June 2003 posts


Previous June 2003  

More June 2003

Back at you S'kat re: Spike - my response got eaten! -- curious, 15:03:07 06/12/03 Thu

Unlike many Spike fans, I did not see him as redeemed or good in S6, I saw him as grey, and still evil.

Me too. And the interviews with writers and JM make it clear that was what they were going for. I think they portrayed him grey but a lot of the audience still saw him as more redeemed than intended.

Seeing the DVDs makes a huge difference. I can zip to the scenes with Spike and skip the rest to focus on what exactly was going on with him - to see his journey separate from the rest of the show. The most recent commentary for "Wild at Heart" from JW solidified my opinion about what the writers were doing with Spike. He said something about how even villainous, horrible people don't see themselves that way. We all think of ourselves as "good guys" - even if others don't. The audience sees Spike from his own POV and Buffy's POV most of the time. We were supposed to see the "objective reality" POV (if such a thing exists) from people like Xander and Riley but some people didn't see enough of that POV to convince them that Spike was still pretty dark "grey" in Season 6.

I think that the writers took a lot of risks in making Spike so sympathetic. But when you look at Spike's history as a whole - you do see that unsoulled Spike was completely A-MORAL as opposed to being IM-MORAL. Thank you for defining those terms explicitly. I think this distinction is crucial. It explains why some of us can love this character, see that he loves Buffy and yet understand why Buffy can never love him. JM describes Spike in the Season 4 commentary as a guy who has glee in all the wrong things. He loves killing and would prefer killing humans but is happy to be able to kill demons. He doesn't really care. He doesn't kill because it's right or wrong but because it's fun. He is a vampire - he enjoys violence. When I watch the Spike portions of the DVDs from Season 2 on - I do see a picture of an amoral, evil character who has fallen in love with a "good" woman. Joss states in the Season 5 DVD that Spike realizes that he really loves Buffy when he saves her from the demons in Family - that it is more than an infatuation with an enemy. That is what he was trying to portray.

At any rate, when you think about Spike - you have to remember he's amoral, which means to him sex is sex.

Let's face it, a real life guy like this could have consensual sex with a lot of people - women, men, you name it. But he loves Buffy. With Buffy, he sees an opportunity to use sex as a tool to get under her skin. That's his "bloody revelation". He confirmed his suspicion that Buffy he has an itch - that he can scratch the way no one else can. With Buffy, he thinks he can use sex as a way to her heart. He's wrong, of course. Looking at the history between Buffy and Spike on the DVDs and seeing Chosen - it suddenly became clear to me that the writers have been setting up that Spike believes Buffy has always and will always love Angel. (I have problems with B/A and hope that isn't true. Too much Lolita. So many problems here for me. Just as unhealthy as B/S at this point - but I digress.) It is shown when he turns the little angel statue around in Him and in many other places starting with Lover's Walk. In Tabula Rasa, he fancies himself a noble vampire with a soul - an Angel clone, worthy of Buffy's love. In Wrecked, Buffy tells him she was hot for Angel but he's gone and Spike is just convenient. I think he believes her and deep down doesn't believe he really has a chance with her. He feels he is in the same position Riley was in Into the Woods. I'm not sure I agree with him - but I think that's what he believes through the end of Season 7.

When we see things from Spike's POV - we can't see why Buffy doesn't fall for him. He's charming, a real hottie, he adores her, he'd do anything for her, he helped the Scoobies when she was dead, he's great in bed. What's the problem? Why can't Buffy lighten up and see what a great guy he is? Can't Buffy see that she can help redeem him? He's the loveable underdog. Angel left her. He's got his own show. That's where part of the audience starts to villify Buffy. They don't see all the shady, questionable things he is probably doing off screen. That is where ME could have done a better job. They were showing us Spike's POV and he sees himself as a pretty good guy trying to make himself worthy of Buffy.

Then there's Buffy's POV. We only see the slice of Spike that allows Buffy to tolerate Spike. We see the kernal of hope that Spike could become a better person. We see the best of Spike through Buffy's eyes. Buffy only really sees Spike when he's on his best behavior - for her. But he is still the same guy - with a dim view of how he should act on the outside.The chip is just holding him back. Buffy realizes this to some degree but chooses to ignore it or minimize its importance. She considers him "beneath" her and sees him as pretty harmless.

Some of the audience only sees Buffy's and Spike's points of view and forgets that he is doing bad things off screen - when he is not with Buffy. Some of the audience only sees the old evil Spike. They see him as sleazy and manipulative. They can't understand why Buffy is even considering being with this guy. They think he is just being opportunistic - that he doesn't really love her. They villify him. Buffy is too good for him. He is beneath her. Can't she see that? What is wrong with her????

The writers use Riley in AYW to explicitly remind Buffy that Spike is "Deadly ... amoral ... opportunistic". Very interesting choice of words. I think we only saw Riley and Sam from Buffy's POV. They weren't really that perfect or obnoxious. We just saw her idealized view of them. This ep doesn't bother me as much as it bothered a lot of people. They needed this interaction to jolt Buffy into breaking up with Spike - for real - for good. The audience and Spike had to know she meant it this time.

But this led to Seeing Red. I really do think Spike loved Buffy in his own way and desperately wanted her to love him. But it wasn't going to happen. This was an unhealthy relationship and Buffy finally "got it". But she admitted she did care for Spike on some level. But she didn't try to do what a zillion of my friends tried to with "bad boyfriends" in college and beyond. She didn't try to "fix" him. That's what some of the audience wanted her to do. "If only Buffy had been more understanding." "If only she had validated his attempts to redeem himself." on and on. I have seen waaaay too many of these situations to believe that was possible. These guys only change if they want to - and they have do it themselves. No woman is going to change these guys. But I had friends who brought home loser after loser and never learned. Yay! Buffy for not getting stuck here! It was not her job to "fix" Spike. It wouldn't have worked if she had tried.

That's why I think ME decided they needed the AR. They needed something to jolt Spike into seeking his own redemption. His own soul. He needed to be so appalled with himself that he would seek a soul. It could be argued that he had a selfish motivation - that he thought he could win Buffy if he got a soul like Angel. If he could make himself more like Angel - but with great sex and less brooding - then Buffy would love him. He sought the soul without knowing what that meant. But once he got the soul, he hated himself and Buffy still didn't love him.

In Season 7, writers had to keep Buffy extracated from the dysfunctional relationship but have her help Spike redeem himself but without them ending up together. I think that's why SMG had to play Buffy so ambiguously. In the beginning of Season 7, part of the audience, Xander and Dawn all thought Buffy should have nothing to do with Spike - soul or no soul.The AR was proof to them that Spike really was a bad guy. Even Spike and JM felt that way. They thought Spike should stay away from Buffy because they felt so horrible about the AR.

Another part of the audience wanted to scoop Spike out of the basement and tuck him in bed in Lessons. (maybe that was just me. ;-)) Even more so with his revelation that he had a soul. He was so helpless and vulnerable and miserable. Why can't Buffy be nicer to him??? What is wrong with her? He has a soul now. They also thought they had to drag things out to keep the audience interested.

So they had to slowly redeem him. And let Buffy slowly accept him and love him as a friend.Unfortunately, that story took away from other story lines and was a tad boring. Obviously, we all knew they wouldn't end up together because SMG was leaving the show and ME never lets main characters stay together very long. In some ways, I liked the resolution but I think ME went too far in trying to appease all the sides. I would have preferred to see more friendship and interaction with the rest of the cast and less "Maybe Spike and Buffy will get together." I think they went a little too far in bringing Angel in at the end. I am not convinced that they needed to show us that Buffy might be holding out for Angel. It came across as appeasing the B/A shippers but not completely alientating the B/S shippers. Angel was also used to remind Spike of what I have come to believe he has believed all along - that Buffy was just using him as a substitute for Angel. I kind of wish they had just left Angel out of the ending.

And Spike's noble death would have been a lot more effective if half the universe didn't know he was going to be resurrected on Angel before Chosen aired. It would have provided more satisfying closure for the character.

But it's hard not to be thrilled Spike will be on Angel. I really hope he finds some joy in tormenting Angel next season. ;-) Should be interesting.

[> Oops! That thread is back now. -- curious, 15:10:50 06/12/03 Thu


[> Spike and Dawn -- Anneth, 15:14:43 06/12/03 Thu

I think you make several excellent points, Curious, but I think you miss something crucial - part of the reason, I believe, so many people felt drawn to unsouled Spike was not because of how he acted around Buffy, but because of the tenderness in his actions towards Dawn. In the Zombie-Joyce ep (Forever?) he tries to reach out to her, to comfort her, and stops himself, and the gesture is just dripping with aching longing. It's the little things like that, actions that don't appear motivated by a desire to increase his status in Buffy's eyes, that make his unsouled character so confusingly complicated.

[> [> Yup. He's a complex guy. That's why we love him! -- curious, 16:46:59 06/12/03 Thu

This post was in response to a long thread below. So it might seem a little out of context here.

Spike is a-moral (as opposed to immoral). He is perfectly capable of loving and feeling compassion. He just can't tell the difference between right and wrong. I don't see his affection for Dawn as inconsistent with that.

Spike is the great guy we all knew in college but he was dealing a little pot and cocaine on the side. We knew it but he is so FUN and his eyes are so blue! What's the harm? And then he gets drunk and smashes up his car with your little sister in it. Not so fun any more.

He's the one of the guys my roommate would try to rehabilitate. He'd borrow money and embarrass her in front of her parents. He's the guy we were attracted to but would be smart enough not to marry.

Does that make sense?

[> [> Re: Spike and Dawn -- tam, 17:40:44 06/12/03 Thu

it kind of bugs me that the spike and dawn friendship -- then the spike and dawn (the dawn of "vampires sleep, don't they?")relationship was never resolved. after that one comment to him about sleeping vampires, i don't think dawn and spike ever said a direct word to each other in all of season 7. just bugs me.

[> [> [> Re: Spike and Dawn -- curious, 17:55:06 06/12/03 Thu

It was really odd that Spike hardly spoke to anyone but Buffy all Season 7. Not really sure why.

But ME started being careful with Dawn and Spike early in Season 6 because they had such great chemistry together. They were worried that some people might start seeing them as a possible ship. JM is 40 and MT is 17. That's a big reason we don't see Dawn and Spike together as much as we did in Season 5.

[> [> [> [> Re: Spike and Dawn -- leslie, 18:10:28 06/12/03 Thu

Which is too bad, because Spike and Dawn could have been such a fabulous riff on the relationship between Giles and Buffy--who have roughly the same age difference. And given the number of people who seemed to think it reasonable that Spike was somehow Dawn's "father" in the same way that Buffy was her "mother," I don't think it would have been a hard sell.

[> [> [> [> [> I would go with older brother figure -- Miss Edith, 18:21:29 06/12/03 Thu

And it was cute as Spike's relationship with Dawn did show a very different side to him. I love the vampire who thinks of himself as a rebel trying to convince Dawn to go to school and learn to be a useful member of society. I have read some really good fic imagining Spike's attempts to comfort Dawn in the summer following Buffy's death. Makes me come over all gooey :)

[> [> [> [> [> Agree -- curious, 18:23:09 06/12/03 Thu

Which is too bad, because Spike and Dawn could have been such a fabulous riff on the relationship between Giles and Buffy--who have roughly the same age difference.

And then there were people who saw potential for a sexual relationship between Buffy and Giles. ICK!

I really liked Dawn and Spike in Bargaining, but Mari Noxon says in the DVD commentary that's when they decided not to have them together very much.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Interesting -- s'kat, 20:25:01 06/12/03 Thu

And then there were people who saw potential for a sexual relationship between Buffy and Giles. ICK!

Yes, that's the reason that after WttH, Whedon installed the six inch face rule between Giles and Buffy in the episodes. He went out of his way to put as much physical distance as possible between them to start out with. He also went out of his way to have them relate as father/daughter. Head was approximately 43 at the time and Gellar 17.

I really liked Dawn and Spike in Bargaining, but Mari Noxon says in the DVD commentary that's when they decided not to have them together very much.

Lots of fans reacted to this comment with a big huh? Because Angel is 242 years old and Buffy was 16 when he met her and they became an item. IF it is squicky for Dawn and Spike why not Buffy and Angel??

Well...the real life reason is the actors age differences:
David Boreanze when he took the role of Angel was around 26 years of age. SMG was 17/18. James Marsters when he took the role of Spike was approximately 33. He's 40 now.
MT was approximately 14 and is 16 now. Big age difference between actors. Same problem people had with Charisma and VK, VK was 22 (but looked 16) and Charisma is 30 and looks 30 and was pregnant. The actress herself was squicked by it.
And it came across on screen.

