March 2002 posts
Riley seemed to
perfect -- LoriAnn, 16:06:32 03/02/02 Sat
Does anyone else think that Riley seemed to be inutterably perfect: perfect confidence, perfect
efficiency, perfect job, perfect wife, perfect life, perfect wisdom. Riley was always a nice guy and good
at his job, but he was Capt. Cardboard, not Mr. Perfect.
I won't be surprised if we find out in the future that neither he nor his life is quite as perfect as he
portrayed it during his very brief visit to Sunnydale.
[>
Check out the Mary Sue thread below... -- Belladonna, 17:32:12 03/02/02 Sat
[>
My God, you people are so hung on tearing down Riley. -- Hanayashik, 03:51:06
03/03/02 Sun
[> [>
Re: My God, you people are so hung on tearing down Riley. -- LoriAnn, 05:28:36
03/03/02 Sun
Pointing out plot points is not the same thing as tearing down a character, and besides these are
only characters in a play where each performs a function.
Watch AYW again. Riley is entirely too perfect and was not like this before. He was always a good,
steady guy, but never so absolutely perfect. No one is so perfect. We might be seeing him through
Buffy's eyes, which doesn't seem likely since she wasn't in every scene; we might view this as a plot
device to set up something else; or we might go writer bashing, a particularly assinine activity in
which, without knowing what's to come or how what the writer wrote fits into the story arc, we
comment on how the writer blew it.
As far as Riley goes, the character was one of a nice, All-American, stereotypical young adult, but the
storyline it was being used in was going nowhere and was aborted; the character ceased to serve a
purpose in keeping with the overall direction of the story. Beside that the character now serves a
much better function, that of being the incomparable image of normalcy in Buffy's head that
continues to tell her that she should be a boiler plate young adult or generic ingenue instead of the
unique individual she really is.
But perfection isn't normal, and in AYW, Riley, along with Sam, was just too perfect.
[>
The Messenger -- Rufus, 05:30:08 03/03/02 Sun
I've been looking at all the finger pointing at Riley, how boring he is, too perfect. I think that was the
point. For Buffy to understand her value it had to come from someone that looked like the poster
child for perfection, heroism. I chuckled while Xander almost seemed ready to dump Anya to run off
with Riley (j/k), the fact that Riley seemed so clean, so tall, everything that encompasses a dream.
His visit with wife in tow seemed like a slap in the face of the stuggling Buffy, his perfect life her to
remind her that she felt like a loser. He then told her the one thing that she needed to cut through
all the crap to hear...no matter what has happened, how low she may feel at this time, she is still the
person she always was. That is what she needed at that moment to hear. I didn't think that she
would have been any happier if Riley had arrived back in Sunnydale unmarried. His purpose was to
be a figure everyone respected there to tell Buffy she was more than the DmP smell. So, he doesn't
like Spike, more important, he didn't kill him, and either did Buffy. When Buffy broke up with Spike,
she broke up with a man, not a monster. She didn't slam the door an any further communication,
just the sexual interactions they had been having. I see this as posative to both Buffy and Spike.
Buffy no longer has to identify Spike as only a monster, and Spike is now free to choose what he will
become monster or man. Riley was only the messenger. Love him or hate him, whatever happens to
the characters will be of their own doing not his.
[> [>
Re: The Messenger -- LoriAnn, 05:41:35 03/03/02 Sun
When the messenger is written in an unrealistic manner, given the rules of the universe Buffy is set
in, we must question the messenger. If the messenger is incredible, what is the message?
[> [> [>
Re: The Messenger -- Cactus Watcher, 06:18:33 03/03/02 Sun
I have to disagree. Riley was not written unrealistically at all. Think of what he did. He spent a
considerable time driving Buffy to the dam without either telling her he was married or that the
mission of the moment was to capture not kill. Hardly perfect in any sense. So why are we left with
the impression that he is? Remember also the wheel of life references. Riley seems so high because
Buffy has been so low. You have to understand that we essentially saw Riley through Buffy's eyes.
