. Why would I think that? well she seems to have a different point of view from the other watchers from the way she talked to Buffy nicely instead of commanding ('course that night be because the guy who talked before her got a sword thrown at him...) and as for liking the dark side didn't you see her eyes light up when she told Spike about how she wrote her thesis about him?
"I'm cracking up each time I hear her say "yes". She really has a crush on Spike and it's like a dream come true for her to interview him. Notice that every member of the SG was interviewed by a different watcher. I bet she asked to go to Spike's crypt! Girl has some courage. Gotta like that. I really hope she'll come back!"
"Yet another email I got that I wouldn't mind getting some thoughts on from the varied and interesting minds of ATPoBtVS posters:


I'm about to embark on what will probably turn out to be a book-length serious study of BVS and Angel in terms of their social and cultural context and
possible impact. I'm particularly interested in pursuing possible links with Japanese pop culture.

I can find reams of junk written on the subject but very little that actually takes us anywhere or assists in understanding.

Is this entire universe invented (I doubt it but it certainly isn't one I recognise)? Or is it drawing on an existing mythology? Even invented mythologies like
Tolkein's have tracable roots.

This is an important debate to have because of the impact the shows have and their deeply transgressive nature in terms of Western culture.

Can you point me to any relevant material especially sources for Wheedon's cosmology and critical reviews of the series.

I might be interested in your comments on my text as it develops - I expect it will take most of this year - if you're willing.

Thanks in advance and best regards

[name withheld]"
One place for the Questioner to start would be comic books. Particularly Batman (for Angel) and Superman (for Riley).

Also slasher films - or rather the antithesis of them. Since Joss chose to create a heroine who was attractive blonde and petite who instead of being the first to die is the one who kicks the bad guys butt.

And of course the whole vampire mythology.
Actually I would look to Captain America for the inspitation for Riley. Both were scientifically enhanced to be all-American super-soldiers. In fact I could see Marc Blucas playing the role of Captain America.
Joss had a very very rich background in comics. We all know he has a personal interest in the hobby what with his writing one to be released this year entitled 'Fray'.

I know that he focused on the Marvel comics but he had a very large expansive variety of comics in his life. He has recently written the introduction to a trade paperback entitled 'Earth X' which is a new take on the entire Marvel universe.
I would also suggest the writer look to film history. In many episodes the theme or plot is an homage to old films of course often putting the original convention on it's head. Heck most of the first season episodes were riffs on old horror films
And all this time I thought Angel was more the John Constantine type. If we going to get all comic-bookie though I see significant differences between Angel and Batman. Batman is fundamentally good and his evolution into the vigilante persona was caused by external forces. Angel is fundamentally evil (Angelus is not gone just repressed) and his changes are caused by internal forces. (lack of a soul introduction of a demon replacement of a soul etc) If one were looking for comic book counterparts for Angel then John Constantine or the Demon (during his time trapped in the guys body-sorry can't think of the guys name) or others might be a better comparison.

Riley just never seems like a suitable superman clone. Although some of the initative experiments are similar to the underground genetic lab in the superman comics (cloning of the newsboys Adam as a Metalman? -grin- or the genetic 'accidents' running amok) Riley is much more a Guardian rather than Superman type constantly either cleaning up after the Initative or running missions for them. Guardian was even a clone of his former self which fits with the experiments done on Riley as well. Riley also kills his enemies with little or no remorse. The one time Superman executed criminals (excellent storyline btw) he went insane for a short time.

However none of this is likely helpful to the original writers questions. (grin) In looking at any mythos you have to realize that it isnt the mythos that is copied it is the themes and archetypes that are used and reused and turned inside out to be reused again. Joss may have developed a new mythos or retooled older ones to fit his ideas. What is more likely is that he took themes (good and evil sacrifice power redemption descent into darkness etc) and archetypes (the hero the shapechanger ect) and reworked those to form his own mythos. If I were going to write about anything with a strong muthic content I would go back to those basics even if only to see how he worked them into his storyline.

As for practical help try http://buffyguide.com/ for reviews and other info.

I could argue that BtVS and Angel push the limits of TV rather than the limits of culture but I am not positive what you meant by the statement so I will end before my post becomes a book itself.
I'm glad you brought up John Constantine. He is one of my all-time favorite characters (though I haven't read Hellblazer in years ). Anyway if Giles had retained more of his Ripper persona I think we would be more like Constantine. Of course Constantine is more ex-punk and working class than Giles. Giles seems to have been a bit earlier than the punks - maybe a mod. He also seems to have come from a more upper class background. Still both seemed to have been rebels who dabbled in black magick and then straightened themselves out (more or less). Constantine is a lot more cold-blooded and much more of a con-man than Giles. Giles seems to have more integrit and wears his heart on his sleeves at times.
"As I have mentioned in various other places I would also look to Chinese Buddhism and Chinese mythology. The sixth century monk Chih-i's teaching of the "mutual posession of the ten worlds" really seems to be operating in Joss's universe. The moral ambiguity of Chinese cultural heros like the Monkey King or the Heroes of Liangshan March also seem to be part of Joss's vision. Not to mention the many hells many heavens the celestial beaucracy and the many demons monsters and ghosts that seem to choke the countryside (at least in the story Journey to the West). Movies like Green Snake (available at your local Chinese video store) also portray a world where non-human beings like Dragons can humanize themselves and even become human. The Green Snake story also prominently features an intolerant and fanatical Buddhist monk who refuses to let these beings remain or become human. That monk actually would make an ideal member of the clumsy and intolerant WC as seen on Buffy. The old Hammer/Shaw Brothers film The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires is also a fun little piece of cinematic trash that features Chinese vampires and their zombie armies vs. seven brothers and their sister in a supernatural display of martial arts mayhem. The sister in that movie would actually be the first appearance of a kung fu using female vampire slayer in any medium that I know of.

Also others have pointed out that Joss's universe also seems to borrow quite heavily from the Cthulhu mythos of H.P. Lovecraft. Especially the idea that demons were here first and are working very hard to reclaim the world for their own once again. Joss's vision however isn't quite as bleak as Lovecraft however. In fact it sometimes seems more dualistic in a Zoroastrian sense in that the forces of good (The Powers That Be and the Watchers's Council) seem to be fairly evenly matched against the forces of evil (The First Evil and the Senior Partners).