Honestly...I think they over-reacted. Yes it's true JM can stimulate chemistry with air, but do they really have to separate him from every single woman he has chemistry with outside of the ones they want him too? In real life people have chemistry with other people and don't act on it.

They separated Willow from him for this reason. Now Dawn.
It's sad. So much could have been done for all three characters. They did the same thing with Willow and Riley.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Other Factors -- Laura, 10:14:01 06/13/03 Fri

Agreed, it have been weird for the actors to play something like that. How would you like to play a romance with someone who was old enough to be your dad?

Plus keep in mind that Buffy's character in S1-3 was child-like at times, she was also an adult in many ways. On top of that both Angel and Buffy were stuck as not being quite in the supernatural world or the human world making it more likely they'd bond with each other.

[> [> [> [> Re: Spike and Dawn -- fresne, 09:16:23 06/13/03 Fri

Well, it recently occurred to me that for S6 to work as it played out, ME did kind of have to separate Dawn and Spike.

After all, if Spike is there chewing out Dawn for say, running off during a battle with some biker demons and equally so for running out in the middle of the night with some boys that she hardly knows, wellThe plot line in which Buffy is leaning too much on Giles cannot occur in quite the same way.

I mean, if I've read it in one summer of S5-6 fanfic, I've read it in a dozen, the Spike, "All boys are evil and I should know nibblet." speech. And yet it always cracks me up.

Likewise, if Spike keeps showing up to play Canasta or Poker or whatever, the Dawn home alone plot line makes no sense.

"Like sucks. No one loves me. Oh, hi Spike. No one ever pays attention to me. I'm all alone. Unloved. Hey, stop boggarting the Cheettos." Not that she couldn't say it. Heck, to be teen is to angst and cry over your math homework and the general argh of it all. It's just from a larger perspective. UmmmDawn, who's that in the kitchen whipping up a bloody brilliant blooming onion.

And then, if all of a sudden he stops hanging out because, ahem, his time is otherwise engaged at night. Yeah, Dawn isn't going to A: notice, B: show up at his crypt to find out what's up, leading to C: major therapy.

Too bad really, because it could have made the melt down of SR and Dawn's threats in BY all the more poignant.

And now that I have everything before me, it's interesting that in S5 we had this distinct parallel between Spike and Dawn, with the not quite sure where you fit in plot rifs. Dawn's fears that she is evil and unknowable answered by, "I'm not good, but I'm okay."

As opposed to S7, where the emphasis is on Dawn and Xander as the regular ordinary folk who keep things running. The hidden hearts, rather than hearts on sleeves.

[> [> Spike Plus Dawn ... A Moral Question Disturbing Me -- Archilochian, 18:07:42 06/12/03 Thu

Say a couple years pass - which in the Buffyverse means you mature fairly quickly - get quite alot of adventures and experience under your belt there.

Dawn is 18. Spike is old. Buffy is long gone, Tibet - Devonshire maybe, finally getting some quality alone time without worrying about the world.

As things actually do in real life - they start dating and are "in love".

Is that ok? Buffy went out with Angel when she was 18 and he was old. Now Spike has a soul, too. Done all kinds of redemptive acts including charbroiling himself with the Turoks.

Or is there a different set of rules for Spike than for Angel. Or for Dawn than there was for Buffy? If Spike fans claim he is good and dandy now, shouldn't it be ok? Especially if they're both happy? If Spike haters claim he is still a vampire who got a soul for the wrong reasons, then wouldn't it be a just reward that he is with Dawnie?

The age difference shouldn't matter, vampires are just old anyway. It's not like an 18 year old and a 45 year old, is it? Or was the whole Buffy/Angel thing pretty squickie, too? Where is society's cutoff date for this kind of thing?

And was Angel just "so" great that it didn't matter? Or is it because he was frozen at a young age - and so will always get to pick up on young humans?

But that's just physically, y'know. Inside he's several grandfathers old. But isn't that really what society's main uproar about in the "real" world? - the difference in maturation between the two involved.

Spikes rape was a horrendous act. Isn't Angels stalking, seduction and ultimate sex with Buffy reprehensible also? Why the double standards? One broods more than the other so he must be "better".

[> [> [> Re: Spike Plus Dawn ... A Moral Question Disturbing Me -- lesie, 18:12:27 06/12/03 Thu

"Buffy went out with Angel when she was 18 and he was old"

I think the squickiness comes from the age difference between the actors, not the characters. Not so much of a difference between SMG and DB.

[> [> [> [> Re: Spike Plus Dawn ... A Moral Question Disturbing Me -- Rina, 07:57:28 06/16/03 Mon

Actually, Buffy had just turned 17 when she slept with Angel.

Angel first fell in love with Buffy when she was 15 years old - she was sitting on some school steps, licking a lollipop.

[> [> [> Re: Spike Plus Dawn ... A Moral Question Disturbing Me -- Miss Edith, 18:15:16 06/12/03 Thu

Well I always had a problem with B/A. His first image of Buffy was as a 15 year old dressed in bright pink and sucking on a lollipop. Angel is the seedy older man checking her out from a darkened car. I cannot see the romance in that. I started watching Buffy in season 2 and admitedly B/A looked good together and as tv is a visual medium I did accept the relationship somewhat. The clip form Becoming gave me pause and when I finally saw season 1 I was really put off. Buffy just seemed so young and innocent skipping around wanting to be a cheerleader, making comments about how Giles should get a girlfriend if he wasn't so old, crushing on Owen and worrying about her outfit making her look fat etc. Such an innocent young girl who had only just turned 16 so the whole thing with Angel really started skeeving me out at that point. I'm in the minority I know. I believe the common defense is that Buffy wasn't a normal girl, as Angel and Buffy were both champions their romance cannot be judged by real world standards *shrug*

[> [> [> Re: Spike Plus Dawn ... A Moral Question Disturbing Me -- curious, 18:19:13 06/12/03 Thu

I agree with a lot of this. Angel/Buffy has always bothered me a lot more than Spike/Buffy. She was only 16 when they met and he was stalking her in LA before she ever came to Sunnydale. She was 17 when they had sex - statutory rape in most states.

There were certainly problems with B/S but she was legally an adult and more sexually experienced by then (with Riley). And she knew him a lot longer before they had sex. She had a lot more leverage in that relationship.

As for Dawn and Spike - I don't know. I think the problem was more that the actor that plays Dawn is underage. They didn't want to encourage fanfic about her and JM - who is 40. Now that's squicky.

[> [> [> [> Too late! -- Miss Edith, 18:26:10 06/12/03 Thu

There are a lot of Spike/Dawn fics floating aroud. Particularly around the time of Crush when Dawn was the only one being kind to Spike and Buffy was beginning to earn the nickname "bitchy Buffy" from some of the viewers. And no I haven't read any of the fics :)

[> [> [> [> [> One person's squick is another's Lolita, sadly -- mamcu (who'd prefer to see JM with a much older woman...), 19:30:14 06/12/03 Thu


[> [> [> [> [> [> Though I really enjoyed seeing the "old" female vampires in deep relationship w/young men. -- Archilochian, 19:50:52 06/12/03 Thu


[> [> [> [> [> Ah, fanfic - nothing is sacred in that world -- s'kat, 21:23:47 06/12/03 Thu

Believe me if they could find a way of writing a fanfic between Spike and Miss Kitty Fantastico or Mr. Gordo, they would. Actually I think someone may have.

Nothing is sacred in fanfic. One of the reasons fanfiction.net stopped all NC17 fanfic was the Harry Potter and TeleTubbies NC17 fics. Yes, people were doing Teletubbies, Blue Notes and Harry Potter stuff. I never read it, but I saw the ratings.

There's Dawn/Xander, Dawn/Giles, Spike/Giles, Xander/Giles, Xander/Spike, Giles/Buffy, you name it - it's there.
On B C&S when they were doing the shipping times last year, there was Spawn (S/D) and several people really objected.
And there are a lot of people out there who do not understand why they couldn't do B/G on the show and feel Giles was the best man for Buffy.

Fandom is in a word? Insane. But hey...harmless.

ME got squicked by Giles/Anya. That's why they never pursued that one. sigh. To each their own.

[> [> [> [> [> [> "ME got squicked by Giles/Anya" -- Archilochian, 11:29:23 06/13/03 Fri

Really?

Because Anya was hundreds of years older than Giles? or the actors physical appearance again?

It was alright she went with Xander, who wasn't as close to her age as Giles was.

Ageism. Buffyverse suddenly shifts to ME Realverse image moralities.

I would like to read about Cordelia carrrying a Teletubby baby. She's borne everything else.

(Rumor on "E" last night: Miss Kitty Fantastico found "sans collar" under the bed on Mr. Gordo.)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: "ME got squicked by Giles/Anya" -- Miss Edith, 12:09:35 06/13/03 Fri

Marti was asked if G/A could happen and she responded "ewww" upsetting some of ASH's fans as it was generally assumed she was referring to the actor's age. And well as was pointed out Marti has a thing for James who is 40 so a bit unfair to ewww poor Tony. I was up for a G/A relationship because I wasn't always the biggest fan of Xander's belittling of Anya. But that's a whole other story.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> "Xander's belittling of Anya" -- Archilochian, 22:16:32 06/13/03 Fri

That bothered me, too. Sure it was funny at times - and she was such an easy target. Still - what we were expected to think of their relationship?

It's for laughs, no - now it's poignant errr wait - maybe it wasn't supposed to be poignant, it was supposed to be cruel, or was it funny that time? Are they Lucy and Ricky? or Romeo and Juliet?

If Willow had treated Tara like that, fan letters would be flying. Maybe it was alright because Anya wasn't really *human*.

That made it all ok.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I've never gotten the "belittling" vibe of the X/A relationship. -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:49:23 06/14/03 Sat

There are two types of "belittling" I've seen people point to: one is when Xander makes a sarcastic crack about Anya, the other is when Xander corrects Anya about her behavior in public.

Regarding the first one, I never had a problem with this because that's just what Xander does: he makes sarcastic comments. He makes them about people he hates, people he loves, people he doesn't know, and even himself. That's been a basic aspect of his character since day one. Given that, I have to wonder why Anya would have a problem with this when the rest of the Scoobies don't, and why she'd ever agree to a serious relationship with him if it bothered her so much, since it was a part of his personality that was always there.

As for how Xander often corrected Anya's behavior, I was never troubled by this for a very simple reason: there was usually a good reason for it. After all, when someone says "You don't need me, all you care about are lots of orgasms!" in public, who wouldn't try to get her to stop talking? I never had a problem with Xander's corrections because they were always done to avoid further embarrassment for both him and Anya.

Now, someone might bring up that, if Anya should have no problem with Xander's jokes, than Xander should have no problem with Anya's comments. Well, my personal belief is that, if Anya had a problem with Xander making sarcastic jokes, than she should have brought it up to him, which she really didn't do until the relationship went down the toilet. Xander did voice his uncomfortableness over Anya's extremly open remarks; he let her know how he felt, but he still stayed with her.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> By S5, I was really having problems with it. -- fresne, 11:13:40 06/14/03 Sat

Possibly it's the associating characters with people we know phenomenon. I have a friend who with her absolute honesty and bluntness reminds me very much of Anya. A truer friend a person could never have. And if occasionally she says things that are embarrassing, they are far outweighed by her ability to lay out on the table things that everyone thinks, but are often far too socialized to say.

Thus, as time went on and Xander corrected Anya over and over for the same faults, it went from correcting someone newly human, to not accepting this person that he was sharing his life with as she was. That rather helping enable her to be the most Anya she could be, he was trying to conform her to some mold. Some of which seemed to stem in part from his own uncomfortableness in his own skin. Which is part of the appeal of Giles/Anya.

But then again, maybe I just want what's best for my friend.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I think they were trying to reprise C/X -- s'kat, 14:56:34 06/14/03 Sat

I think the reason we had the insult-a-thon was to reprise the banter between Cordelia and Xander. Xander and Cordelia were always trading insults which resulted in hot kissing eventually. When Cordelia left, they hunted for a way of replacing her in the dynamic, they tried Spike first, but it didn't quite work, since Spike is a vampire and can't be around all the time and still make sense. So when Anya showed up again, they began to go there with her. If you re-watch S1-3 with Cordy then S4-7 with Anya, and imagine the other saying the lines - you'll see that's probably what they were attempting there.