Riley's life may indeed not be perfect, but to Buffy who has been having so much problem dealing
with life, it does seem perfect. Riley has everything Buffy wants, stability, someone worth loving to
love him back, a good job, real goals... I think you need to concentrate not so much on what Riley
looked like as on what he said. As Rufus pointed out Riley is just a messenger. Rufus pointed out
here and in her post on transformation of consciousness what's going on, but I'd also like to add that
it's a matter of attitude. Sam and Riley seem larger than life in this ep. because they enjoy life.
Buffy on the other hand has spent half a year dreading it. Sam and Riley are eager to head off to
their next adventure, which may well get one or both of them killed. Buffy on the other hand really
has just been "going through the motions." Riley is just a wake up call for Buffy. It
seems as if she just might have heard it.
[>
Re: Riley seemed to perfect -- SCWLC, 17:38:46 03/03/02 Sun
I always liked Riley, a near-suicidal thing to admit when you're a fervent B/A shipper like myself.
The problem with Riley before had to do with his essential lack of understanding as to what drove
Buffy. Riley was introduced to the world of the supernatural in his early to mid-twenties. He never
really quite understood it when he was dating Buffy.
Now that he understands it he seems perfect because he's that perfect guy Buffy was trying to get all
through season 4. You know, the normal guy Angel left her to find?
I personally found AYW to be an episode just dripping in irony about how Buffy, superhero, can't
pull her life together, and everyone, including Riley, (who was 'supposed' to pine away after her for
the rest of his life) is doing great except for her.
Mainly though, I think it was the wake-up call about how she's more than just her appearance.
Machiavelli, Ripley, and Sam
(incoherent spoilers for AYW) -- manwitch, 16:55:25 03/02/02 Sat
I think we need to have a discussion of Alien/Aliens/Alien3/Alien 4 the Resurrection as well as a
discussion of Machiavelli.
It was not just cute banter that the dude was talking about Machiavelli and Realpolitik.
What I do remember of Machiavelli is the question he poses of whether it is better to be feared or to
be loved. And his conclusion is that it is better to be feared. If you have based your policy on being
loved, the minute you fail people you will have rebellion. Hmmmm. Could this be Buffy, or perhaps
Spike? Was Spike better off being feared than trying to be loved? Or is Buffy about to engender a
revolt by failing the one that loved her?
Is the "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" quote actually from
Machiavelli? Whether it is or not, who does it seem to apply to in this episode? It seems to me that
only Sam fits.
A dark and unjustifiable side of me says that she is Eeeeeeeeeeeeevil and will be back.
She reaches out in a false friend way to everyone in Buffy's house. To Dawn, "Oh, she looks old
enough," then looks at Buffy, "if its ok with you." Appealing to Dawn's desire to be
an adult and part of the scoobs and then disingenuously appealing to Buffy as authority figure. To
Xander she has the answer to the wedding questions, just what he wanted to know. She appeases
Buffy again, appealing to her desire to be the strong hero, "Buffy, it was good that you killed
the Stromboli demon before it killed us." Then she makes the gaf with Willow, and you can see
her cunningly figure out how to correct it. Eeeeeeeeeeevil. What's she up to? What does she
want?
Then she chats with Buffy and basically sets her up to go to Spike. I think Sam sends Riley there,
knowing full well that Spike has the eggs (she gave them to him) and that Riley will find them
together.
Obviously, I have no justification for any of this. Its how I feel people.
The scene at the dam. I agree with the idea that this dam is symbolically holding back the powers of
the unconscious. I don't know much about reading dreams or such, but I recall Joseph Campbell
saying that "In reading these things psychologically, water represents the unconscious, and the
creature in the water represents the dynamism of the unconscious. And so its here that the monster
of the abyss comes to meet you." Or something like that. And I've found that it certainly works
as a guide to reading imagery in sci fi and James Cameron films. There is a moment where the
protagonist descends somewhere, whether its below the street (terminator) or to lower floors (Aliens)
or claims in words to be so descending (Alien 3) and in each case water is present where they go or
the sound of water. And that is the moment where the protagonist fully confronts the monster that
they are facing. Its in that moment that the scope of the battle is revealed and faced, even though it
may not be over until much later.