The main thing about Joss is that his vision is very post-modern in that it weaves together new and old elements from many cultures into a very contemporary synthesis. Joss also refuses to confirm or deny the existence of any particular meta-narrative (such as Christian or Buddhist or Lovecraftian) which fits in well with the post-modern suspicion of the universal validity of metanarratives."
According to my sister Japanamation may have influence over btvs. Sailor moon (not the cheesy dubbed version but the subtitled one) is similer. It has a heoin with a legion of friends it's antihero tuxedo mask (aka spike) is in love with her and two of the female cadets are verrry close to one another. Also Vampire hunter D is somwhat similer though warped. Also Sonya blue a novel is similer accept the slayer was half vampire and more punk/goth than buffy.
"Well off the top of my headÖ

BTVP is of course a fairly good example of a bildungsroman which is the story of a hero who journeys from innocence/childhood into adulthood/experience. Other examples: Wilhelm Meister's Apprenticeship) Evelina David Copperfield or the classic example Star Wars.

Angel gosh I wish I had a fancy Lit Crit German term for this is the classic sinner seeking redemption story. Other Examples the Divine Comedy ("Halfway through the journey of our lives I came to myself in a dark wood and found that I had lost the true way." One of my favorite lines in literature) Pilgrims Progress and of course Forever Knight (best damn vampire cop show ever made).

Horror Films
They've managed to have just about every kind of horror film creature: Vampires (of course) Witches In-human Femme Fatale (Preying mantis woman etc) insane robots the mummy creature from the Black Lagoon werewolves zombies trolls demons possessed computers demons in their generic brand. Did anyone else think of Nosferatu when watching Hush?

Conversely most of the named species of demons appear to be unique to the Jossverse.

Buffy herself is both a reversal of the typical female in the classic horror movie (blond babe who foolishly runs into a dark alley and gets killed) and the embodiment of the slasher movie female heroine. You know I wish I could remember the name of the book that talked about this (check your local university library for Horror Movie Criticism). It discussed how in many slasher pics the villain is a man with some sort of phallic/stabbing weapon. He attacks a series of sexually active characters who die while the predominantly pre-adolescent male audience cheers. Then the female main character who is shy/tom boyish/not sexually active/not comfortable with her own sexuality seizes (often literally) control of the villain's weapon in some way and defeats him while the predominantly pre-adolescent male audience cheers. The first Slumber Party Massacre movie is a great example of this.

I'd have to agree with the Batman/Angel analogy. He belongs to that long tradition of damned and brooding in it hero. Do good brood. Brood some more do good. Spike strikes me as fairly John Constantine-esk. Accent hair trench coat punk past cigarette smoking choice of swear words. I can also imagine Spike flipping off the Lords of Hell. Course Contantine is kinda sorta more heroic. Riley is very Captain America/G.I. Joe corn fed and true American blue. I just can't place our title character. I mean there are plenty of Amazonian hiny kicking comic book heroines but I'd be hard pressed to say Character name=Buffy.

Mustn't neglect literature: Dracula Lovecraftian primordial monsters (Bad Eggs and come to think of it Go Fish. Fish freaked Lovecraft out.) and Dr. Jeckel and Mr. Hyde (Beauty and the Beasts).

Of course Beauty and the Beasts makes me think of the whole reoccurrence of the Doppelganger/character possessed by evil/characters who mirror each other darkly thing. Willow/Vamp Willow Xander/VampXander Xander/split in two Xander Xander/Hyena Xander Rupert/Ripper Janus Buffy/Faith Angel/Angelus every main vamp/their pre vamp days. HmmmÖactually there are too many to list.

Random thoughts
After watching Fool for Love I went and reread Andreas Capellanus' The Art of Courtly Love (aka How to pick up Chicks in Medieval France). I wanted to think about how the Courtly love tradition gave disenfranchised/but armed to the teeth landless young knights a role/investment in the overall culture. (A whole big long not going there here discussion) I'm sure they weren't thinking of that when they started the whole Buffy/Spike arc. However it means that you can find connections pretty much anywhere you want to.

I look forward to hearing more about the project.

P.S. Oh and thanks purplegrrl and OnM for your reponses to my Total War Post. I'm afraid it takes me so long to think about these things that I probably won't post much.
Thanks folks - there are a lot of good ideas here. I've been looking at Sailor Moon & one or two other Anime productions vis Buffy. I'm seeing her as a kind of post feminist anti DiD - I think Masquerade has something similar.

Angel is pretty much a regular Hero with a hamartia which brings both the necessity for and the means of redemption: he's kinda Sophoklean almost Christlike in some respects and most like Beowulf or more exactly Beowulf's Danish analogue Bothvarr Bjarki.

What is fascinating is the cosmology where does this demonology and the idea of the Slayer come from? Is t purely a post-feminist response to the 'Isabella' syndrome in Gothic literature?

A good deal of Joss's vampire mythos is drawn from Anne Rice's novels. For example the way vampires are sired.

This has already been mentioned but BTVS also draws a lot from the Japanese version of Sailormoon. For instanceo this season's story arc is frighteningly like the second (R) season of Sailormoon:

Young girl (Dawn/Chibi-Usa) appears out of nowhere. People's memories are modified so that they think she has always been there. It turns out she has been sent to the heroine (Buffy/Sailormoon) for protection from villains (Glory and the Knights of Byzantium/Black Moon Family). The villains want to use the young girl to open a door and in the process kill many people.

I researched this whole thing much too thoroughly didn't I?
And isn't Glory just a bit like Galexia?
Hee my roommate and I love making Buffy/Sailormoon connections but I didn't realize other people do. Scary in the reassuring way. ^_^

Glory is frighteningly like Galaxia as SJH said. Both super-strong & invulnerable both absorb something essential from their victims both are mean to their minions etc. Dawn is quite like Chibiusa but also a bit like Chibichibi in that she's related to/being hunted by Glory/Galaxia. Oh and Chibiusa was also once kidnapped by an inept female vampire. ^_- You could also draw a paralell between Dawn and Sailorsaturn. One group wants to protect Saturn because they love her one group wants to use her power for evil from another world and one group wants to kill her to prevent that. If Dawn get glowing purple eyes when she awakens her Keyness I'm going to find Joss and scold him.

Also in the fifth season the sailor senshi gave their power to Sailormoon enabling her to become Eternalsailormoon just like the scoobies performed the spell that put their essences into Buffy turning her into Eternalslayermoon.

Then there's the boyfriends who easily undergo personality changes the demonic high schools the lesbians . . . I'll stop now.
I'm beginning to realise that I'm at considerable tactical disadvantage on this side of the Herring Pond. We're about a season behind you (on terrestrial tv and I disdain satellite cos it's run by a bunch of power hungry crooks). I get the gist of what you're saying but anything past #P4ABB15 is a bit of a blur.