To an extent it worked really well. Where it didn't work, is I always got the feeling Cordy could devour Xander for breakfast - she was the Queen of the Insult and far better at getting his goat than most. When he got a zinger in at her - I cheered. Also Cordy started higher on the social scale than Xander. Anya on the other hand, seemed to start at a lower level than Xander - the outsider and most of her comments weren't insults or ditzy tactless comments, they were merely Anya not getting the human tact concept. So when Xander landed a zinger on Anya? I would occassionally wince and occassionally smile, but mostly wince. It felt like he was hitting a puppy while with Cordelia he was hitting a tigress. Ironic considering when Anya was introduced she could and did wipe out Cordelia - The Wish.

But that may be what was going on there. OTOH - I did like the Anya/Xander relationship better in some ways that C/X, because it got more multilayered and they did have their
moments of compassion. IT was complicated.

I'm sorry ME couldn't do G/A - because I really liked the chemistry between the two characters. Obviously Marti Noxon didn't see it. But hey...she saw chemistry between Riley and Buffy and I saw none. Riley in my humble opinion had better chemistry with everyone else. So there you go.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Misapprehensions on first watching -- mamcu, 17:52:27 06/14/03 Sat

I started out watching FX reruns somewhere in S5, I think, and for several episodes thought G/A was the ship! Can't remember now which ones--but it took me a while to get over that idea. Something about the chemistry of running the magic shop together, maybe. It would have been great, I think.

[> [> [> Re: Spike Plus Dawn ... i'm talking FRIENDSHIP - nothing else -- tam, 14:18:02 06/13/03 Fri


[> [> [> Wow...fantastic question...and im stumped! -- Nino, 10:20:25 06/15/03 Sun


[> [> Brilliant point about Spike and Dawn. I wish he hadn't AR'd so they could still be friends. :( -- Rochefort, 01:09:57 06/13/03 Fri


[> [> That scene's from 'Tough Love' -- Tchaikovsky, 02:02:10 06/13/03 Fri

When I first saw that episode, which was yet another mediocre Rebecca Rand Kirshner effort, the 'lightning rod for pain' speech really stuck out like a sore thumb. At the time I wandered whether it was a Marti or Joss-written scene, but of course RRK did an excellent job with Dawn and Xander in 'Potential' (assuming that was her writing), so perhaps I was being unjust. In any case I think the little moment you mention is another little sign of how wonderfully subtle the ME writers are- it means so much that little gesture of Spike#s- and we don't need all the Dawson's Creek psychobabble- or even for Dawn to know how Spike was attempting to comfort her:


Spike and Dawn walk through the creepy caves together. Dawn carries a flashlight. Spike is limping, still bruised and battered from episode 18.


SPIKE
No one's gonna hurt you.


DAWN
Oh yeah, the same no one who did
that to you?


SPIKE
What, these? Just a few bruises.
Nothing to write home about.

Dawn doesn't respond. She looks grave.


SPIKE
Hey, chin up, Platelet. And don't
get scared. Maybe Glory doesn't
want to kill you. Maybe it's something--


DAWN
Worse?

They keep walking. Then Dawn stops, slumps to the ground. She buries her head in her hands. Spike kneels beside her.

After a moment, he tentatively reaches out a hand to pat her head.


SPIKE
(comfortingly)
Hey.

Just as she whirls at him, her eyes flashing:


DAWN
You want to know what I'm scared of, Spike?

In an instant, Spike withdraws his hand and makes like he was just planning on running it through his hair--cool-like.


DAWN
Me. Right now, Glory thinks Tara's
the Key. But I'm the Key, Spike. I am.
And anything that happens to Tara is
'cause of me.

She points at Spike's bruises.


DAWN
Your bruises, your limp... That's all
me, too. I'm like a lightning rod for
pain and hurt... and everyone around
me suffers... and...
(tearing up)
And dies. I... This stupid Key must
be something horrible... to cause so
much... evil.


SPIKE
Rot--


DAWN
What do you know?

Spike pauses.


SPIKE
I'm a vampire. I know something
about evil. You're not evil.


DAWN
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe I'm not evil
but I don't think I can be good.

Another beat as Spike thinks.


SPIKE
Well, I'm not good, and I'm okay.


TCH

[> Very good post. Completely agree again. -- s'kat, 18:47:50 06/12/03 Thu

Yes. This is how I began to finally view the relationship and I think you did a very good job of summarizing how everyone in fandom and the characters themselves came at it and why.

Forgive me for the scattershot approach in the below post.
Lots of thoughts, but mostly a jumble. Your take on this has excited me, because it is so even keel and objective.
So many takes on B/S are riddled with emotion and tend to feel like rants - usually rants that have zip to do what's on the screen and everything to do with the personal life of the poster. They married a bad boy, were a bad boy who got redeemed, got raped by a bad boy, had a friend who was abused by bad boy...the list is endless and really has zip to do with what is on the screen and everything to do with how that poster viewed what happened on screen. (I'm no different than anyone else about these things - the character of Wood, I realized mid- season, is a character that I can't objectively analyze or post on in any way - because I can't see the character outside of my own personal real life experiences - I have a knee-jerk response to him. This response made it very difficult for me to enjoy several episodes of BTVs in S7 including First
Date, Storyteller, Get it Done, and LMPTM. If it weren't for the way this character reminded me of someone who hurt me in my own life - it wouldn't have been a problem. Is this response valid - well yes to me. But it's not valid for criticism or an accurate reading of what is going on on the screen. So I defer to more objective views of the character. I think when it comes to LMPTM - TCH, Caroline, OnM and Wwolfe probably have the most objective and accurate reads. Don't mean to get into that debate again - just pointing out how dicey it can get when you over-identify in either a negative or positive way with a television or literary character - it can and often does affect your analysis and not always in a good way - as we see on fan boards and reviews.) Spike oddly enough I could be more objective on - since I've never personally been involved with this type of character and wouldn't want to be. I've had friends who were to a degree - but not to the extent to affect how I would view literary or television versions. To me - Spike is just a fascinating character that I've played with in fiction, doesn't exist. And I think that helps.

*****************
There's an interesting justification I've read of Angel being in that last scene, which may interest you :

(I got this from B C& S board, it's an excerpt from Tallgent's review of Chosen, one of the more positive reviews, while I didn't see all of this as Tallgent did, it is interesting)

"Buffy learned that people have choices. She can't make Dawn not fight or Xander for that matter. She shows her faith in Willow but she doesn't push. She leads the Potentials to water, but she doesn't make them drink. That's what power is, the power to choose.

But for every choice there's a consequence. And sometimes you just have to deal with the choices others make and respect them. Sadly, this is what Angel must deal with when it comes to Buffy's choice.

I really liked how Boreanaz just showed Angel's devastation when she realizes that she doesn't want him as her champion. It's what he's always fallen back on. The Powers chose him as their champion. He's the only vampire with a soul. In "Angel" he learns the first statement might have been manipulated. And now he discovers that the other thing that he's taken as fact and taken for granted may no longer be the case.

Actually three in that Buffy no longer sees him as her only love. That's been a given. In canon.

No longer.

Angel's just been supplanted as the sure thing in Buffy's life. And when he learns that, the playful façade drops. Now he has to make his peace with the lost opportunities with Cordelia and Connor and the compromises he has made with Wolfram and Hart.

He had his chances and he didn't take them.

But he still can't quite let go. Until Buffy gives him a glimmer of hope so that he can.

Strange. Angel needs a hope of a future with Buffy and Spike is content with giving her hope for the future. It seems that Angel is slipping into the selfish love that Spike transcended.

So the first vampire with a soul is regressing while Spike hits the zenith of his evolution. There's a new champion in town and the old one has to go back to the drawing board, learning a few new lessons along the way.

Or so it seems at any rate.

We'll see come the fall. "

I'm not sure whether I agree or not with tallgent. I tend to see Spike's read of Angel/Buffy the same way you do.
I honestly think Spike is a hopeless romantic and may have viewed Angel as Buffy's one true love, even if this was purely subconscious on his part. He is pretty surprised she sent Angel away, yet may be justifying it in his head as she wants Angel safe.

I agree that Angel wasn't necessary for the season, I think I got that message without him showing up - but maybe the writers felt the need to go there for the reasons tallgent states above or possibly to wrap up the story better?

**********

What I really like about what you said above and it makes me realize that we both watch this show in remarkably similar ways - which is to watch it from one view, then another, then a third view. I could honestly see Spike in all three points of views - the manipulative/opportunistic evil bastard (which is one portion of the fanbase's/Xander/Riley/Giles pov), the charming/lovable/guy who desperately wanted love - another portions, and the third which is the amoral individual who will do anything to get Buffy. (Although I think you spelled out these categories much better than I did.)

I think how we read this show has a heck of a lot to do with how cognizant we are of which pov we are in. The writers don't always do a good job of making this clear. In Smashed we jump from Buffy's to Spike's to the Troika to Willow's to Dawn's pov's all within the space of 43 minutes.
And each character is slightly different depending on whose pov you're in. Same thing in AYW - the point of view in that episode is most definitely Buffy's and Xander's respectively - both envy Riley. And they are the two characters we see separate and with Riley at different points. We aren't ever really in Spike's - they even cut a scene from the shooting script to ensure we aren't in his pov in this episode. Just as we aren't really in Spike's pov in Dead Things - we are in Buffy's and Willow's.
My difficulty with AYW - was partly the pov, it made Riley come off far worse than he may have otherwise. I realized something in re-watching S5, I like Riley better when he's not around Buffy, very odd. So perhaps her view of Riley has always been slightly skewed? Or maybe that's just my own perspective. Don't know. At any rate - I think you nailed it - when you mentioned it depends on your pov.

**************

The writers were attempting something incredibly ambitious for a tv show - which was the ambiguous nature of concepts like love/good/evil - Areustha below mentions that the way people dealt with the Spike/Buffy story and Angel depends a lot on how they view the world - whether it's more black and white or grey. Btvs is written very grey in some respects.

Like you, I'm glad that they didn't go the soap-opera/movie of the week route of having Buffy try to save Spike - for a while I feared they would. I didn't want that.

She didn't try to "fix" him. That's what some of the audience wanted her to do. "If only Buffy had been more understanding." "If only she had validated his attempts to redeem himself." on and on. I have seen waaaay too many of these situations to believe that was possible. These guys only change if they want to - and they have do it themselves. No woman is going to change these guys. But I had friends who brought home loser after loser and never learned. Yay! Buffy for not getting stuck here! It was not her job to "fix" Spike. It wouldn't have worked if she had tried.

Exactly. This was what David Fury was trying to say in interviews in S5 when fans kept asking if Spike could be redeemed without a soul. Since it was Buffy's show, Fury feared to do that, would send the message that the love of a good woman redeems you. People misunderstood this to meant that Fury was saying love can't make us better. That wasn't it exactly. What he was trying to say is what you expressed so well above. Because obviously love did help redeem Spike but not in that way. It's Spike's love that redeemed him NOT Buffy's love, hence the distinction.
And it's an important one to make. Buffy didn't try to change Spike, nor did she ask him to change. If anything she told him he couldn't or tried to extract herself. As we see in AYW, Hells Bells, Normal Again, Seeing Red, and even to a degree in Lessons, BY, and STSP. She made it clear to him that she wasn't going to love him more or less. OTOH, she did help when she realized he was trying to change.
A good way of looking at it is I believe through the addiction metaphor. Which from Joss Whedon's interviews and the way Sleeper was written - I think is the metaphor they were going for.

I've known a few addicts in my life. And the thing to remember about someone who is an alcoholic or an addict, is you can't stop them from drinking. You can't make them stop.
Trying to do so can set up a co-dependency, you become their drug or a substitute or they could do it and lie to you about it, addicts are very good liars. So you have to back away. You can help them through withdrawl, you can give them support. But you can't stop them from drinking.
They must decide to do that. That's what happens with Spike.
HE must decide to change and Buffy sees him do that. She helps him but she does not try to change him or tell him to change. Same thing with Angel on that bluff in Amends or Xander with Willow in Grave - they coax the person down, but they don't stop them. It's a fine distinction and I believe hard to covey on film. Days of Wine and Roses - is a film that shows what happens when you attempt to make someone change and how you can't. I think people who have changed their lives around out of love for someone - get confused about what we mean by this - what they don't get is that THEY made the decision to turn their life around. The other person didn't wave a magic love wand or push them through it - THEY did the work.