So, here, in buffy, we have a body of water (powers of the unconscious) being blocked by a man made
barrier. Buffy and Riley descend from the top of that barrier to a platform down below,
where, interestingly enough, the waters from behind the damn trickle forth through the barrier (The
point where the powers of the unconscious bubble over the conscious barriers). That we are meant to
notice this and not just think it a fact of their being at a dam is made clear by the fact that they land
on the right side of the opening, and cross over to the left side to be attacked by the demon. They
could have descended on the left side and as they landed and began to move around on the platform
the demon could have charged them from the doorway. But no. They land on the other side and cross
the tube with the water running out of it. To make a point that they have done this, they stop at the
tube and Riley a sort of ducks his head under it in an odd way just to make sure we notice that it is
there. This is the point where the monster of the abyss should come to meet them. And what
happens? The demon comes charging out of the doorway, from not only right behind the outpouring
of the waters of the unconscious, but from what had to be right in it. I mean, check out the
architectural design. I don't know anything about dams, but that door leads STRAIGHT into a big
pipe. There is no other way. That monster is coming out of that same dark place from which the
waters are bubbling forth. Please watch it again and notice how odd it looks. The big pipe is right
there. Where does the little doorway lead? Even if there is a real answer, symbolically this monster
seems intended to be associated with the dynamism of the unconscious.
And what is this demon? He's a "breeder." That hung with me, when Riley called it that.
Its a majorly loaded term anywhere that feminism is discussed, and BtVS qualifies. They don't
accidentally call something a breeder. It means that somethings entire identity is reduced to its
procreative aspect. But then I saw the eggs it produced.
Those are the eggs that the Aliens produce. Slight variations, yes, but clearly an allusion to
Alien. Why?
Well, some of you won't believe it, but one of the main themes of all the Alien movies is the co-opting
of (gendered) feminine procreative power towards the perpetuation of corrupt (gendered) male
dominated institutions and the inhumane forms of knowledge that support them. Women (Ripley in
particular) are "alienated" from their own feminine power to the point where procreation
becomes a monstrous act that produces something totally horrendous and unrecognizable.
Ultimately, to reclaim that power, the new creative act must be one of negation and abortion, as seen
in Alien 4.
And here these little "alienating" gizzards are in Buffy. I haven't worked out the reading
of these images yet, but I know they're there to be read. Anyone?
I think Riley, by returning to a patriarchal system (patriarch being a reference to the old testament
of the Bible, Adam being THE patriarch and Genesis being the book of the patriarchs) in which the
moral parameters for decision making are set external to him, has made himself what Machiavelli
would call "feeble" and "easy prey to evil-minded men." Sam is eeeeeeevil.
Buffy's true creative power is being threatened to be co-opted to help the system, and she is being
alienated from her truest self. Her true creative power lies in the ability to slay without slaying, the
ability to change vampires through love rather than killing. She turns her back on that at her
peril.
So. there. I've said it. And can't support a lick of it, I know. I'm not set in what I've written here. I'm
still working on it. Musing.
Anyone else have any thoughts on Machiavelli or Aliens?
ps. I thought her line about "that's you. I should have remembered" referred to him being
mercenary rather than evil or idiotic.
pps. Spike is clearly not the doctor. He has no idea what Riley is talking about. You can see
the total change in his character when Riley mentions the eggs and Spike realizes why he's really
there and that Buffy will find out. He shows no concern whatever at Riley's presence or Rileys
repeated mention of "the doctor." He thinks its about Buffy. When he finds out its about
the stuff someone suckered him into putting in the crypt, he changes visibly. Guess who that
someone is?
ppps.
Q: what about Sam and Riley? You don't see patriarchy there do you?
A: They're married. Consider the phrase "Mrs. Finn." or consider the number of happily
married couples depicted in 6 years of BtVS episodes. Or the fact that the first happily married
major character is also the only major character ever seen going to church as a member of the
congregation, in, oddly enough, the season that revolved around the Garden myth from the Book of
Genesis ("thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee" Ge 3:16). Riley
thinks he's in patriarchy heaven, but in true BtVS fashion, I think she's running the show.
Eeeeeeeeeeevil.
[>
BY GEORGE! -- Teri, 17:30:46 03/02/02 Sat
I think your on to something!