"One more place for your Questioner to look for cultural references in BtVS is the new book
"Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Monster Book" by Christopher Golden Stephen R. Bissette and Thomas E. Sniegoski.

Although the book focuses on the monsters there is a lot of information about where certain influences for the show came from including interviews with Joss and others. "
"Hi everyone! I'm new here but I love your discussions so I'm gonna throw my two cents too.

After rewatching "Out of my mind" for the "x" time a thought came to me. Why the hell Spike is having that dream now? Why that particular timing?

If we look at Spike so far he has always wanted to kill the slayer. He's still looking forward to killing her in "Out of my mind". He makes the dive can't bite her because of the chip he has a dream about Buffy and suddenly BOUM! he becomes all silly putty. The attraction Spike feels towards Buffy has always been semi-present (James Marsters says himself that he always acted that way on purpose even if it wasn't written in the script) so it's not a very new fact that he's attracted to her. Only now he knows it and can't seem to get past it.

So again my question: why now Spike gives in to his feelings? He says himself :"This has got to end" and after his dream:"Oh no! Please God no!" He doesn't want it and still the next time he sees Buffy he's all different around her. A little dopey (it's in the script!) acting like a child on his first crush (not unlike the way he was when alive). So could the chip be responsible for this? I mean could the doctor have activated something new in him? Something that allows his former self to come to the surface? What do you think?"
"Great Idea! And I love the irony that Spike's attempt to reclaim his "Big Bad" status resulted in him falling in love with his "hated enemy."
He went from the frying pan into the fire."
"Question is was it the chip that made him say "This has got to end" or was it just that his failed attempt at biting her was the straw that broke the camel's back? Also once Spike has decided (on his own or because the doctor upped the potency of the chip) that 'this has got to end' does he dream that he loves Buffy because he has given up and the focus of his desire to kill her is revealed as latent attraction or has the chip converted his evil spade and weeds thoughts of killing her into hearts and flowers?

Nina: We've been discussing this a great deal on this board (scroll down a few pages) and each poster has a pet theory about the chip and what it does. Mine goes like this (I'll give you the short version;): Spike's chip was removed by the doctor in OomM but its removal amplified the effect of the chip or cause some kind of brain damage. My other pet theory is that the chip never really existed in the first place and that the easter egg Harmony saw was actually a part of the brain stem.

One of the biggest questions re: the chip is whether or not the chip (assuming it exists) can sense if Spike is going to bite or harm a human or whether it keeps Spike from harming entities *he* thinks are human. Seems to me this is going to be put to the test soon.

"This has got to end. This is the line I find most significant as well. Because Spike couldn't best Buffy physically he may have sublimated the hate into a more manageable emotion i.e. love. He may subconsciously figure this is his best chance of "conquering" Buffy. His dream the following week where he's fighting her instead of kissing her tells me that there is still some violence mixed in with whatever tender feelings he has towards her. That doesn't mean I don't think his love is genuine but the motives that led to his feeling that way are a little suspect. "
"Thanks Aquitaine! I've been reading the message board all day and discovered quite a lot of theories! (should have waited before posting!) but well I seem to have nothing else to do these days then obsessing about the Buffy universe (time to get a life I know).

What's really getting my attention is the "why now?"... it could have been anytime in the season for that matter. A little later a little sooner. But it seems that the writers are paying a lot of attention to these details so hence the reason why I'm wondering if the chip has something to do!

Now if the chip exists or not... that's another very interesting question. How would you explain the pain Spike feels when he wants to kill humans if?"
I was reading through some earlier posts in regard to what Willow's dream means and someone mentioned there was discussion at some point that Willow is a spy. What's this all about if anyone knows.....
" There wasn't really anything much to it. It's just that there was a spoiler around awhile back that there was a CoW spy around Sunnydale quite possible one of the Scoobs. I think this spoiler has pretty much died since Checkpoint so I doubt very much that it has much truth (although why the CoW wouldn't have a spy on Buffy when they had one on Faith when she was in a coma I will never know). Some of us at a different board were just going through the possibilities y'know which characters it was most likely to be. We just thought that Willow's dream could possibly point to it being her you know because of all the "hiding" and being in the play in "costume" and all that sort of thing. There were people who were saying the spy was Xander because of the "Big Brother" reference. Really it was all just speculation and not being overly serious. I was just using that as an example of how you can read pretty much anything you want into Restless. Sorry sisn't mean to freak you out! :)"
Thanks so much for taking the time to answer me. I was really curious!
"I've never asked a question of the board before so I'm a little nervous. This has stuck in my head for the last week and since things have been kinda quiet while we wait for the new episodes to start I decided to take the plunge.

Now that Spike's basically told Buffy that her threat to stake him has "gone stale " what will she do now? Will she think up another threat to keep him in line? Give up on threats all together? Admit she won't stake him now unless he gives her a reason?

Does anybody have any ideas on this?"
"Don't be nervous. LOL. The worst thing that could happen is that no one answers you (which won't happen since I'm posting this). BTW the fact that no one answers doesn't necessarily mean no one cares about what you wrote; could be that what you wrote was inherently rhetorical. It's a weird dynamic (and now I'm babbling - sorry).

As for your question "Will Buffy Have to Sing a New Tune?" I think the answer is 'she already is'. Spike's tune has changed and therefore she has no choice but to change as well (witness her passive listener mode in FFL her agreeing to go with him to the vamp brothel her taking her family to him for protection...). The dynamic between them was established in Season 2 and has been pretty consistent up 'til now. It went like this: I try to kill you (but fail) you try to kill me (but fail) let's work together on this because it suits both of us (and succeed) if you do this I'll do that (and it works). It's always been a give and take tit for tat reciprocal (in a bizarre way) relationship". I suppose you could call it co-dependent when one element changes so does the other. It is clear to me that this is the case but the show has never really explained *why* this co-dependency exists (maybe that's what's so intriguing about it). What exactly is the connection between these two?


Since his 'chipping' Spike has gradually accepted the fact that he needs the SG and Buffy in his life and now that he has discovered that his obsession with Buffy is 'love' he clings to the fringes of Buffy's life. Buffy is less aware of the 'need' for Spike in her life and many would argue that Buffy *has* no need for him. I side with the camp that says she does need something from him or else he'd be dead. I don't know what that something is however. A great deal hinges on the manner in which Spike deals with Buffy's reaction to his declaration of love. I'm not referring to his initial reaction but to his long term reaction. Will he be satisfied with and settle for living on the fringes of Buffy's affections and of her life? Or will he choose another path? (Sorry it appears I'm still babbling and now have generated more questions!)