Again with Spike - in LMPTM, Grave, Sleeper, Him, Dirty Girls, Touched, Empty Places, and finally Chosen - we see him do the work. It's subtle and its not easy or necessarily unambigiously written but it is there, all the same. ME isn't going to throw it in your face or hit you over the head with it, that's not their style. I sort of wish they did at times. So whether you bought it or not (and there are a few fans who clearly never did), may have to do with those issues Aerustha brought up about how you view the world and whether you over-identify in a negative or positive way with certain characters or issues.

Examples: Spike's remorse over the killing in Sleeper. His conversation with Buffy in NLM (some fans saw him as self- righteous, some saw Buffy as self-righteous, and some of us saw just an honest direct conversation between two adults). His assistance to buffy in Beneath You, STSP, Help, Him. His assistance in Potential, First Date, Get it Done, Storyteller. His gentle refusal of Anya.
His camraderi with Faith in Dirty Girls. His comforting of Buffy without asking for anything in return in Touched.
And his ability to not go off in a jealous rage in Chosen, but instead give up his life to save the world.

So they had to slowly redeem him. And let Buffy slowly accept him and love him as a friend.Unfortunately, that story took away from other story lines and was a tad boring. Obviously, we all knew they wouldn't end up together because SMG was leaving the show and ME never lets main characters stay together very long. In some ways, I liked the resolution but I think ME went too far in trying to appease all the sides. I would have preferred to see more friendship and interaction with the rest of the cast and less "Maybe Spike and Buffy will get together." I think they went a little too far in bringing Angel in at the end. I am not convinced that they needed to show us that Buffy might be holding out for Angel. It came across as appeasing the B/A shippers but not completely alientating the B/S shippers. Angel was also used to remind Spike of what I have come to believe he has believed all along - that Buffy was just using him as a substitute for Angel. I kind of wish they had just left Angel out of the ending.

And Spike's noble death would have been a lot more effective if half the universe didn't know he was going to be resurrected on Angel before Chosen aired. It would have provided more satisfying closure for the character.

Also agree. I think they did go a little far in trying to appease all sides as well as attempting to keep future options open. They needed that renewal for Angel and were probably doing everything possible to get WB interested.
I wonder what would have happened if they'd built more on the other storylines? I did like the B/S story...but in rewatching the S7 episodes, I find it at times slow, and frustrating. Part of that is due to the fact that the other SG seem to be so much in the background. This of course, I do not feel is completely the fault of B/S - actually I think it's more the fault of an over-crowded cast - all those potentials, Wood, Andrew...did we really need Andrew or Wood for that matter? Did they really add all that much?
After re-watching Storyteller and LMPTM? No I don't think they did. I think we could have gotten just as much, and a far tighter conclusion, using regular characters. OTOH - Wood did bring in both Buffy's slayer issues and Spike's trigger issues. So who knows? It's hard to judge.

Agree with everything else. Sorry not more coherent. ;-)
Thanks for the great response.

sk

[> [> Re: Very good post. Completely agree again. -- curious, 19:10:15 06/12/03 Thu

Completely agree with you too. Just a quick response. I have to think about the stuff from the B C& S Board. hmm... I'm not sure I'd go quite that far.

I honestly think Spike is a hopeless romantic and may have viewed Angel as Buffy's one true love, even if this was purely subconscious on his part. He is pretty surprised she sent Angel away, yet may be justifying it in his head as she wants Angel safe.

I think that's right. He is a hopeless romantic. Poor schmuck.

Actually, Spike's lovely reaction to Buffy in the basement - so open and honest - almost makes Angel's arrival work. It couldn't have happened if he hadn't seen Buffy kiss Angel. He is so humble and sweet when Buffy says the amulet is for a champion. He doesn't assume Buffy loves him - like he did in Season 6. He takes for granted that she doesn't - sad and sweet. Ahhh.

I hope he finds someone who appreciates him.

And I wonder if some of the lack of SG action in the end of the season was because they were out looking for jobs. ;-)

[> [> [> LMAO! Agreed. Must stop this. ;-) -- s'kat, 19:28:24 06/12/03 Thu

I have to think about the stuff from the B C& S Board. hmm... I'm not sure I'd go quite that far.

Would agree...I think the person who wrote it went a little too far with it. I saw the whole scene a tad more ambiguously. But then tallgent also posted:

The married aspect reaches into the direction as well. Buffy eventually comes down to the basement once again and both stand at opposite ends of the room just gazing at each other, foreshadowing their eventual separation. It's not just about sex anymore or even connecting. It's about bonding in the private manner that intimacy is, that married people do. Therefore, the lovers have their private, special moment. I believe they didn't have sex, but they did make love. And when it was over, they held on for as long as they could. Still gazing at one another.

See I don't see them as married or making love. I saw another night of platonic love. I've tried to imagine the other, but I can't. I don't think she was "in love" with anyone at that point. I think she loved him. He was as she tells Angel in her heart. But that's not the same thing.
And I was fine with that. As I believe Spike was in the end.

But hey, the other view is possible I suppose. I just didn't see it.

Actually, Spike's lovely reaction to Buffy in the basement - so open and honest - almost makes Angel's arrival work. It couldn't have happened if he hadn't seen Buffy kiss Angel. He is so humble and sweet when Buffy says the amulet is for a champion. He doesn't assume Buffy loves him - like he did in Season 6. He takes for granted that she doesn't - sad and sweet. Ahhh.

I hope he finds someone who appreciates him.

Me too. But I have a feeling that schmuck of a writer, Joss Whedon won't let him. Dear lord, please don't let us spend all of Angel Season 5 watching Spike and Angel brood and pine over Buffy. I don't think we will, they seemed to move past that tendency in S2 Ats.

And I wonder if some of the lack of SG action in the end of the season was because they were out looking for jobs. ;- )

Wouldn't doubt it for a second. Although so far the only one's who appear to have something concrete are Michelle Trachenburg (Ugly Americans), Alyson Hannigan (who says she has several things she can't talk about), James Marsters (Italien Heat - and Angel), and Nicholas Brendan (a pilot by Fox that may be picked up for mid-season ). Haven't heard anything on Emma. ASH is slated for a Charlott Church movie, possible guest appearences on Angel and maybe more MAnchild. He's also doing lots of conventions this summer.

[> [> [> [> In defense of Evil -- leslie, 10:09:07 06/13/03 Fri

This is not so much a specific response to the interchange between curious and s'kat as something that the whole thread has been inciting in me. Just so we're clear!

So much of the debate over Spike is whether he is good or evil, whether someone "evil" "deserves" Buffy, whether Buffy is "evil" in her treatment of Spike, yadda yadda yadda, all from the assumption that good is, well, good. That the purer one's "good," the better. Good is noble. If you are good, either you will get the girl, or you will realize that the girl is so much good-er than you that you will nobly settle for just being Good in her name. The opposite of the "good girl" is the "bad boy," and for the bad boy to become good, essentially he has to become the good girl.

Well, I think that the real source of Spike's charm is that he is evil, in a completely subversive way. He is the epitome of the punk ethos, the unwavering belief that society's rule are a scam, a hypocrisy, a conspiracy to repress everything joyful in life, a completely live-in-the-now philosophy: As the Sex Pistols sang, "I wanna be anarchy." Spike is anarchy. Until his killings in S7, which are guided by the First, we really don't see him kill many humans--he actually kills far more vampires--but those he does kill (as opposed to those he menaces) are examples of middle-class bourgeoise culture, a teacher in School Hard and a shopkeeper in Lover's Walk. There also seems to be a really strange coincidence between Spike's presence and Willow's more spectacularly "off" spells: her attempt at the de-lusting spell seems almost literally to conjure the drunken, grieving Spike, her my-will-be-done spell has its most drastic effect on Spike and Buffy (who begin to act completely out of character, as opposed to the others who merely have things happen to them), her tabula rasa spell effects everyone in the Magic Box, all of whom are there because they have been summoned for a meeting except Spike, who just turns up.

Spike's first acts upon arrival in Sunnydale: he knocks over the "welcome to Sunnydale" sign; he disrupts (to put it mildly) a school function; and he offs the top vampire in town. He expresses disdain for "chanting" and affiliates himself with Woodstock rather than the Crucifixion. And he has fun doing it all.

Spike's evil, as we see it in the show (as opposed to his coveted reputation), is really directed toward tearing down the social structures of middle-class society. He breaks up the "family" unit in The Yoko Factor and he threatens it in his relationship with Buffy, which takes her away from her responsibilities as Dawn's caregiver--perhaps most specifically stated when he disrupts the social worker's visit and makes things even worse with his well-meaning attempts to support Buffy (even his own best intentions get subverted by his chaotic character--and isn't it significant that Dru replaces Spike with a chaos demon?). Spike is in love with a crazy woman who herself fractures reality with her perceptions of future events, things that aren't there, and a kind of surrealist poetry that far surpasses anything William the Bloody Awful Poet could come up with. Yes, he gets upset when his own "family" is disrupted by Angelus, but how much of that is also due to Angelus's usurpation of Spike's role as agent of chaos? Spike is willing to destroy the human world with the Judge, but he is to a certain degree jealous of Angelus's attempt to destroy the entire universe through Acathla.

ME seems to be under the impression that Buffy and Spike's first sexual encounter destroyed a house and oh, that's so bad! So symbolic of everything that is wrong about their relationship! Yeah, and what they destroyed was a vacant house, an abandoned house that was already decaying, and frankly, it was exhilerating. It razed a hollow shell, furnished with the cast-offs that no-one wanted to bother to bring with them when they moved on. They destroyed an empty structure that organized and categorized and contained nothing valuable or alive and they did it in an act that is, at base, completely about being alive (even if you're undead).

As William, Spike lived completely in his head, and what he had in there was well-meaning but very badly executed. When he became a vampire, he lived completely in his body (and I think it's significant that he finally died when his body became a conduit for light). He gets suicidal when he can't beat things up, and perhaps he is amoral in that he doesn't much care whether he's beating humans or demons, but there is always this sense that there is just so much energy coursing through him that it has to come out somewhere. He likes sex and drugs and rock'n'roll, he may be sustained only by blood but he still likes to eat and drink just because of the sensual pleasure of it--things taste good.

"When was the last time you unleashed it? All out fight in a mob, back against the wall, nothing but fists and fangs? Don't you ever get tired of fights you know you're going to win?"

Isn't Angel kind of icky in this scene? Even before he has a soul, he's all about repression; he enjoys the "artistry" of a hunt--a murder--but any pleasure he finds in it comes from the pain and suffering he inflicts on his victim, and as for the joy of (un)living, it doesn't even seem to cross his radar. For Spike, in contrast, becoming a vampire makes him feel "alive for the first time," and what that aliveness consists of is pure physicality and wreaking havoc whereever he goes. Again, I think it's significant that he kills his first Slayer in the midst of the Boxer Rebellion--society is already self- destructing all around him, and what gives him the momentary advantage that allows him to win is an explosion outside the window, which distracts the Slayer. Something blows up and Spike wins. A building is destroyed and Spike kills a Slayer; a building is destroyed and Spike has sex with a Slayer; there's something cosmogonic about it, the destruction of the world and its (re)creation from the ashes, a vampiric Ragnarok--which may have been the end of the world of the Aesir and Vanir, but the world was going to rise again after.

Spike threatens an orderly society--something Mayor Wilkins clearly understands, because he was willing to tolerate it when Spike first came to town, but when the Ascension is at hand, Spike's destructive and chaotic tendencies cannot be allowed to threaten this delicate ritual operation. Spike threatens not only an orderly human society but also an orderly vampire society. Here I think it's interesting that the one set of "rules" he is concerned about preserving is the vampires-stay- in-on-Halloween rule. Halloween, in Celtic tradition, is the night that the forces of chaos erupt into the mortal world. The boundaries between worlds become permeable; the dead return. Spike defers to the once force more anarchic than himself.

You can't argue that Spike isn't a guy you can take home to Mother, because in the Buffyverse, Spike actually gets along better with Joyce than he does with Buffy. The things he attacks--school, religion, hierarchy--are the things that chafe at every teenager. His philosophy may not be as vulgar as Faith's "want--take--have" but he knows what he wants and he does not see why he shouldn't do his best to have it. It isn't a question of whether he deserves it or not.

You do need rules and order to have a functioning society, but if all you have are rules and order, what you have is a fascist state. Maybe you don't want to have a real Spike in your life, but Spike isn't a real person, and what he embodies is a very necessary force that may be destructive on many levels, but also is liberating. You can't be free without something of Spike in the world. From the point of view of the ordered world, yes, he's Evil, but he's the necessary counterbalance to Buffy, whose whole purpose is to maintain the boundaries between the human and demon worlds. And although Spike dies in the act of sealing the Hellmouth, he also, in the process, destroys Sunnydale itself, which by now is the house he and Buffy destroyed writ large. And what he stops from erupting from the Hellmouth is not chaos, but predation--the characteristic embodied by Angelus in that scene in Fool for Love.