And to proove I really think so!
Brought some chairs and a tent to set up the
"Sam is eeeeevil camp" Anyone wanna join?
We could build a fire,..roast marshmellows...
(Great post as USUAL btw)
[>
Re: Machiavelli, Ripley, and Sam (incoherent spoilers for AYW) -- Lilac, 18:23:33
03/02/02 Sat
"Is the "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" quote actually from
Machiavelli? Whether it is or not, who does it seem to apply to in this episode? It seems to me that
only Sam fits"
Actually, I had been thinking that Buffy has been keeping her one time enemy, Spike, much closer
than her friends lately.
[> [>
About the Machiavelli quote -- JodithGrace, 19:34:59 03/02/02 Sat
First of all, MBA guy doesn't actually attribute the "Keep your friends close and you enemies
closer" quote to Machiavelli. If you watch the scene carefully (supported by the shooting script)
what he says is "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer..AND as Machiavelli
says..you do know who Machaivelli is, don't you?" So basically he interupts himself BEFORE
quoting Machiavelli. The friends and enemies quote is NOT from Machiavelli, and in fact after
several searches through Bartlett's quotations, etc. I haven't found out WHERE it is from.
[> [> [>
Re: About the Machiavelli quote -- B
Martin, 19:57:57 03/02/02 Sat
Its from the Godfather
On Outsmarting the competition...
Michael: "My father taught me many things here. He taught me, in this room, 'Keep your
friends close, and your enemies closer.'"
[> [> [> [>
I think it's an old adage quoted in the movie. -- yez, 07:21:26 03/03/02 Sun
[> [> [> [>
Its from The Godfather movie-and in Machiavelli's defense... -- Eric, 17:32:44 03/03/02
Sun
he did NOT say its better for a prince to be feared rather than loved. What he DID say was that it
was better to be loved AND feared. And if a prince can't manage that, THEN he should prioritize on
causing fear. Renaissance princes and mafia bosses are just lazy.
[>
Re: Machiavelli, Ripley, and Sam (incoherent spoilers for AYW) -- Rob, 20:01:36
03/02/02 Sat
Not exactly sure if I think that's what the writers were going for, but that was really a brilliant
analysis...so brilliant, in fact, that I hope you're right. :o)
That would be an awesome plot...Sam would make a great (and very hot) villian. And she did rub me
the wrong way, also, because I love Buffy so much and I'll be petty like Willow, and shoulder
Willow's burden of having to be the only one who hates her. And speaking of having a hot villian, I
miss having hot villians...Glory was so great, she left me wanting another awesome, hot,
supervillian.
I think that we probably have seen the last of Sam, since it seemed like she was part of the plot point
to wrap up the Riley story for good. But then again many times in the past, the story's swooped in a
direction we never before imagined.
Maybe Willow's right. Sam's not evil, just a bitch. Heh heh. And maybe you are. Fingers
crossed!
Rob
[> [>
P.S. I loved your "Alien" analysis...Brilliant! -- Rob, 20:12:36 03/02/02
Sat
If you're interested in more "Alien" analysis, I read a book a few years back called,
"David Thomson on 'The Alien Quartet.'" It's a very scholarly book, dissecting every shot,
visual and internal symbol in the "Alien" films. It's in the Bloomsbury Movie Guide
series, and really worth reading, if ya haven't.
Rob
[>
Buffy, the breeder, the unconscious and realpolitik -- Caroline, 20:13:16 03/02/02
Sat
Pretty bloody fabulous post, if you ask me!
You could be onto something with the whole Sam thing but my rational mind tells me to stay out of
that mindfield.
As for your theory about the eggs, allusion to the Alien movies (which I haven't seen, so can't
comment on - sorry)and a metaphor for the repression of Buffy's power - you are absolutely on to
something here. I've long argued that Buffy's own unconscious internalization of patriarchal norms
has not allowed her to understand the depths of her feminine power. I think that she is frightened of
that kind of power because the examples she has seen have been so negative and destructive - Faith
as Kali, the Hindu goddess of destruction, Maggie Walsh as Tiamat, Babylonian great mother
usurped by her son, and Glory as Erishkigal, the rather unpleasant Sumerian goddess of the
underworld. She negated everything that the Primitive told her in Restless. The full expression of
feminine energy is incredibly powerful and the negative examples that Buffy has seen have also been
incredibly destructive. But when she does integrate her feminine power, perhaps she will no longer
express it in such a phallic way, as she currently does in her slaying?