Back to your question. Yes. Buffy will have to sing a new tune especially when 'new' info re: Spike's feelings for her come to her conscious attention rather than lurk in her subconscious. She clearly has no overt wish to kill him or she'd have done it in NPLH after he tried to get himself de-chipped. I can only see her initially and on the surface at least being very confused and grossed out by his declaration. But without a doubt she'll have to find a new way to deal with him and to think about him. She'll never see him the same way.

The real question is will the new song she sings be a love song a heavy metal song a bluesy number or something... alternative:) I vote for the last. "
"Co-dependency...that's a good analogy for the weird relationship they have. As Buffy told Riley last year "Spike is hard to explain". Personally I don't think he's hard to explain she just doesn't want to examine the explanation. In OOMM there are numerous references made by both Buffy and Spike that they are ever-present in each others lives and that it's driving them mutually crazy:

Buffy: I so don't want to deal with Spike right now. He's really starting to bug me in a "I wanna shove something wooden through his heart" kind of way.

Spike: She follows me you know tracks me down. I'm her pet project drive Spike 'round the bend.

For two people who profess distaste for each other they seem to frequently end up seeking each other out for one reason or another.

What I liked about that scene you mentioned in Checkpoint is that Spike finally called Buffy on her endless empty threats. And Buffy's silence spoke volumes. It's finally acknowledged by both parties that Buffy isn't going to hurt him. Does that mean Buffy will start to sing a new tune? No Buffy is not one to be introspective unless forced to be. I believe the upcoming episodes 14-16 will bring their relationship to a head force Buffy to confront Spike's place in her life(or lack of one) and that's when we'll know what the new tune is Buffy will be singing."
Aquitaine's right Isabel... how a thread gets answered or not tends to be very unpredictable. I've posted quite a few by this time and there are topics were I thought Oooo! Oooo!! This'll really get a discussion going and I get like 2 responses! ;) Then I'll just throw something out that pops into my head for a moment and there's 30-some responses! Go figure! ;)

The long slow dance between Buffy and Spike has sustained more interest than I would venture any other Buffyverse subject. I personally think it has something to do with some innate subconscious sense that Buffy has (and isn't even aware of) that tells her *not* to dust him. It is the same sense that 'told' her to protect and remain mum about Angel returning from hell. When push came to shove and Angel was going to kill himself and Buffy couldn't convince him not to the 'snow' appears. A sign from the PTB? Most fans assume so and that gives us good reason to follow Buffy's instincts no matter how peculiar they may seem at times.

Whether Buffy is a 'messiah-in-training' or just really *really* lucky we will as always (~sigh~) just have to wait and see.
"Thanks guys. You've given me things to mull over. Their relationship has changed already. Hmmm.

Has Buffy even hit Spike since "Fool For Love?"
For a while she socked him on sight then he asked her to do it and now she won't. Those two are warped. No matter what the relationship evolves into they'll probably be singing something by 'The Kinks.'

We'll see in the next few weeks anyhow.
"In the long run though I'll be glad when this story line is over. "Slayer in love with a Vampire?" Been there done that."
"Well we've heard a good theory that maybe Willow's dream was actually about Dawn and it got me thinking about the other dreams and how they are fortelling what's to come.

specifically Xander's dream. Snyder tells him he is a "whipping boy set on a sacrificial stone". The writers have said that this season Buffy will suffer a loss greater than she ever has before. Will it be her actually sacrificing a human life? Xander specifically?

it's been a long time since the writers have thrown us for a loop like this not since Buffy sent Angel to hell after he regained his soul. And not all would be lost for Xander either. Remember in the Angel episode the Trial they owe Angel and he now has a sort of voucher to bring someone back from the dead.

Just imagine if they ended the season with Xander being dead? Shades of the old unpredictable BtVS methinks."
I think what you suggest is eminently possible and I think Xander may 'leave' as early as episode 16... My reasoning? Well episode 17 of A:tS is Cordy-centric and I'm thinking that
Xander's 'leaving' the Buffyverse might affect Cordy in many significant ways. Without a doubt Cordy was emotionally scarred by Xander and Willow's betrayal. She hasn't been in a relationship since then. Notice that I say 'leave' and not 'die'. The spoilers say that someone very close to Buffy 'leaves'. Maybe Xander will sacrifice himself for Buffy in the Glory debacle and end up in another reality? I know this sounds sick but I'd actually find that a very refreshing plot twist.
Well spoilers say February will be a big month for Xander but they seemed to indicate he had a big destiny to fulfill something that might come between him and Anya. I thought it would be something a little more noble than to just die. His death would certainly be a big surprise for episode 16 when most of us think Joyce is going to die. I agree it would be nice for the writers to zig when we expect them to zag since we haven't had very many of those surprises in a while. Of course if Xander is the one who's going to die then we're going to have to consider the possibility that those time travel spoilers are also correct since I don't think they'd write NB off the show permanently.

My money is still on Joyce though.
"Well since the door has been opened let this fool rush in. My thoughts are not about Xander but about Dawn. I think that Glory & Ben are the yin and yang of some sort of god-dom. Eventually they along with The Key will merge and evolve to some other dimension.
The Key will separate itself from Dawn as it leaves and Buffy will truly have a "little sister." And that Little Sister will be left with some sort of special powers to aid Buffy in her neverending fight against Evil."
So you see Dawn becoming a regular on the show? I just always assumed her role would be written out for maximum angst. Something along the lines of she has to return to her previous energy form for the good of mankind and to thwart Glory and Ben so Buffy has to say goodbye to her sister and much unhappiness ensues. Your theory could work though if they want to keep MT on the show. I'm wondering if in the huge season finale also the 100th episode(?) we're going to have a huge clash between Gods and demons as the gates of both are unlocked somehow by the Key. I'd love to see some sort of Excalibur type battles with hundreds of warriors fighting!
Have to go with jade here as to Dawn being the one who dies/leaves/vanishes/returns to energy form whatever thus causing Buffy significant heartbreak. I think most fans are assuming it will be Joyce.

What I like about the Dawn angle is that there is the irony (a Jossian favorite) of Dawn having not existed until he monks 'created' her. It knid of brings up similar questions as to what constitues actual 'life' much like the Doctor or Data in the Trek universe.

The reason it will cause Buffy so much heartbreak is that I'm wondering if she has ever realized just how lonely it was growing up as an only child. I think this was also a factor in her overall dynamic with Faith who at least for a while was sister-like to her. (Also insert appropriate Faith/Buffy dream refs here-- 'little sis' etc).