Okay, this is rambling. But it seems to me that it doesn't matter whether or not Spike is good or evil, and even when he is evil, it's a necessary evil. I think the reason why the people who like Spike "overlook" his evil is because, on the metaphorical level that is the Buffyverse, he's a liberating evil; he embodies a rage against authority and restriction and stagnation. And I think that the reason why he and Buffy make such a powerful couple is that the two of them together embody the forces that structure the universe: order and chaos. You can't have only one, or the universe is either too binding or too formless, but if you have the two in a balanced tension, you have life. Likewise, you can't have good without evil and you can't have evil without good.

[> [> [> [> [> Brava leslie! -- ponygirl, very impressed, 10:46:54 06/13/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> oooh! another layer -- curious, 11:00:44 06/13/03 Fri

I like and agree with a lot of this. Very well said. A whole layer of symbolism that makes a larger statement than just the B/S relationship.

But it seems to me that it doesn't matter whether or not Spike is good or evil, and even when he is evil, it's a necessary evil. I think the reason why the people who like Spike "overlook" his evil is because, on the metaphorical level that is the Buffyverse, he's a liberating evil; he embodies a rage against authority and restriction and stagnation. And I think that the reason why he and Buffy make such a powerful couple is that the two of them together embody the forces that structure the universe: order and chaos. You can't have only one, or the universe is either too binding or too formless, but if you have the two in a balanced tension, you have life. Likewise, you can't have good without evil and you can't have evil without good.

I like this a lot. That's why we say Spike is grey - not black or white. I think the problem for Buffy was that she still viewed the world as black or white. She had problems with grey because of her youth and inexperience. Spike challenged her in a way that excited her and scared her. (there's more in the old thread below). It's not so much that Spike is eeeevil - it's that he's amoral without the soul. A destructive anarchist rather than a constructive revolutionary. Does that make sense?

In Buffyverse, he needed more of a sense of right and wrong before Buffy could be with him - take him seriously. He needed the ability to know - internally - that killing people was wrong. Pre-soul Spike would not have been upset about the people he killed in Sleeper. It wouldn't have bothered him one way or the other. With the soul (whatever that means in Buffyverse), he was remorseful and called Buffy. With the soul - he knew it was wrong to boink Anya. That's when Buffy could see that he was becoming a better man - someone she could believe in. Someone she didn't feel was beneath her.

OTOH, Angel tends to take himself too seriously. He goes too far the other direction. (another long post in itself) He is still very splintered between Angel and Angelus. I see Spike as more integrated than Angel by the end of Season 7 - Angel still has a lot of work to do. I think they are going to use Spike on AtS next season to contrast their strengths and weaknesses.

Spike is set up in opposition to Angel all over the place. In Doug Petrie's commentary for FFL - he says that Angel is supposed to be more aristocratic while Spike is working class. (Personally, I didn't see that clearly without the commentary. I just didn't see DB as "aristocratic"). Neither of them were really like that in life. These are the personas they adopted as vampires - somewhat in opposition to the human life personas.

I agree with you. I'd take Spike's 'tude over Angel's any day. I don't find Angel attractive. I find him dull as a table lamp. But other people feel the opposite. But I don't think I would have seen Spike as serious relationship material before he got the soul. And I think there was too much damage done in the relationship in Season 6 for Buffy and Spike to get together. That and SMG was leaving the show.;-)

[> [> [> [> [> Great post!! Agree. -- s'kat, 11:04:28 06/13/03 Fri

Don't have much to add here, except that you've done a very good job at hitting on something that was beginning to bug me on the threads and I address more thoroughly in my response to curious on the thread below KdS' SR post
about - "uhm one problem here". And that is the danger of over- identification with characters and real life issues.

The problem is the tendency both Marti and some fans have of trivalizing the relationship with the incredibly trite, oh Spike's my bad boyfriend and the evil boyfriend motif. (which I have also fallen into doing at times - even though it is the one tract I find the most annoying. ;-) )
No. I think Whedon has created something far richer here, b/c honestly I think Whedon could care less about that.
The bad boyfriend was Marti's issue, not Whedon's or any of the other writers. And while you can certainly see it in the text, it's minor, and those who spend too much time emphasizing it in their posts often end with saying: I dated a Spike in college or my friends did, which makes me go - A-HA!!! A-HA!!! But that's impossible, see, because Spike is a vampire who relishes evil for its chaotic tendencies..if this was Dawson's Creek or the Gilmore Girls or a Daytime Soap Opera? Yes you have a case. But it's not.
By overidentifying with the badboyfriend motif - people limit themselves to a very small portion of the complete picture.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that angle's not there or valid - that's the real life angle and I've certainly analyzed it enough in my posts. But it is also, the most trite, cliche and overdone one in my humble opinion. And not the whole story. I think Whedon may have been more interested in the angle leslie mentions above.
It was after all Whedon who wrote Chosen. Whedon who co-wrote School Hard with David Greenwalt, and Whedon who came up with the house metaphor. And Whedon who decided to give Spike a soul and have Spike save the world.

What attracted me to Spike and I think to the story the most is an intuitive response to what Leslie writes above.
Even after he got that soul - he still represents that sense of chaos. It's how he closes the hellmouth. Also it is his motto after all both in Fool for Love and in LMPTM
where he states:

1. "When I became a vampire - I was through with society's rules. I could make my own."

2. "We can disrupt the fancy bourgeosi and elitists worlds"

And his conflict with both Wood and Giles is in a way representative of his conflict with authority. Wood the son of the watchers and the embodiment of orderly demon fighting, Principal Wood of the school. Sort of representative of Walsh, Trick, The Mayor and all the other town authority figures.

Giles the last watcher and teacher. Telling Buffy what to do.

Spike points out to Giles: "You aren't fooling me, Rupert,
she surpassed you." And he always calls Giles Rupert.

His clothes, his attitude, it's always somewhat in your face. Even the smoking - a sign of anti-rules, anti-authority.

I have to admit, I've always found Spike's metaphorical presence for chaos far more interesting. And it is why he attracted me.

So yes, if it doesn't sound too inconsistent with my other posts, what leslie states above is why I got interested in the character of Spike.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Breaks the rules on the soul -- sdev, 12:31:47 06/13/03 Fri

One of the biggest rules Spike breaks is that he is not totally immoral or even amoral without a soul. That pesky humanity sans soul is another rulebreaker. Definitely not the same model as Angelus.

He is a soulless vampire who sometimes exhibits morality, as in seeking a soul. Total amorality is just as black/white as total immorality. I don't believe him to be wholly without the ability to distinguish right from wrong prior to ensoulment. He is grey in his ability to know what is right. Sometimes he gets it and sometimes he only gets it after he screws up (AR). Granted, sometimes he doesn't get it at all(AYW the demon eggs). It develops in Season 5 from not eating a dying accident victim because he knows Buffy wouldn't like it, to anguished remorse post-AR, to seeking a soul voluntarily.

Also, you can know what is right from wrong and not always be able to live up to it. I think often Spike's problem is in the execution. He knows but his impulses take over.

I actually think his analysis in DT on the accidental killing was perfectly moral. Another rulebreaker. Conventionsal thinking would have Buffy turn herself in. Buffy had the faulty hero-trip guilt. His take was-- yeah the rules say turn yourself in but what good would that do society--"How many have you saved?". Obviously there was a selfish component as well, but she was needed out in the world not locked up.

Why were Andrew and Willow out there?

[> [> [> [> [> Beautifully said. -- Sophist, 11:05:50 06/13/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> Hmmm, don't entirely agree -- KdS, 11:35:40 06/13/03 Fri

I hope I detected a certain lack of seriousness in that post so hey man! Let's go kill us a few of those bourgeoisie pigs! Course, if you're rich enough to own a computer or do a job with a net connection, some people might put you in that category. Maybe you'd better go bar the door

Seriously, I get the whole creative destruction, blow off some steam, shake up discredited power structures thing. Trouble is, lawless situations are only really fun if you're the one with the muscles or the AK47. When you start thinking about a spot of murder, rape and pillage as a legitimate response to the system that gets you down, you get Jonathan Levinson at best, Warren Meers at worst. I was always more an Una fan than a Jerry loyalist. Might be sexy and handsome, but he could be a cruel, sleazy little bastard at times. She'd probably be upset if you told her, but Buffy's the real warrior for the positive side of Chaos. Sharing the power around, bending the institutions to her will, kicking patriarchy in the nuts, judging what's right and wrong in every situation anew, transgressing all the boundaries of black and white, human and demon. And she did it all without hardly ever recreationally torturing anyone, unless you count that one time in the alley behind the Magic Box when she thought the multiverse was going to implode and everyone was going to die.

OK, maybe it's shallow, rambling, a little insulting, full of lazy literary metaphors of limited accessibility. But so what, to hell with the oppressive structures of grammar and logic and spelin. Be seein ya

[> [> [> [> [> [> The Shiva and Kali thing -- mamcu, 18:36:58 06/13/03 Fri

What leslie said is in a very different way what the wonderful posts about Shiva and Kali were about. Spike on a mythological level is the Destroyer of Worlds--the destruction that must happen for creativity to exist, for there to be any kind of change, development, progress.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Shiva and Kali thing -- DEN, 13:34:38 06/15/03 Sun

Grear post leslie--at the same time, though, Spike is not a Destroyer of Worlds. Rather, he needs the ordered universe to define his anarchy. As he says himself, he likes Manchester United, "Passions," and hot chocolate with little marshmallows. Thereis a correspondingly constructed quality to his rebellion- -not artifical, but constructed; there's a difference.

It may be of some use to note that in social history terms William is almost a caricature of a mid-nineteenth century Victorian bourgeois: respectable to his fingertips, vitality systematically sublimated. Liam is correspondingly representative of an eighteenth century Irish squireen--gentry rather than aristocracy, given to wenching, gambling, and dueling Esentially aimlesss, they cared nothing for the morrow, and given the power one of them was perfectly capable of annihilating the world on a whim.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil-well done! and a question -- sdev, 11:59:08 06/13/03 Fri

Really enjoyed that.

But where do you see Season 7 fitting in then?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil, or, Darn Your Sinister Attraction -- leslie, 12:48:20 06/13/03 Fri

Season 7. Okay. We start out with Spike insane in the basement- -about as shattered, fragmented, and chaotic as you can get. Then he separates into two halves: the "sleeper" who is killing people and the "good guy" who is overwhelmed by the reality of what he did as a vampire (and I think this is where the reality of his chaotic, down-with-the-bourgeoise persona comes home to roost--he has always been destructive toward institutions, ideas, abstractions, and now he suddenly realizes that these are real people he murdered, people about whom someone cared as much as he cares about Buffy, Dawn, or Dru). Even Buffy can take only so much of this--she openly acknowledges, finally, that she needs the chaotic Spike back. As did most of the audience. Spike was kind of boring low-key and good--he had still been interesting as Wheelchair Boy and the Undead English Patient, but Guilt-Trip Spike became tedious. He starts zinging back and forth between "good" and "bad"--here his own perception of his possibility for goodness, whatever that is, and Wood's perception of him as irrevokably evil, the vamp who killed his mother (doubly--killed Wood's mother and Spike's own mother). For all of the psychodrama of LMPTM, I think the real turning point for Spike is when he bites Wood but does not kill him--he makes "authority" know that he has fangs and he can use them, but he also shows that he can channel his chaotic tendencies to his own ends.

As I said, I think the circumstances of Spike's death are significant--he destroys the predators, but he also destroys the empty shell of a town. He does this through light passing through his body, and practically his last words are about how this physically feels; the light disintegrates him, breaks him down into his constituent matter, the ultimate physical chaos.

Also, when I talk about Buffy and Spike as a couple here, I'm not talking about a romantic couple. For all of the emotional and sexual stuff going on, I think what draws them together is exactly this kind of yin-yang balance of order and chaos. By the end, Buffy has absorbed some of Spike's chaos--I think this is what allows her to share her power with the Potentials--and Spike has absorbed some of Buffy's order--this is what allows him to channel his antiauthoritarian bent into something more productive than simple destruction. And again, this is precisely the tension that keeps the universe moving and alive: creation and destruction. There are a number of Native American creation myths that lay the existence of death at the feet of Coyote--a trickster!--who pointed out to the gods that if people just keep getting born and getting born and getting born, the earth will soon be overburdened with population, and so death was instituted to keep the cosmos in balance. Death is the price paid for birth, destruction is the consequence of creation.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Love it! -- curious, 12:53:21 06/13/03 Fri

By the end, Buffy has absorbed some of Spike's chaos--I think this is what allows her to share her power with the Potentials--and Spike has absorbed some of Buffy's order--this is what allows him to channel his antiauthoritarian bent into something more productive than simple destruction.