I agree with your interpretation of water as a symbol for the unconscious and the man-made barrier
of the dam as symbolic of the repression that Buffy is currently inflicting on herself. I felt As You
Were has halted any kind of progression for her in terms of the exploration of her unconscious drives
and, since the unconscious hates to be ignored so zealouly, it's going to strike back at Buffy in a
really big way. The Suvolte 'breeder' demon is representative of a dynamic issue in the unconscious,
and the killing of it by Buffy was symbolic of the repression of that particular issue. And since it was
a breeder, it definitely represented something feminine and since, in mythology and from the womb
we all emerge from water, it's incredibly appropriate that it took place at the dam! And those eggs
are representative of the stuff and issues that will continue to breed in the unconscious after the
initial repression and then erupt in a very chaotic and destructive way. Buffy can keep throwing
hand grenades at these things but they're going to keep coming! The message here is that you've got
to deal with the original issue because if you don't, the issue will multiply.
So Buffy has some internal demons running around in her unconscious to deal with and somehow
integrate into her conscious life. At the moment it's repression-ville with some unpleasant
unconscious eruption waiting to emerge. I feel that how Buffy deals with that will go hand-in-hand
with dealing with Spike - basically because he is currently bearing the projection of her disinherited
unconscious drives. This is where I felt the discussion of Machiavelli fitted in and the stuff about
keeping your enemies closer. As the bearer of her projections, he is the enemy but he is kept close
precisely because he bears her projections. Buffy dumping Spike was equivalent to killing the demon
- destroy any recognition of unconscious drives. (This is why she dumped him after she admitted to
herself and Riley that she was sleeping with him). So now she isn't following the Machiavellian
advice but her unconscious will erupt again to spank her. And, most likely, Spike will be the agent.
(no, I didn't mean that!) Just because she's not sleeping with him anymore and she dumped him
doesn't mean that the projection is over.
As for how to view Riley and Sam, on one level they are just a beautiful, perfect couple in so many
patriarchal ways. But I do have to wonder about what is behind the beautiful facade. It seemed to
me that they worked so hard to achieve that facade which made me immediately suspicious of what
was actually going on underneath the surface. And Machiavelli applies here too because, in The
Prince, Machiavelli basically argues that PR is everything, and you should always try to look as
wonderful as you can, even while your motivation may be a base one. He says that a leader's virtues
may actually lead to his downfall whereas his vices may lead to his long and successful reign. It may
apply to Sam in that she is really nice to Buffy 'cos she knows that Buffy was her husband's first love
and by being nice, she pre-empts any actions on Buffy's part about getting him back. And hubby
thinks how fabulous she is that she is big enough to brace his ex and her friends. Good realpolitik
strategy.
I also think that Spike is not the doctor but whoever the doctor is will most likely be mightily pissed
off that the eggs that were so valuable to a foreign government would be destroyed and I'm sure will
come seeking vengeance - a la Teeth in Tabula Rasa. Will Buffy have to come to Spike's rescue
again?
[> [>
Question for you on feminine power, Willow and magic -- yez, 07:30:36 03/03/02
Sun
I thought that magic was associated with feminine power on the show, at least of late -- with Willow
drawing strength from it and then creating a relationship that's not defined by male-female gender
roles.
Do you agree with that? If so, how do you think recent developments with Willow's addiction affect
that?
yez
[> [> [>
Re: Question for you on feminine power, Willow and magic -- manwitch, 08:45:35
03/03/02 Sun
One possible angle is that in the middle ages a "witch" was someone who communed with
the spiritual world, or with the supernatural world, without aid of a male mediator, such as a priest.
So there's a pretty direct connetion, imagery-wise, with "witches" and the idea of
"not needing men." Also, witches tend to draw on "goddess" powers, i.e. the
channellers of the source of powers rather than god powers which are seen more as the manifestation
of powers. I think.