I very much doubt Xander will get gone at least not permanently. I also seem to recall a Joss interview where he expressed something to the effect that the 'core' of the group-- Buffy Giles Willow and Xander-- will always be around. Anybody else-- anything is possible (evil Joss grin).
"Couldn't this be the "loss" that you are all discussing? I like Dawn but Zander is such an integral part of the show...it would lose something very special if he were gone."
"I have to say I'm torn between Brian's and jade's theories. They both make for good storytelling. Brian's would be a great way to introduce a new character in the show permanently. And there were the spoilers that Dawn was supposed to have some sort of powers that would help out Buffy. But for gut wrenching angst jade wins the prize. Even though Buffy knows that Dawn isn't her "real" sister in her head all her emotions and memories tell her otherwise. She has no memory of not having a little sister. So losing her would be a great loss for Buffy a loss like no other. "
But what i was saying was that Xander could be brought back with the help of Angel (the favor he is owed from the Trial). This could cause angst for Buffy because she let one of her friends die even if they were brought back she would have the knowledge that she sacrificed one of her friends.

i like the Dawn causing Joyce's death thing though...that would be really interesting.
Thanks to the requests of my many fans (all 3 or 4 of them!) and for your greater viewing pleasure here is
the *very first* installment of OnMís weekly Classic Movie Recommendation! (Assuming of course that
Masq doesnít kick me off her server for hijackiing her webspace in this manner! I mean hey the chocolate
& sprinkles crowd have *their* little section of ATPoBtVS cyberspace! ;) ;)

* * * * * *

Regular ATPoBtVS posters are likely aware of my propensity for suggesting a movie as evidence in
support of some given point being discussed. This is possible because movies have been with us for so long
now and are such an ingrained part of modern Western culture that they serve as a kind of cultural
shorthand. If someone else has seen the same movie you have you have both enjoyed a commonality of
experience that makes illustrating a point of discusson much easier-- even if the person saw the movie and
came to a completely opposite conclusion!

So as not to go too far off-topic I will try to stick with selections that relate to threads/topics we have
discussed or are discussing here on the board. Nonetheless be forewarned that I have a certain affection
for tangency and may very well go off on one on occasion. ;)

A secondary benefit of this beyond feeding my ego (which in non-cyber reality is fairly small and could use
some fattening up) is that youíll end up being entertained and perhaps provoked into thought in ways that
could be pleasantly unexpected. I am most certainly not a movie snob I enjoy some good mindless
entertainment as much as the next prole as long as said entertainment itself wasnít *made* by mindless
people. I do tend to seek out the unexpected in movies and like many people I live where the local
cinemas shy away from anything that isnít fairly mainstream. So praise be for video!

My recommendations will not include any lengthy analyses such is not the intention. If however you see
something in a film Iíve recommended especially if it relates to the Buffyverse please feel free to start a
thread on the topic you want to comment on or discuss. (Earlier this week I urged one and all to hasten
forth to see ëCrouching Tiger Hidden Dragoní-- a film with multiple BV resonances). These weekly
excursions will primarily involve ëclassicí films which I define as anything not in current release so that
can cover a lot of territory!

Well thatís enough for now... letís commence to do the thang!

* * * * * * *

About a week or so ago we were discussing the Watcherís Council in particular and bureaucracies in
general one of the salient points that all seemed to agree on was that bureaucracies are 1) seemingly self
perpetuating often to the exclusion of whatever it is they were originally supposed to do and 2) able to
wield great power with little oversight by those they are supposed to serve.

So with this in mind my Classic Movie of the Week is Terry Gilliamís brilliant reworking of George
Orwellís ë1984í dystopia *Brazil*.

Iím pretty sure this has been re-released on DVD but whatever format you choose be certain to get the
ëDirectorís Cutí edition. If your tape or disk has a happy ending surprise!-- you have the version that the
studio wrested away from Gilliam re-edited to the point of making it a pale resemblence to the original
intent and even tacked on a bogus ëhappy endingí. Of course the resulting studio ëimproved versioní
flopped miserablyat the box office. Gilliam eventually regained control of his creation and over the years it
has grown into a nearly cult phenomenom. Witty ironic dark visually striking beautifully written and as
is the norm for Gilliam totally unlike anything else out there in movieland.

* * * * * * *

Next week Fearís evil twin Paranoia-- in a great movie very few have even heard of let alone seen
recently re-released on DVD.

E Pluribus Cinema Unum
Wow sounds like a good movie. I'll have to keep a look out for it next time we're in the video store.

Unfortuanly because I live over an hour from the nearest city we only get two stations. Two startions where they never show anything good (except for Buffy once a week and the one time showing of 'The Meaning of Life' by Monty Python). End rant and now geting back to the topic.

I'll make sure to keep an eye out for 'Brazil'.

I look forward to you next pick OnM. :)
"I've heard of the movie Brazil. Most people seem to love or hate it but most seem to agree it's visually stunning. I know my local library has a copy so I'll have to check it out.

Also I don't know if we were supposed to add our own connections we saw between movies and BTVS but in season 4 with the Initiative storyline and Spike getting chipped I immediately thought of "A Clockwork Orange" an extremely disturbing film in which a violent criminal undergoes a sort of mind control experiment by the government to cure him of his violent urges. It worked very similar to Spike's chip without there being an actual chip. Of course the irony became that the criminal once "cured" was then helpless and vulnerable to other criminals. Anyway this isn't a movie for everyone's taste but I can say that it was truly unforgettable. "
A number of people have made reference to this movie (the book was by Anthony Burgess I believe) in connection with Spike so you're not alone in picking up on it jade. What I always wonder is if the writers of Buffy/Angel think of these connections before or after they do the screenplay. As I mentioned movies are such a great part of our collective consciousness we can easily make reference to them without really thinking about it.

Look at Ronald Reagan-- at times during his administartion he made references to things that he seemed to think were real and it turned out to be something that he saw in a movie and internalized to the extent that it became 'reality' for him!
"I believe the BTVS writers intentially mimic some movies. For example in OOMM when Spike and Harmony kidnap the doctor the shooting script calls for them to walk in and take charge "Natural Born Killers" style. And although I haven't seen "Casper" I heard that the W/T dancing scene in "Family" was an imitation of a scene from that movie. Moments like this aren't what you're talking about though I don't think. Aren't you talking more about themes from movies?"

Don't sweat it. People come and go from discussion boards so as long as the same point doesn't get repeated like every other week it doesn't hurt anything. Besides you may have a different spin on the point than someone else has.

Both specific scenes or moments or general themes are perfectly acceptable topics for commentary. One of the greatest pleasures I get from frequenting this board (ans occasionally a few others) is that other people see things that I don't or put a different interpretation on things that I did see.