That's great!!!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> To Curious-OT -- sdev, 17:36:00 06/13/03 Fri

I was going to respond to your last post but the thread disappeared. An omen or a message or random? What is protocol here?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil, or, Darn Your Sinister Attraction -- sdev, 13:00:03 06/13/03 Fri

Thank you. So they both became more integrated. I can see that. Buffy really needed to break out of her mold. I found a lot of her moral vision overly dogmatic and too determined by social mores. And she certainly needed some fun.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh I like this, some more pts, (Spoilers to Home and Chosen) -- s'kat, 14:32:16 06/13/03 Fri

Also, when I talk about Buffy and Spike as a couple here, I'm not talking about a romantic couple. For all of the emotional and sexual stuff going on, I think what draws them together is exactly this kind of yin-yang balance of order and chaos. By the end, Buffy has absorbed some of Spike's chaos--I think this is what allows her to share her power with the Potentials--and Spike has absorbed some of Buffy's order--this is what allows him to channel his antiauthoritarian bent into something more productive than simple destruction. And again, this is precisely the tension that keeps the universe moving and alive: creation and destruction. There are a number of Native American creation myths that lay the existence of death at the feet of Coyote--a trickster!--who pointed out to the gods that if people just keep getting born and getting born and getting born, the earth will soon be overburdened with population, and so death was instituted to keep the cosmos in balance. Death is the price paid for birth, destruction is the consequence of creation.

Ooh, I like this. It works with some other things I've seen both on Btvs this season and Ats.

I just finished re-watching Storyteller, LMPTM and Dirty Girls. In each episode we deal a little with the conflict between order and chaos and what the characters represent.

In Storyteller - Sunnydale High has fallen into complete chaos.

Principal Wood:" The riot that almost happened"
Buffy: "Looks like it happened."
Spike:"Looks like it's still going on."

Spike and Wood fighting the students. Spike oddly enough seems under control, Wood - the symbol of order/authority, loses it and almost stakes Spike in the back. When Buffy saves the day, Spike isn't surprised. Wood is.

One seems to embrace and understand chaos, the other sees it as evil, represses and like the students gets taken over by the first in the episode at one point - when he tells Buffy she's a filthy whore.

Also we have Andrew who is attempting to control his chaotic world by telling stories, but the stories keep changing they keep turning around on him, they don't stay the same or consistent.

LMPTM

Giles talks to Buffy about order, being a General, doing what has to happen to keep things in place, while buffy is fighting a symbol of chaos, a vampire in a suite, who keeps interrupting Giles speech. Giles uses the vampire to stall Buffy - to control her. Yet when she stakes it - it is clear she's in control. Also giles has agreed to plot with Wood to kill Spike - b/c both fear the uncertainity of Spike, his chaotic influence. They are about order/control.
(The irony upon re-watching is how completely and utterly wrong both Giles and Wood are proven to be about Spike's role in this and what Spike will do, and most of all about their own motivations in it and completely and utterly right Buffy is proven to be. What's also interesting is
how their attempt to kill Spike, to contain his energy as it were - with either a stone or a computer generated trigger song in a room full of crosses, is what unleashes him and allows him to operate under his own will no longer contained or controlled by the First, Buffy, his mother, or anyone which is what he states at the end of the episode.)

Other symbols - Spike being chained up in the basement and upset about it, Buffy against both authority figures advice, unchaining him. Willow going to LA to chain Angel's soul to him once more and contain the chaotic Angelus (although this may be overstating things somewhat). Xander musing that he wishes the chains were there earlier (like when he and Anya were having sex - an opposite use of their use now).

Dirty Girls - Caleb is all about order but at the same time
about the abuse of order. The abuse of religion and organized structures. He destroys the orderly Watcher's Council which seems anarchitic on its face - except only sets up his own. And imprints his symbol on the girls, killing them in order. When he fights the chaotic Spike and Faith - both are thrown into the red wine. Buffy is thrown clear of the wine. Xander - master of keeping order - is blinded in one eye - so his perception is now slightly skewed. Everything he builds will be off slightly. Faith and Spike commune in the Basement while Buffy is fired by Wood b/c the order of the day is the mission.

While over on Ats - we have goddess JAsmine who keeps order, makes world peace, and everyone is happy, except no one has choice. No chaos. They are all part of the body Jasmine, connected. And the balance is kept by her devouring enough to keep her energies. Perfect balance. Perfect order. Which Fred - reacts chaotically too, first with the scrubbing of Jasmine's shirt then when she sees Jasmine, by attempting to kill her - causing chaos, taking off and causing more chaos. When Fred shoots Angel and taints him - they continue to break into Jasmine's orderly world. Until finally Angel gets her real name from the orderly literally black and white insect paradise she left behind (Wonder if insect is a twist on Tara's comment in Family - your insect self is reflection of your insignificance?) When he does so, Angel's world becomes chaotic again, people loot in the streets, and Jasmine wanders aimless through them...pleading, Connor kills her but only to become a killer himself, pure chaos reins and Angel ends up joining establishment of order W&H and orderly puts Connor with a family that cares - restablishing order in Connors, his own and friends lives while re-establishing chaos outside it.

Interesting. Makes me wonder if Spike will play the same role in Angel's newly ordered world of W&H that he did in Buffy's??

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you -- Caroline, 19:07:24 06/13/03 Fri

for your wonderful series of posts. Wonderfully insightful and a huge step away from much of the judge-y stuff we've had lately. And they are a wonderful coda to the many previous discussions we've had previously on oppositional thinking, the balancing of forces etc. Spike can only save Buffy and the world by integrating and accomodating the meaning of his own soul and he has to do so in the totality of his character, not by reversion to his William self, precisely because Spike has a great deal to teach William, who was in so many ways unformed. It is only through this integration that he can gain the understanding of what his love for Buffy really means and that he is prepared for his own destruction to allow her creation. He destroys her demons, of which he has been one, as well as her demonic landscape, represented by Sunnydale, through light and fire that cleanses and purifies and destroys.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> The Way of the Warrior, and being a good person (brief note) -- Doug, 20:47:37 06/13/03 Fri

Whe "Get it Done" came out there was a lot of debate over Buffy's demands of Spike and Willow. She calls on Spike to return to his roots as a killer. Spike has his quest to become a better man; but how can one be a good person and be a killer at the same time?

How can one be a good person and be a killer at the same time?

I wrote that question twice because it's one people have been trying to come up with solutions to for as long as the existence of the second oldest profession; the warrior. Warriors, by definition, kill. But you also want them to be part of society (if they can't identify with the people they protect there's a problem) and most societies frown on murder. Bushido, Chivalry, hundreds of years of warrior codesand millitary regulations all trying to create people who can wreak destruction but still be good people.

It strikes me that Spike has spent this season trying to find that balance point. "Get it Done" is a major episode for this; with buffy ordering Spike to try and regain his bloodlust. LMPTM also has some development in this area.

I'm trying to recall the specific interview; but I remember Joss being quoted as saying that with a war going on in the real world he focused on some of the darker aspects of war in season seven. I think that if he did really say that the Spike's jourey in season seven can be seen in this light. Trying to find his own balance between savagery and mercy, the Chaos that he is and the order that is needed to be good (because pure chaos and pure order both end badly).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Way of the Warrior, and being a good person (brief note) -- leslie, 22:54:51 06/13/03 Fri

Somewhere in the archives for last summer is a draft of the paper I presented at the Buffy conference in Norwich last fall, called The Stakes of the Warrior, which was about precisely this issue, in relation not only to Spike but to Buffy, Angel, and to a degree Faith. Now that the show is over, I need to go back and reassess it and do some rewriting, but I think a lot of it still stands up. What it is based on in Georges Dumezil's contention that the basic concern of Indo-European myths about warriors is how do you make sure the warrior kills the enemies and doesn't go berserk and attack his own people in his battle frenzy. Spike seems to me to have a lot of similarities to the story of how the Irish hero Cu Chulainn became a warrior--he was in such a frenzy that he attacked Emain Macha (his own people) and so the women of the tribe exposed their genitals to him (thereby providing one of my favorite lines in Old Irish literature: "Naked women to him!"), and when he turned his head aside in embarassment (he was, after all, still a little boy), they grabbed him and tossed him in a vat of water. The water in the first vat vaporized with his heat; the second burst with the vehemence of its boiling; and the third was just pleasantly hot and Cu Chulainn returned to his normal visage--oh yes, did I mention that when he goes into his battle frenzy his face "distorts," especially around the forehead area? And that descriptions of Cu Chulainn suggest that he bleached his hair?

[> [> [> [> [> Excellent! Exactly what Spike is about -- mamcu, 18:33:29 06/13/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> 'I didn't write Spike and Buffy together... -- Tchaikovsky, 02:12:23 06/14/03 Sat

...I just found out how they would fit', says Joss Whedon at the end of his 'Once More, With Feeling' commentary. And I think this is it- the order in doubt modified by chaos- a destructive concept and yet one which might destroy the right things- the decaying, abandoned old house.

Super post as usual.

TCH

[> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil -- shambleau, 18:06:49 06/14/03 Sat

Was the homless man on the bench that Spike and Dru killed an example of bourgeoise culture? Or the Goth kids in LTM? The magic store clerk in Lover's walk? The little girl in the coal bin?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil -- leslie, 19:31:46 06/14/03 Sat

Was the homless man on the bench that Spike and Dru killed an example of bourgeoise culture?

Victim of bourgeoise culture.

Or the Goth kids in LTM?

Spoiled middle-class kids who think vampires are all Ann Rice? You bet.

The magic store clerk in Lover's walk?

A shopkeeper? Isn't that the definition of bourgeoise culture?

The little girl in the coal bin?

Not enough class background given to tell, but given Spike's proclivities, I would say yes, probably. The thrust of the story seemed to be nice middle-class family home-invasion.

Now, are all these people running-dog-capitalist-pigs? Probably not, but that's the problem with Spike's pov--he's seeing them as abstracts, not as humans.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Wouldn't...? -- LeeAnn, 01:05:44 06/15/03 Sun

Wouldn't an attack on bourgeoise culture be an attack on his own culture and really, an attack on William, on himself?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That makes sense -- curious, 06:19:30 06/15/03 Sun

Wouldn't an attack on bourgeoise culture be an attack on his own culture and really, an attack on William, on himself?

Yes. Spike - the working class wannabe - has created a persona that is in opposition to his human persona. So - yes - his attack on the bourgeoisie would be an attack on himself. His old human self that he rejected. Not just himself - but his social class and social circle. The people who had rejected him.

That makes sense to me.

[> [> [> [> [> [> I come here not to defend Evil, but to bury it. -- fresne, 22:49:42 06/14/03 Sat

Not really. And pardon me if I end up basically restating leslie's very interesting essay.

It's just that fire bad and fire pretty. And without the tree pretty, there is no fire. And in some cases, without the fire no tree. In others, charred landscape.

Consider the destruction of the Watcher's Council. A group of people who dedicated their lives to saving this sorry world. Or an oppressive patriarchal group that favored watching while sending teenage girls one by one to save their day. Girls who were kept, but not paid. Girls who didn't get to be women.

Or is it that the Watchers were both. And now, in this world where every Potential is in full expression and there is nothing but a gaping maw where the Watchers' function once was, something new can grow. Perhaps an organization made up of women who are themselves Slayers. Made up of the community that supports those women. Their friends and lovers and fathers and mothers and children.

Just because beautiful things could potentially grow out of destruction doesn't make destruction necessarily good, it just makes it destruction.

Contrast the First Evil and Jasmine. One wanting chaos and death and to finally feel so it could snap necks. The other wanting perfect order and structure and absolute love, on absolutely its terms. Opposite and yet neither particularly desirable. The ugly faces of Chaos and Order. The first one is obvious. Even, or perhaps of course, Disney can display it, like the forest fire sweeping the world away in Bambi. Like the faceless hunter in the woods. The rotting face of order is often a trickier thing. Unless, you're ME. Wonder what Ethan Rayne is up to.

Either. Or. Rotting with maggots. Stolen dead faces. "Get out of my face."