I think this is one of the major problems with Willow's addiction and her bumpy relationship with
Tara (not in terms of bad writing, but in terms of interesting to see how it will play out). While in
principle we are all open-minded to Willow's bisexuality, how can the show ask her to reject having
her own direct access to spirituality? She needs to assimilate the power, not simply give it up. Truth
is her magic power is important and is valuable. Her unmediated access to that power is
important.
Is Tara symbolic of that channelling power? I don't know. In some ways she is, but the show also
makes a point of Willow's connection to those powers way beyond Tara. The neat/scary thing about
Willow is that she needs no mediator of anykind. Her eyes go black, her head shoots up, the white
light blasts down on her and stuff starts to happen. I think what she needs to learn from Tara is that
the world is fine just the way it is. She doesn't need to use magic to change the natural order of
things. When she realizes that, she can use magic again, if there is any need.
[> [>
Re: alien movies -- manwitch, 09:26:32 03/03/02 Sun
The Alien movies are all fantastic, except for alien 4. In alien 4 the symbol set still functions nicely,
but the dialogue, plot and filming are noticably weaker.
I have also read a nice essay about Aliens (the second movie) being the Persephone myth. You
might actually find them pretty interesting.
Plus, Ripley is just a fantastic character.
They are, however, horrendously frightening and you will have nightmares for years after seeing
them.
[> [> [>
Re: alien movies -- Caroline, 16:34:33 03/03/02 Sun
I admit that the reason I haven't seen the Alien movies is precisely because of the not wanting to
have nightmares for years. But I might screw my courage to the sticking place and rent them, just to
see what I missed. Any essays on the topic you could point me to, including Aliens being a retelling of
the Persephone myth (one of my faves, could you guess?) would be much appreciated.
[> [> [>
Re: alien movies and joss -- Dochawk, 17:15:10 03/03/02 Sun
Joss wrote the original script for Aliens 4. it was then rewritten though he says alot of the dialogue
is his. He got arbitrated out of a writing credit for the movie and may be a bit bitter about it. So, I
wonder how much he wants to pay homag to the aliens movies.
[> [> [> [>
Re: alien movies and joss -- leslie,
18:12:21 03/03/02 Sun
Or how much he wants to goddamn get that story off his chest.
[> [>
Re: Buffy, demon eggs, repression, Riley..the usual suspects! -- Dyna, 13:44:53 03/03/02
Sun
"And those eggs are representative of the stuff and issues that will continue to breed in the
unconscious after the initial repression and then erupt in a very chaotic and destructive way. Buffy
can keep throwing hand grenades at these things but they're going to keep coming! The message
here is that you've got to deal with the original issue because if you don't, the issue will
multiply."
Very interesting, Caroline! Reading your comments makes me feel better about the demon-eggs plot,
which at the time seemed just bizarre to me. Thinking along these new lines about what the demon
eggs represent, a couple of things occurred to me:
Riley remarks that Spike "screwed up" with the eggs because he "didn't keep them
frozen." If the eggs represent Buffy's unconscious issues, Riley's comment fits nicely with the
recurring motifs of freezing and fire that have characterized the Buffy/Spike relationship. Buffy
feels "frozen," she turns to Spike for his "fire"--the warmth of his feelings, the
fire of their physical passion (beautifully symbolized in the cemetery scene in DT, where Buffy
stands outside in the blue cold, while Spike inside is surrounded by candle flames.) Spike's
undercrypt is a "breeding ground" where Buffy's unconcious desires, needs, whatever,
are given free reign, and is the primary space where she gives herself permission to stop
"keeping them frozen."
However, as Spike discovers, being the one to encourage Buffy to access her unconscious issues is a
perilous undertaking, and it's liable to backfire. The demon eggs, once unfrozen, rapidly multiply
and become uncontrollable. Similarly, as Buffy and Spike's relationship taps into more and more of
Buffy's issues, Buffy reacts with increasing panic, and efforts to repress. "Dead Things"
did a great job of showing this process in Buffy, as well as its consequences for Spike, i.e. her out-of-
control beating in the alley as she projects her inner conflicts onto him.