For the same reasons I enjoy DVDs or laserdiscs that have directors and/or cast members commentary tracks on them. Everything I learn accumulates and enhances my enjoyment of movies/books/etc. that I experience in future.

My pick for a movie of the week and in trying to keep it with a related BtVS moment would be a New Zealand film called Bizarre. The main character has a heart attack and then has an out of body experience. When he is revived by medics he comes to believe that he really did die and now he is living in Hell as he discovers more and more evidence of nasty craziness and betrayals by his family and friends.
"Unfortunately I think "Brazil" loses something when translated to the small screen. I originally saw it in the theater but when it was shown on TV some time later I couldn't keep focused on the story. You sort of need to immerse yourself in the movie without other distracts."
Do Dawn or Anya have souls?

Dawn is energy manifested into a human body. She appears to be pure hearted and can show compassion. But since she isn't technically human does she have a soul?

As for Anya she is without a question human. However she does not show much evidence of having a soul. Unlike Angel she does not feel guilty about the people she tormented and killed while she was a demon (and Anyanka was wreaking havok for 850 years more than Angelus). And moreover Anya does not show much human kindness or compassion (her utter lack of tact).

So who has a soul?
"Not sure about Anya but Dawn has a soul. As the monk told Buffy "Made the key human sent it to you." Then later he says something like "Just human now."

Sounds to me like Dawn is completely human two arms two legs and a soul. The monks gave her the works!

I know there were some early rumors last summer that Dawn would be able to channel demons and stuff but I don't think she has any special powers. So far we haven't seen them and I'm guessing Glory will have to do something to Dawn in order to achieve her goal whatever it is.

Perhaps Glory will need to convert Dawn back into energy or say some sort of spell when the planets come into the right alignment to unleash the power that is within her.

We haven't had any indication (yet!) that Dawn is anything more than human so she must have a soul.
That would be some feat if those monks created a soul as a side effect of putting the key into human form. I agree that Dawn certainly acts like a full human being and certainly believes herself to be one - but does that mean she really is? Jury's still out on that one as far as I'm concerned though if I were Buffy and the gang I'd have to bet that she does and treat her accordingly just to be on the safe and compassionate side.

As for Anyanka it seems as though she were human once and that in turning into a demon nothing was really taken away from her. In other words she was augmented but not really changed. I've certainly known (or know of) women who display the same kind of rutheless hatred and contempt of men (or people in general) that Anyanka seems to have had. Anya however strikes me as someone who has been detached and on the outiside looking in for over a thousand years. I don't think it is that she lacks a soul I just think she needs time to reconnect and learn a new way of relating to men (and women). Having a sould doesn't automatically grant empathy or even a strong conscience. Anya is certainly a more loving person than the Wolfram & Hart folks - and we know that Lindsey and Lilah have souls!

I hope Dawn turns out to have an ability that nobody else has. It would give her something to add to the Scooby Gang.

I always thought that the statement made to Dawn by those who were victims of Glory walking around town insane stating she was a shell or empty or there was nothing there was because she had no soul. She was human form but had empty inside.

"Anya has shown kindness and caring to Xander. To relearn humanity she is having to experience it again first. I don't think she has been any less hateful than Cordelia used to be. I like Anya. I believe her employment is also helping her integrate back into society. Admittedly she is having to learn retail skills ("Here is your package. Please go.") but she has found something she has a knack for (gift wrapping handling money)and was adamant about protecting Gile's merchandise (I think she would have protected it from anyone although with Willow she probably was a little more touchy.) She also offered herself in Xander's place to the troll.

I think she has a soul. Vampires don't. Do other demons? Are all demons soulless? Since she was basically herself after becoming a vengeance demon (only with the power)was her soul simply overprinted with her new demon power and when the amulet was destroyed the power left and her soul was again exposed?"
I have a question about the soul in the Buffyverse. Please excuse me for not going through all the postings and references. I'm really enjoying this site now that I've discovered it and going through all the episodes a few a day. I still have a tremendous amount to read.

Anyway in the Buffyverse is it true that humans are the only ones with souls and the conscience or the ability to discern between good and evil and then choose good (providing the conscience is well-formed) resides in the soul? When the human is turned into a vampire the soul leaves the body but the memories remain behind helping to form the newly created vampire?

Everything else--Demons gods and angels (if there are such although we haven't seen any) are spiritual beings without souls although they have physical forms housing their spirits. I'm having a real problem with getting a handle on choice and free will regarding vampires. This has probably been discussed to death but it's new to me.

I did some exploration of the nature of the soul in this thread below. It doesn't answer all you questions (not that I'm suggesting I even know any real answers just theories) but it's a jumping off point.
My impression is that souls are an intrinsic part of human beings--like a mystical internal organ. Perhaps its much harder to make a human *without* a soul than with one.

But another impression I get is that demons have something analogous. Whereas humans use their souls to (among other things) feel compassion demons use what-ever-they-have to power their predatory instincts.

Yet really impressive vampires--The Master Angelus Darla Spike Drusilla VampWillow--evidently can develop something like compassion or even love (albeit usually for their own kind). Interestingly vampires were also inspired to loyalty by Adam.

So I'd assume both Dawn and Anya *do* have souls.
"This whole matter of who does and doesn't have a soul and what having a soul means is very murky in the Buffyverse. There always seems to be this assumption that soul = human and good. And that no soul = demon and bad. In Gingerbread when it first appeared that the villains may be people performing black magic Buffy is horrified "Someone with a soul did this?!" The basis for these assumptions seems to be Angel who stopped his killing ways when his soul was restored. Add to that his speach in "Angel" the episode "When you become a vampire the demons takes your body but it doesn't get your soul. That's gone." But note he says YOUR soul not THE soul. In addition there is some evidence in the show that demons do in fact have souls the most significant being Giles explanation of vampires in The Harvest
"The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a human mixed their blood. He was a human form possessed infected by the DEMON'S SOUL."

Of course there are plenty of examples in both shows that humans presumably in possession of a soul do great evil. Note all the episodes where the villain does turn out to be a human (the list is too long to cite each episode here) anything involving Ethan Rayne and of course the whole W&H organization. And being revivified as a human also presumably with a soul did not automatically endow Darla with a will to do good or even regret for her past evil deeds. We've also seen that being a demon does not automatically = evil. This all leads me to assume that in the Buffyverse there are different types of souls human and other and that sentient beings all probably have a soul of some type. So either way Anya has a soul.