Grab the fire. Internalize it. Balance. Laugh as you feel the dross burn away, leaving only the pure product, the soul. Destruction. Smile as you face the road to the future. Creation.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Great post. Didn't restate leslie's at all just added to it ;-) -- s'kat, 23:33:27 06/14/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Again with the happy clapping -- ponygirl, impressed once more, 07:05:40 06/15/03 Sun


[> [> [> [> [> Re: In defense of Evil -- Rufus, 01:23:00 06/15/03 Sun

Here I think it's interesting that the one set of "rules" he is concerned about preserving is the vampires-stay-in-on- Halloween rule. Halloween, in Celtic tradition, is the night that the forces of chaos erupt into the mortal world. The boundaries between worlds become permeable; the dead return. Spike defers to the once force more anarchic than himself.

Spike may rage against the machine but in the end he saves the world around him. In B2, he helps Buffy out and in Chosen he is the one who cleanses the Hellmouth of the destructive element of the Turok Han. In s2 Halloween, Spike is the one out breaking the rules....hunting on a night when the oggly booglies are supposed to sit it out. I see the story of Spike as just another story of growing up. His progression was put on hold by his becoming a vampire, but the chip is the thing (the Clockworking of Spike)that resumes the process. In s6 All the Way...it's Spike who punishes the vampires for not following tradition. He may have still been bad, but that subtle change was just one bit more on that road to becoming a real man. In Grave, the return of the soul is the return of the ability to solve problems in a mature, adult way. Spike without a soul is very possessive, the Spike with the soul is adult enough to learn how to let go, and that included living in this world....for now.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Terrific points! -- Caroline, 11:39:16 06/15/03 Sun


[> [> [> [> [> [> Yes! That's how I saw it too. Well Done. -- s'kat, 18:50:47 06/15/03 Sun


[> Was the AR necessary? (From below) -- LeeAnn, 19:58:33 06/12/03 Thu

That's why I think ME decided they needed the AR. They needed something to jolt Spike into seeking his own redemption. His own soul. He needed to be so appalled with himself that he would seek a soul

Like many people I felt that they could have used some other device than the AR to motivate Spike to get a soul. I thought he should try to turn Buffy in order to keep her. He certainly had plenty of opportunity but though he threatened it he never tried it. When Darla wanted a companion she turned Liam. When Angelus wanted a companion with second sight he turned Dru. It would have made sense for Spike to have at least tried to turn Buffy, it would have seemed in character (if he was so deadly, amoral and opportunistic), and could have motivated him to go get a soul. (And it wouldn't have driven the viewers so crazy.) What we (and the writers) didn't know about then was Spike turning his mother and her turning on him. I think that is why he didn't try to sire Buffy, or really sire anyone except when he was under the control of the First Evil. Of course they still could have had him try to turn Buffy and had that all getting tangled up in his mind with how his mother turned against him once he sired her. ( Mother's milk is red.)

[> [> Re: Was the AR necessary? (From below) -- ECH, 13:41:42 06/14/03 Sat

I would personally consider Spike trying to vamp Buffy much more horrible, evil, and indefensable act on any possible level then a confused attempt to use sex to get back with her. Some times I wonder why one would want Spike to do something much more horrible and evil to Buffy rather then making a very human mistake. Is is just because some people don't want to see a sexual assault as anything but black and white? It makes me think the protection a metaphor provides a character is that it makes it so that people don't internalize the act or take it personally.

[> [> [> That's a good point... -- LeeAnn, 22:36:11 06/14/03 Sat

That's a good point because I would have seen an attempt to turn Buffy as less disturbing than the attempt to rape her. The attempt to turn her would have been within the metaphor, not a human crime but typical of a vampire and might have been shown not as a betrayal of his love but as an expresssion of it, like William turning his mother to take care of her. That turned out to be a disaster and might be the real reason he didn't try to turn her. But we didn't know about that then.

The AR was a betrayal of "I don't hurt you." An attempt to turn her, might not have been, not in Spike's twisted mind.

[> Re: Back at you S'kat re: Spike - my response got eaten! -- Mightor, 18:02:04 06/14/03 Sat

I think this is a fantastic summary of the situation. Its interesting that, in interviews, James Marsters said he was appalled that so many in the audience didn't see in season 6 that Spike was still evil. I think that may have been an overreaction to other fans who would see no good in him and so the grey he was supposed to be got lost. I think that in season 5 they pushed him so far toward being sympathetic (willing to sacrifice himself rather than tell Glory who the Key was; protecting Dawn over the summer after Buffy died; bringing flowers with no card to the funeral home when Joyce died, etc.) that they felt they had to do some drastic things in season 6 to remind us that Spike was still evil.

So they had him be "The Doctor" (and Spike as an International Arms Dealer James Bond villain was way corny) and eventually the AR all to remind us he was evil, that loving one person didn't make him good. Unfortunately, they also were portraying Buffy as a physical abuser using her lover while having no real feelings for him and Spike as the victim of abuse and a lot of people related Buffy to an abusive male and Spike to a female abuse victim. Then they had the "voices of reality" be Riley and Xander. Too many people didn't like Riley to begin with because they wanted Buffy with Angel and they didn't like him no matter what. And with Xander, when Xander warned her that Spike deep down was still evil, the audience remembers that Angel is just a vampire and Buffy should "kick his ass" just like Willow said.

I agree they did a wishywashy job of portraying his evil if that was the intent. If portraying his greyness was the point, I think they did the best they could. I think there is something about Spike that makes people identify with him. I do that myself. Maybe its partly JM's acting but, whatever it is, it draws you completely into his point of view and you find yourself going, "That emotionless bitka, Buffy" or "That Xander who can't see anything but the surface", etc. I think its that there is something archetypal about the character combined with JM's incredible ability to play it.

W"So have your apocalypse now, and then we can all go home" (spoilers "Chosen") -- KdS, 16:56:37 06/12/03 Thu

(No AtS this week, instead the BtVS documentary already broadcast in the US)

I don't know if it's being spoiled, or the general lack of enthusiasm for S7 in the BtVS world, but Chosen was something of an anticlimax - one of the top episodes of the season, but somehow lacking in relation to previous season closes such as Graduation Day, Restless and The Gift.

The Good:

The infamous "cookie dough" speech. When I heard people denouncing this speech, I was under the impression that it would be the big speech to round off the episode. Instead it's Buffy quietly musing about her private life before the big battle. It isn't meant to be some fantastic metaphor, it's Buffy searching for a way to express herself and coming up with a metaphor that even she sees the funny side of. Overall, I have to approve.

The core Scoobies' quiet moment in the corridors before the big battle. The sort of thing we've been missing all season.

The overall ending concept - I'll be writing a big essay about the portrayal of Slayers and superpowers and magic in general once my current piece of coursework is finished (if I didn't give it priority, I'd deserve to end up on fandom_wank), but here's what I'll be saying about Chosen. I can only approve of the final decision to activate all the potential Slayers in the world, which hammered home the series's core message of empowerment. A minority of people here and elsewhere have attacked the concept on three main grounds, which I'll deal with on my personal estimation of how serious they are.. Firstly, there's the argument that Buffy was interfering with the free will that she claimed to defend, by conscripting all these girls into the battle. For me, this argument fails to recognise the significant changes in the situation as a whole. Now there are many Slayers, they will no longer be doomed to an eternal respiteless struggle until they die by accident or burn out and seek death. Semicanonical material from ME in the past suggested that most past Slayers wandered the Earth looking for evil and that the constant upheavals in Sunnydale were anomalous. Now, with many Slayers, it is probable that each will be able to simply deal with the infrequent eruptions of evil in her own region, and will probably have a worldwide organisation dedicated to her actual support, rather than manipulating her as a disposable and personality-free weapon. The endless battle just developed time-outs. Secondly, there is the argument that some of these Slayers will turn evil and that Buffy has created a threat to the world. Such an argument insults the new Slayers and humanity in general. Certainly, on pure probabilistic grounds, a few of these Slayers may turn bad. However, unlike the old days, there will be other Slayers around to contain them if required. There is a more serious issue that some Slayers may be responsible for tragic events through unawareness of their strength and new power. To me, the more extreme arguments some have put forward about the dangers posed by Slayer children or even foetuses are over-pessimistic, as none of the girls activated appeared truly prepubescent, and it is probable that the future Slayers will still be activated when on the cusp of childhood and adulthood. It has been implied many times that all Slayers have some form of connection to a subconscious bank of memories, and this may also have some guiding effect. Finally, Willow's line about feeling all the new Slayers suggests that it will not be impossible to contact them all and give them at least a brief outline fairly quickly, especially if all those already trained at Sunnydale are sent out simultaneously in duos or small groups (did anyone get an estimate of how many Potentials actually survived and were on the bus at the end of the ep?). The final and most serious argument is that the power handed out in the episode is still limited to a small mystical aristocracy, which undercuts the message of mass empowerment. I personally see this as a consequence of ME's desire to continue to tell stories in the Buffyverse. If the entire human race or its female half were raised to Slayer strength, then the freedom for AtS next year would be dramatically reduced, and future stories would suffer from a farcical aspect similar to Monty Python's Bicycle Repairman sketch.

Anya's deliberately underdriven death, which relied on casualness for effect. I also got a very different impression of the "Fluffy, hoppy bunnies" line from everyone else. I interpreted EC's delivery as suggested not that Anya had recognised rabbits as part of a world worth dying for, but that she was determined to strike down every last one of her fears.

Other brief humorous/fluffy moments - Andrew's farewell speech, Buffy bisecting Caleb from the crotch up, Willow's blatantly orgasmic magical response (possibly a deliberate attempt to deal with the magic-is-gayness-therefore-gayness-is-evil problems in S6).

The final question, and Buffy's silent smile. What can't we do now?

The bad (longish list but mostly minor things):

Faith starting to strip for action during her argument with Wood - a cartoonish f**kslutwhore moment which one would have expected to see on the sleazier fanfic archives rather than canon material. Wood was returning to his condescending former self - but Faith unlike Buffy can stand up to him.

The cliched nature of Caleb's revival.

Shallow, cartoonish Angel.

The final shot of the baseball-playing activated Slayer, which conjured up irresistable associations with tampon ads.

The incredible wimpishness of the Turok-Hahn, and Buffy's apparent belief that a few dozen activated Slayers could slaughter thousands of them. However, in S1 a normal vampire was portrayed as utterly lethal to any human being, while by S6 Giles could take one on alone, so the effect was simply more rapid for the ubervamps.

The manipulative wounding of Buffy, and her implausibly rapid recovery.

Bad, bad special effects work in Buffy's escape from the collapsing town.

Finally, and sorry, I have to say it: S****

I wouldn't have been so disgruntled if Joss hadn't been quoted, quite unambiguously, as saying that Spike is now redeemed. Compared to what other characters have gone through, wearing a Christmas Tree Light of Death and immolating yourself isn't that spectacular. What happened to the days when heroic suicide in the MEverse didn't magically wipe out all your moral failings? I don't deny that Spike feels bad about all his unsouled actions. What makes me uncomfortable is his utter lack of any real emotional or moral connection throughout S7 with anyone but Buffy. By now it's clear that he will be back (and remember that Angel, Cordelia, Wes and Faith all came into their real glory as characters after moving to AtS), but let me just vent briefly. If you're a Spike fan, just scroll down until the italics end:

[Slow motion silent replay of Spike's death. Over, a heavenly choir sings, with drastically slowed-down tempo and in a minor key]

Let him rest in peace
Let him go to sleep
Let his ashes sleep 'til doomsday in that hole so wide and deep
His mortal task is done and he found a sweet release
So-oh let him rest in peace

Questions: what did the GRR ARRGH vamp turn its head to the audience and say at the end? Someone hit the mute button a little too early.

And how did this episode compare to the various earlier scripts that leaked out onto the net? Were there big alterations, and what were the differences?

[> Huh? -- Sophist, 18:36:00 06/12/03 Thu

the general lack of enthusiasm for S7 in the BtVS world

I'd be interested in your evidence that this is true.

Willow's blatantly orgasmic magical response

Can I trade imaginations with you? Orgasmic? Hardly. Darby was quite right to compare it to Angel's re-souling in Becoming. The shooting script describes the scene like this:

Is blown by a force so powerful, so loving, that she is bathed in pure white wind, her hair is actually white, streaming out behind her, her smile a bowl to catch her tears.

A moment of transcendence, then it ends, the wind sucking out of her and her appearance returning to normal.