Interesting that Riley gets the line about needing to keep these things frozen. Riley and Buffy had a
relationship that was superficially "ideal," but in which almost everything was left
unsaid until it was too late. Riley went to the vamp trulls when the things he was holding back (his
belief that Buffy didn't love him, his feelings that he wasn't needed, that he couldn't connect with
her) got so overwhelming that he needed to let them out somehow. Is Riley telling us now that in his
view the mistake he made in his relationship with Buffy wasn't that they repressed things, but that
they didn't keep them repressed enough? Buffy was, after all, perfectly willing to stay with him in
an emotionally disconnected relationship. Riley may see his visits to the vamp trulls, rather than
the repression that led to them, as the cause of the breakup. Something else he should have
"kept frozen."
Now we have a "new" Riley--one who shows less strong emotion, who is never without his
wife--is he a better person that the Riley who left? His life of adventure has given him a sense of
purpose, and also a way of never being alone again, never having to sit still and be preyed upon by
his feelings--the situation he was in when he was last in Sunnydale, and which led to his most
disastrous "failure." It's interesting to look at Riley as representing a path Buffy could
have taken, could still try to take to get out of her current difficulties. But, as Caroline points out,
for Buffy, the path of repression and avoidance can't lead very far. What's below the surface for her
is too strong, and I would argue that it wants to be found, and that Buffy wants to know herself. As
long as Spike represents the path into Buffy's unconscious, I think she will continue to need him,
and seek him out, though in what capacity remains to be seen.
[> [> [>
Re: Buffy, demon eggs, repression, Riley..the usual suspects! -- Etrangere, 15:08:42
03/03/02 Sun
Oh... well though !
what do you think about Buffy wearing purple (Red+Blue) in the break up scene ? Don't you think it
shows an aknowledgement of both her fire and ice ?
[> [> [>
Really great observations...reading your responses helps me enjoy the show even more! --
Caroline, 16:41:12 03/03/02 Sun
[> [> [>
Fire and ice -- Arya Stark, 20:29:25 03/03/02 Sun
Wow.
Thank you for nailing the cemetary scene in DT right on the head! When I saw it, I saw the colors as
cold and warmth, but labeling them fire and ice makes so much more sense and adds so much. Now
that scene means so much more in terms of the whole story arc.
[> [> [>
Re: Buffy, demon eggs, repression, Riley..the usual suspects! -- ponygirl, 09:10:54
03/04/02 Mon
Sometimes I want to smoke a cigarette after reading the posts on this board - they're so very
satisfying! So many great points about the symbolism of the eggs and the "breeders"
line. Breeders so often used as a derogatory term for straights by the gay community, is odd coming
out of Riley's mouth, he being the ultimate straight boy. Then to see the eggs positioned so
prominently by Spike's bed - the implication as mentioned in the prior posts that this is what Spike
and Buffy's relationship has produced. Interesting too that once the eggs have hatched Riley's line is
that the beasties have to be "contained", once more repressed, whereas Buffy chooses to
destroy them.
[> [>
Spike/Buffy's offspring -- Spike Lover, 17:53:57 03/03/02 Sun
Ok- You say that the dam is the symbolic holding back of the unconscious or unconscious desires;
you say that killing the demon at the dam is symbolic of the killing of an issue (or subconscious
issue.) Fine, I am going to step further and say that Buffy is THE BREEDER this season and she
has been breeding with Spike.
Those eggs are symbolic of what they had been/were in the process of creating. (A good healthy
relationship? A miracle half-vampire/half-slayer child? A redeemed vampire or balanced slayer?
Something monstrous/Chaotic? Whatever.) She blew them up. Now the breeder has to start over.
Why would the eggs be there? Well, there are other kinds of eggs than reptilian or fish eggs. There
are bird eggs as well. What do birds do? Well, in some varieties, both parents have to sit on the eggs
to get them to hatch. I would say that Spike has been nursing this relationship for a long time, so he
obviously is the one that has been setting them.
So what you have is a sort of premature hatching in this episode... Is this because Buffy has not
done her part in setting on the eggs? Would the eggs have turned out to be monsters destroying
mankind if they had actually been brought to term with the work of both parents? (symbolically
speaking?)