As for Dawn that's harder to call. The monk said she was originally just energy. Did that energy have sentience? Did it qualify as a being? Maybe the energy was pure soul. In which case Dawn would be the housing for that soul. Just like any other being in the Buffyverse.
"I like Marya idea's about Dawn being a human 'housing' for a sentient energy based entity that its 'soul' is now hers. This would apply assuming Dawn is 'for real' in a corporeal sense as the monk asserted. But is this the case?

One thing that has puzzled me is a certain inconsistancy between what the monk said-- "We molded it made it human"-- and the comments of the 'insane' people who said she was 'hollow' or 'empty' or words to that effect. Also there was the spell Buffy performed when she first discovered that Dawn was 'different' you will recall her form or visage faded in and out in the pictures and when Buffy went into her room.

If Dawn is fully corporeal why would she fade in or out of 'reality' or be perceived as 'empty' by any other human insane or not?

In a thread below I wondered if in fact Dawn is possibly not the Key at all but a diversionary tactic for the monks to protect the Key should Buffy fail in her quest to protect her 'sister'.

Suppose Dawn is *not* corporeal but has an existence only in the collective unconscious of those the spell affects? (See also my related posts on the spell as a 'virus' if you haven't already). This could explain why 'insane' people don't see her or see her as 'empty' they are no longer tuned in to that collective.

Also when under the effects of the Magick Buffy used to locate what she thought was the source of her mother's brain tumor why the fading in and out phenomena.


Your idea that Dawn is really some sort of illusion a deception by the monks seems problematic to me. For one if Dawn is not really the Key than who or what is? I saw your post earlier suggesting it might be Willow or some other character. Asking us the viewers to accept that an established character's true nature is so entirely different from anything we've been shown so far would require a leap of faith that I think even us most loyal fans would have trouble with. I suppose the Key could have been put in hiding in one of the characters but there are still problems. It would require us to believe that the monk was completely lyng to Buffy. While the monks certainly were capable of deception -- they had to be or they wouldn't have been able to protect the Key as long as they did -- I don't see them as being so totally duplicitous. And what would they gain by telling Buffy she had to protect the Key and then denying her the knowledge to do it. As for hedging against her failure then why tell her at all. Just hide it and keep it a secret from everyone. As far as why she blinks out when seen by someone freed of the spell haven't a clue. Maybe they're just seeing what the world should have or would have been like if the monks hadn't done the spell in the first place.
"Also there was the spell Buffy performed when she first discovered that Dawn was 'different ' you will recall her form or visage faded in and out in the pictures and when Buffy went into her room...If Dawn is fully corporeal why would she fade in or out of 'reality ' or be perceived as 'empty' by any other human insane or not?

Maybe for the same reasons that Adam was able to see through the Jonathanverse in Superstar. I see the Superstar situation not as a full fledged alternate reality but as a false reality superimposed over the true reality. I think that had Jonathan been able to sustain his spell long enough there was the possibility that the new reality could supplant the original and the original would slowly fade away. It does not seem to be an AU in the sense of Wish with separate characters and new destinies. In Wish when Anya's spell was broken Cordelia was transported back to the moment in time when she had made the wish -- in Superstar life had continued. Yet no characters had gaps in their memories for the time period when they were in the Superstar universe (not even Jonathan) and the memories of the Jonathanverse faded almost immediately (the next day Jonathan could not remember the specifics of his conversation with Buffy -- and he was the focal point of the spell).

I think the same thing is happening with Dawn: there are two competing realities -- and insane people and people in trances can glimpse the old universe. If Dawn is killed or her energy is consumed (by whatever nefarious scheme Glory has in mind) the universe will slide back to the way it would have been without her -- and the memories of Dawn will quickly fade away (in spite of how hard Buffy might try to retain them).

It wasn't that Dawn was "fading " but that Buffy was viewing a world with Dawn in one instant and a world without her in the next.
As usual Malandanza very logical and well reasoned. I've been pondering this whole issue for a goodly part of the day and I still haven't sorted out everything! Later on I'm going to try to come up with a theory that has few enough holes in it that I can stick by it until something on the show proves me wrong (not that *that* ever happens... uh-huh... if you don't count the dozen or so times I get proved wrong *every* season!).
"If a soul were to be removed from a human body what would be the result? Would the person continue to function oblivious even to the fact the his soul was gone? Would he suddenly fall into a coma baffling medical experts? Or would he be something in between -- an automaton devoid of any real personality but with the memories and perhaps mannerisms of the original?

It seems to me that the soul is distinct from the conscience. I believe that when the Ethros demon spoke of Ryan (in IGYUMS) being without a soul he was merely being poetic. Ryan was without a conscience. Ryan is the only human we have heard of on the show as not having a soul -- yet there is plenty of evil (presumably even Hitler Stalin and Pol Pot had souls).

It also seems as though the soul is different from the "life-force." Animals are alive -- yet the lower animals can be frozen -- suspending all life functions -- then reanimated even after years when the temperature returns to normal. To say that the soul is that which animates our bodies suggests that the animal souls either never leave their bodies or are called back when reanimated. Neither of these ideas seem satisfactory.

I have stated previously that I felt that the soul was what allowed people to distinguish between right and wrong while the conscience punished them for choosing wrong. So soulless beings would be amoral rather than immoral. Now I am leaning toward another possibility: the conscience alone is what determines morality. The soul may be no more than that part which survives death -- a psychic imprint of the person's memories and personality. In this case being soulless would simply mean that the individual has no immortal part; they cease to exist when they die and return if revived like the lower animals. Dawn could be entirely human yet at the same time have no soul. "
It's true that the whole matter of having a soul or not is very murky in the Buffyverse. Spike doesn't have a soul and yet he seems to be developing very human feelings for Buffy and he clearly loved Dru. I think when someone is vamped it's more than a matter of losing the soul a demon craving blood is inside of the former person and the lack of the soul is what enables them to take human life without remorse. I think in a fit of anger Spike could kill Buffy(although that probably won't happen) just because the demon is still part of him but i think he would definitely feel remorse for it and remorse is something that comes along with having compassion something that we generally assosciate with a soul.

a lot of philosophers argue about the existance of a soul i will try and find some stuff about that it's really very interesting i wish we had a more clear cut definition on what a soul is in the buffyverse.