I can't get the transcript to load right now, but my memory is that Psyche editorializes that Willow is purified by the spell. We all should have such orgasms.

[> [> Agree with Sophist Re: lack of enthusiasm, here's a "really" positive review -- s'kat, 19:48:30 06/12/03 Thu

Actually according to the fanboards I've been on?
It's evenly split. Lots of people cite S7 as their favorite.
Lots cite it as their least favorite. If you look at the posts on this very board you'll see a similar split.
And I've read hugely critical and very positive reviews of the season. Pastor Steven? Loved Chosen. Jenoff seems more positive on S7. spoilerslayer? Less positive, but Spoilerslayer (Frank Tenseis at www.spoilerslayer.com) favorite season was S4 and his all time favorite big bad was Adam.

Kds? There is ABSOLUTELY no consensus on this. You can't see "general" dissatisfaction for S7 - because that would indicate a semblance of a consensus and there just isn't one. It would be akin to saying the general dissatisfaction with s3, S4, S5, S6, S1 - all fit it. Chosen btw got the highest ratings of a Buffy episode in a long time- 4.9.
And almost all the mainstream media critics gave it glowing reviews. Entertainment Weekly? An A+. HErcules cites S7 as amongst his favorites. So yep, Sophist is right.

S7 may not have been my favorite season, but hey I loved S6 and consider S5 the best. So to each their own.

HEre's a really positive take on Chosen and the season:
(I don't completely agree with it...but it's interesting, partly because it demonstrates how we each see things differently and how one piece of art can be seen in a mulitple number of ways depending on the person and no one way is the best one. )

This was posted by Tallgent on the Buffy Cross and Stake Board, and was recently reposted by michelle. This same board had the negative post on S7 and Chosen by 3Strikes.
Same board, two different, polar opposite views.



"I laughed. I cheered. I cried. And I clapped.

And I am going to miss this show.

1. Buffy and Angel had "Goodbye" written all over it.

2. Typical Whedon touch. We expect serious Buffy and Dawn tension and we get a kick in the shin.

3. Well, we can see which vampire is the artist in the family!

4. Whedon has this way of making everyone likable. Kennedy became hot again. Though kicking Uber booty probably had a lot to do with it.

5. Loved the Buffy/Spike staging. Always, ALWAYS he flanked her or stood behind her. And when she marched to the Hellmouth seal, he was right there waiting, and allowed her to go first. No wonder she spent three nights with the guy.

6. Dungeons and Dragons, happy sigh.

7. Awesome nostalgia between the original four. And just as Whedon said they would in the beginning, the original four came out alive.

8. You know, I like the idea of Wood surviving because he and Faith have a shot at some fanfic love now.

9. Andrew was admirable and brave.

10. Marsters and Gellar. Like Tracy and Hepburn, Bergman and Bogie. Thank you for acting both your hearts out in one of the seminal tragic love scenes in visual media. Buffy's childlike joyful awe when she felt Spike's love was....

No words. That goes double for Spike's bravery which shown brilliantly thanks to Marsters.

11. A strikeout for William "The Spike" Bloody. The Sunnydale Sign is finally out after a tenacious at bat!

12. Buffy and Spike will go down as one of television's greatest romances.

13. Also typical Whedon, for every moment of mythic resonance and witty levity, we also get a stark reality. Sometimes good people die and they die in a way that's so utterly meaningless. Anya was the true tragedy of this piece.

14. Small touches of giddiness: The equal opportunity mussing of hair between Xander and Anya. But the best was the fond hand squeeze between Buffy and Xander. I love hand squeezes.

15. Finally, Buffy's ready to do some living. And at last some loving.

16. P.S. Hope you like L.A., Spike.

17. I have no inclinations on comparing this to other Buffy finales. I still think storywise and dramatization wise that The Gift is the best.

All that said, though, I've never cried harder during an episode than last night.

In the end it wasn't all about power. It was about making choices on how to use it. And Buffy made hers in the most beneficial way possible. She shared it.

Some have a problem with how it was done. Perhaps. But the point is she isn't alone anymore. She's got a whole million Slayer march out there to confront evil where it lies. Whether in a Hellmouth in Cleveland or an abusive dick of a boyfriend, evil has to deal with the power of the Slayers. A whole mess of `em this time.

No wonder it turned tail and ran.

It was epic. It was glorious. Buffy rallying the troops for the last time. Xander proving how far he's come as a man, Willow achieving her true potential, Giles welcoming his new role as advisor to Buffy, though as always staying her father figure, Dawn learns that Buffy won't choose her, so she chooses instead, Faith realizing what she's been missing in all her encounters with men, Wood finding a chance to heal his inner wounds, Andrew realizing fate doesn't have death in store for him, yet, Anya dying as a human being in the most inhuman manner, yet proving without a doubt how human she really is. I watched the thing again and it was like a movie. I'll probably see it again sometime this afternoon.

Buffy learned that people have choices. She can't make Dawn not fight or Xander for that matter. She shows her faith in Willow but she doesn't push. She leads the Potentials to water, but she doesn't make them drink. That's what power is, the power to choose.

18. But for every choice there's a consequence. And sometimes you just have to deal with the choices others make and respect them. Sadly, this is what Angel must deal with when it comes to Buffy's choice.

I really liked how Boreanaz just showed Angel's devastation when she realizes that she doesn't want him as her champion. It's what he's always fallen back on. The Powers chose him as their champion. He's the only vampire with a soul. In "Angel" he learns the first statement might have been manipulated. And now he discovers that the other thing that he's taken as fact and taken for granted may no longer be the case.

Actually three in that Buffy no longer sees him as her only love. That's been a given. In canon.

No longer.

Angel's just been supplanted as the sure thing in Buffy's life. And when he learns that, the playful façade drops. Now he has to make his peace with the lost opportunities with Cordelia and Connor and the compromises he has made with Wolfram and Hart.

He had his chances and he didn't take them.

But he still can't quite let go. Until Buffy gives him a glimmer of hope so that he can.

Strange. Angel needs a hope of a future with Buffy and Spike is content with giving her hope for the future. It seems that Angel is slipping into the selfish love that Spike transcended.

So the first vampire with a soul is regressing while Spike hits the zenith of his evolution. There's a new champion in town and the old one has to go back to the drawing board, learning a few new lessons along the way.

Or so it seems at any rate.

We'll see come the fall.

19. For a show created by an avowed atheist, there are times when I think Buffy the Vampire Slayer is one of the most Christian television shows ever made.

Please don't misunderstand.

I'm not talking about the controversial aspects that fly in the face of religion. I'm talking about what's at its center. What has been the common crux through its seven years.

Love. The celebration of love in all its forms.

Buffy and Angel: The celebration of first, naive love.

Buffy and the Scoobs: The celebration of the love of the family.

Buffy and Giles: The celebration of love between the father and child.

Now, finally we come to what may be the defining love of the series. At least for me. Love that redeems, makes whole. Love at its purest and most powerful. Love that exalts.

Two things went through my head while I saw Buffy and Spike's love reach the pinnacle of the sacred. "Casablanca" in which Rick demonstrated his love for Ilsa that he was willing to give her up. And John 3:16

"God so loved the world that He gave us His only Son."

Spike so loved Buffy that he gave up himself to give her the world.

Spike reached his pinnacle as the Christ figure. The image of himself burning on the cross in Beneath You was setting us up for his real crucifixion in the Hellmouth. And like Christ, whose only witnesses to the end were the two women who loved Him the most: Mary, His mother and Mary Magdalene, the redeemed sinner who became one of His followers, so too was Spike's witnessed by the one woman who loved him most, the only one to bear witness to his struggle for redemption, his victory over the darkness: Buffy.

Buffy became his staunchest support and defender. In confronting Angel about her relationship with him, she finally closed the door on her past. After all this time, she is the one to move successfully on from the past while Angel retreats to it. But more importantly she makes her choice for Spike in his presence. The hold he has over her is gone.

When she gets to the basement she immediately expresses regret for her impulsive greeting. They snark back at each other like two married people once again, not idealized utterings or hateful sniping. All they do is talk and communicate clearly. And Spike shows his maturity by instantly forgiving her and getting down to business. Unlike Angel, who thought he should be the one to bear the amulet because of his place as champion, Spike believes he should bear it because he is the strongest one besides her to bear its power. It's not boasting. It's fact.

Buffy tells him that the amulet can only be worn by a champion, and we see Spike's heartbreaking humility. As he said before to her, he's not a champion he's just a guy willing to pitch in and do what he can.

But that's what makes him a champion. That's what being a champion is all about. It's what he's been doing at her side for so long now. In one gesture, Buffy elevates Spike in meaning to her and to her life. He is her champion.

And once again she spends the night in her champion's arms. Drawing strength from his love and devotion. In a nice visual, already things have changed from their time in Touched. Now her hair is let down from its meticulous arrangement. She's baring herself to him a piece at a time.

We get our first hint at his destiny when he wakes up from a dream about footwear (snert). But for those in the "Angel" know, events are corresponding to a fulfillment of the prophecy. That a soulled vampire will fight alongside the Slayer in the last days and Shanshu. The crucifixion will lead to resurrection.

Buffy's warrior triumvirate is established in the speech. The two shadow selves of Buffy, Spike and Faith, are situated at her right and left side respectively. What was hinted at metaphorically is now made manifest. Spike has become Buffy's right hand.

The married aspect reaches into the direction as well. Buffy eventually comes down to the basement once again and both stand at opposite ends of the room just gazing at each other, foreshadowing their eventual separation. It's not just about sex anymore or even connecting. It's about bonding in the private manner that intimacy is, that married people do. Therefore, the lovers have their private, special moment. I believe they didn't have sex, but they did make love. And when it was over, they held on for as long as they could. Still gazing at one another.

We see in the battle, and I would argue even with Buffy's final fight with Caleb, that they don't need to be hovering near each other all the time. Spike let Buffy do her thing while he did his, both show faith in the other to get the job done. It was only near the end when he felt his soul threatening to rip free from its demon prison, that he called out to him.

And her response was immediate. She could see he was in pain.

And in the end, all that was left were the both of them. And Buffy was willing to stay with him to the very end.

Hands have defined Spike and Buffy. Hands were used on each other in brawl after brawl until the brawl turned into a dance. In the closing song in Once More With Feeling, Spike and Buffy are the only ones who have their fingers interlaced, much like their final moment together. In Dead Things, the door scene focused on their hands being separated by the door, but their attachment still evident through the barrier. Then in Potential and beyond things changed, the hands held each other, caressed, fondled, stroked.

In Primeval, Buffy learned she was the hands of the Scoobies. In Spike, she found her equal, proved in mythic, symbolic fashion by the way she reached for his hand, interlaced them, and wordlessly swore her devotion to her equal. Now it is Buffy who is reaching for Spike.

The fire blazes forth as they are finally joined. In action. In spirit. In love.

She believed in him.

She trusted him.

She healed him.

And now she's willing to die with him.

She risks the pain, like the First Slayer told her she must, and forges strength from it. Her face glows in something perhaps not unlike how she felt when she was in heaven. This is her heaven on earth, seeing his beautiful soul full of love. It startles her, its brightness. It warms her. It heals her. It sends her into ecstasy.

And he stares in awe as her wounded soul is revealed to him. And in that moment he knows. Purposely, he looks exactly as he looked when she freed him from the First's cave. It was a revelation then, and it becomes truth now.

Buffy hasn't expressed love that often and when she has, always there has been a portent of tragedy. Her voice expresses such. Desperate. Sad. Painful. But not now with Spike. She is a child again in that moment when love was new and anything seemed possible. Her voice is hushed when she tells him what he has longed to hear. Her face beams with happiness and the fear and doubt has been replaced with acceptance and peace.

And he surprises and amazes her once again in his selflessness, denying her love. Taking the burden of his life away from her so that she may live. Buffy has known no greater love and it's doubtful she ever will. Spike and Buffy's love is exalted on high. Made sacred.

One last look. This one different, yet not. It's full ofso many things. Anger at him for his denial, admiration when she realizes his intent, and an acknowledgment of their private truth. He knows. Whatever may come, from this moment onhe knows.

And there's something else. Something that maybe the avowed atheist wouldn't like, but what I registered. What had tears streaming down my face, but grinning and laughing at the same schizophrenic time.

A face that read "Bless you, Spike."

He lets her go and not looking back, not even daring to, she flees.

20. And how perfect that Spike faces death with a snarkish grin on his face. Bring it on, baby. I couldn't cheer. I couldn't yell. But I did pound the armchair and I did say, "Go get `em, Spikey.&q