What happens when a person is turned into a vampire pretty much answers your questions about what happens when a soul is removed from the body. Since the memories and personality remain that argues against that being the nature of the human soul. They seem to reside in the body. Perhaps in the human the soul conscience and personality are somehow intertwined. This could explain why some vampires seem to have a capacity for feelings and actions that are usually ascribed to humans only. When the vampire demon aquires the memories and personality of it's victims it also gets echoes of the soul and conscience. And if you agree with my earlier post that there are demon souls as well as human those echoes might get imprinted on it's soul. The more evil the original the more evil the resulting vamp and vice versa. That ties in the whole concept of free will even more than just whether a victim chooses to be vamped or not I think. Of course this all only applies to the Buffyverse. I have no idea what happens in RL. Although I do think a lot of this could be analogous to the Id Ego and Superego. None of this solves the problem of whether or not Dawn has a soul. She has a personality but that was artificially created by the monk's spell. She seems to have a conscience although she is prone to acting thoughtlessly. But does she have a soul? Without more information on her previous nature and how that was effected by her transformation it's hard to tell.

"What happens when a person is turned into a vampire pretty much answers your questions about what happens when a soul is removed from the body. Since the memories and personality remain that argues against that being the nature of the human soul. They seem to reside in the body. Perhaps in the human the soul conscience and personality are somehow intertwined...

Actually the memories and personality seem to reside not only in the body but the soul as well. Consider Angel/Angelus -- when Angel is resouled in B2 he remembers nothing about what he has done as Angelus. If the memories/personality resided solely in the body he would not have had that moment of disorientation before Buffy ran him through with the sword. It seems to take some time for the soul to integrate with the body. Remember the Faith and Buffy body switch -- Faith did not immediately have access to all of Buffy's memories (it is entirely possible that she would have eventually; in fact it may be some of Buffy's personality rubbing off on Faith that helped her repent -- and perhaps Buffy's newfound focus is a little bit of Faith influencing her). When a vampire is first reborn it is an unreasoning animal -- it does not have access to the memories and personality until after the first feeding. Which leads me to another question (posed long ago by Rufus but never addressed) is the animating spirit in the vampire sentient?

"Although I do think a lot of this could be analogous to the Id Ego and Superego."

I have also been thinking in terms of Id/Ego/Superego. As I understand this concept the Id represents the basic drives (the want/take/have part of the personality) while the superego represents the conscience. Suppose that vampires are nothing more than a powerful Id with a new set of drives (drink blood kill etc.) and the process of becoming a vampire suppresses the Superego. At first the vampire is ruled only by the id but after the first feeding the residual memories and personality of the host become available. In lieu of a true personality of the possessing spirit this personality (the remains of the Ego) becomes dominant. However without a Superego the new creature is much darker than the original. This could explain how basically good people (like Penn who had a very strong conscience) could become such evil creatures. Variations in how strong the vampiric Id is could also affect how often the base urges are obeyed.

The point of all of this as it relates to Dawn is that it may be possible for a creature to behave exactly as a human complete with conscience and not have a soul. The soul seems to be an immortal copy (an "imprint" of an "echo" -- very poetic :)of the creature's personality and memories. "
Just an idea here...

As mentioned above Ryan had no soul. But he still lived breathed and was able to think.

It seems as if the Soul has two purposes. One is to make it's host feel bad about doing things that are wrong.

And it's second purpose is to be a tally of all the good and bad things that the host has ever done. That way when the body dies the soul can be judged and go to either Heaven or Hell.

This would explain why Darla doesn't remember what happened after she was staked. Becuase when the vampire died she just became dust. The soul had already left. As for the memories that Darla has about being a vampire W&H must have included them when she was rencarnated. And this would explain why Angel couldn't remember the things he had done as Angelus at first.

The conscience would be the part that allows the host of the soul to decide what it belives is right or wrong. And the personality (or spirt) would be the template the thing that makes up the person's likes and dislikes.

When a person is vamped the Soul leaves talking the part that punishes for wrong deeds. The conscience would remain but is probluly ignored by the demon. And the personality stays at the fore front. Only now it follows the demon's agenda instead of the conscience's agenda.

As for the Soul it zips off to be judged and sent to the afterlife.

This would allow Dawn to function without a soul. All she needs is her conscience to guide her from right and wrong while the personality makes up her.

As for Anya the reason she doesn't seem to feel bad for what she did is because she did what she felt was right. She belived that men were pigs and that if they hurt woman they desereved to be killed. Since she did what she felt was right her conscience is not bothering her and her soul sees no need to punish her.

"I know we've nearly beat this horse to death. ;-) But I had one more thought on this subject.

What if the reason that Spike is pursuing Buffy is not because he is necessarily in love with her or his fascination with Slayers but because he has become one of those men who cannot go for very long without a woman in their life (or un-life in this case)?

Spike was with Drusilla for 100 years (give or take). When Dru ran off with the chaos demon Spike rebounded with Harmony. Why did Spike hook up with Harmony if he found her so annoying? And now that the "relationship" with Harmony has cooled Spike has turned his attentions to Buffy. And because Buffy has yet to return his "affections" (assuming she will) Spike is reduced to panty pilfering front yard haunting boyfriend ratting and demon fighting to get her attention or merely to be near her.

Any other thoughts??"
"I agree purplegrrl....Spike (or William or the two of them) is indeed the sort of person who simply can't tick on without loooove. We've seen ample excreable poetry quoting from torch songs the fact that no one would put up with Dru else and his outright statements (" I am love's bitch"). Yes his romanticism is his weakness. Of course I think it's Buffy's too...of all the SG's she's definitely the most starry eyed. "
More starry-eyed that Willow? Yes she had a big heart-break with Oz but she was always wanting to hear about other's romances (always talking to Buffy about the subject) and pining for her own.
"I agree JoRus. Buffy's a big-time romantic idealist. Witness her "they have a miraculous love" statement in Triangle. It is completely in contrast with her kick-ass Slayer persona in the same way Spike's romanticism goes against the vampire grain."
Hmmm. Somehow I started talking about Spike and everyone else ended up talking about Liam/Angelus/Angel and Darla.

I may need more than chocolate to puzzle this one out.
LOL. It sort of like sending your innocent child into the world and having him or her come back unrecognisable:) And now *I'm* talking in parables...
"GWBG just aired here and it got me to wondering and to speculating about a few random elements.

"He helps demons reads their souls senses their futures..."

Can the Caritas Host *only* read the future of demons with souls? Have we ever seen another vampire in the Karaoke bar? Darla was human when she sang there. I may be giving the writers too much credit but I don't think they'd throw around the word soul that casually...

Also is it just a coincidence that Holland Manners and Mr. Bryce are the same age? And does Mr. Bryce had anything to do with the SPs?

Virginia mentioned working at a tire store... The wild-goose-chase vision in Reunion had the gang stopping off at a tire store. Hmmmm... Maybe all roads lead to Virginia after all:)

Current board | More February 2001