[>
Re: Machiavelli, Ripley, and Sam (incoherent spoilers for AYW) -- yez, 07:47:49
03/03/02 Sun
Great post. Very interesting mindfood.
The DMP monster also resembled the "Alien" monsters, didn't it? (Hard shell, acid-
spitting...)
Re: the dribble pipe at the dam, I remember Riley doing that awkward ducking thing, and I also half
noticed that Buffy didn't. Did anyone else notice that -- or maybe I'm remembering incorrectly? (I'll
never make a good witness...) If that's the case, then does it show slightly more willingness on
Buffy's part to engage her subconscious?
Re: friends, enemies and proximity -- I agree with the person who pointed out that by pushing Spike
away, Buffy could be reactivating her enemy again, so to speak.
Also, I was thinking how, this season, it's been Buffy's friends/family that are causing the most
problems, almost precisely because she has not been keeping them close. At least Willow and Dawn.
And if it turns out that Xander has gotten in over his head, maybe we should add him to the list,
since we really haven't seen Buffy or anyone have a serious talk with him about the big step he's
taking.
yez
[>
Re: Machiavelli, Ripley, and Sam (incoherent spoilers for AYW) -- Spike Lover,
17:37:06 03/03/02 Sun
Ok, you lost me on the church going thing. Did Riley go to Church?
Re: If Riley is the patriarch Adam, then that makes Sam "Eve" and the one who for all
history is blamed for screwing up Adam and the human race. Adam is the weakest man in history.
Ok- I have to agree with you that there is something 'strange' about Sam. She was an exact replica
of Riley (as if made out of one of the guy's ribs.)
The doctor thing was really bizarre, but Sam was the only one connected with an infirmary.
Somehow, I can't see Spike trying to pass himself off as a doctor- not after everything that has
happened over the last year.
Also, I do not really buy the idea that he was behind the great egg plot either- simply because if he
had been, we would have been given some background of his 'reverting back to evil' in other eps.
(Like we were shown the testing the chip in the alley scene.)
I can believe that it was probably a get-rich-quick scheme.
The water symbolism was interesting, though I wondered why at the time they were showing a dam
when they could have easily used the park.
Why were the writers showing Buffy and Spike in such a weakened state (particularly compared to
the strong as steel Finn family?)
[> [>
which adam? who's eve? -- anom, 21:24:21 03/03/02 Sun
"Re: If Riley is the patriarch Adam, then that makes Sam 'Eve' and the one who for all history
is blamed for screwing up Adam and the human race."
I thought Adam was Adam in that season--not sure who/what that would make Riley. But if Riley
& Sam are Adam & Eve, that puts Buffy in the position of being Lilith, which has serious
implications for the meaning of the eggs in the lower level of Spike's crypt. After all, Lilith was said
to bear 100 children a day...by fornicating w/demons. Hmmmm....
I suppose, given what manwitch & Caroline have said about the "breeder" concept,
that Lilith could be another one of Buffy's nightmare images of what her power as a female means.
(& I wrote the whole paragraph above before I made that last connection.)
Oh, & about Eve being blamed for all history for "the Fall"--that's a Xtian concept.
In Genesis, the serpent, Eve, & Adam are each blamed by God for their respective parts in the
sin, & all 3 are punished. I'm sure Islam has its own take on the story--can anyone fill us in on
that?
impression from the promo for
the wedding ;-) (spoilery if you haven't seen the promo) -- gds, 18:22:27 03/02/02 Sat
The impression I received was something like a mafia wedding. You have these powerful characters
that are regularly in life and death conflict coming together for a wedding that sort of unites 2
warring factions. The war will continue, but now it could get a little more 'family' like.
I'm not much for mob pictures (believe it or not I've never seen any of the Godfather movies or
Soprano episodes), but think of the possibilities. Sunnydale being the Slayer’s territory and all of the
demons know they are at risk if they don’t show the proper respect there. Maybe we will learn about
the territories of others. In season 4 they both fought the feds, though they were still at war with
each other. Maybe we can get some ‘family’ nicknames – Spike already has his. Perhaps Willow
would be ‘The Red Witch’. Spike has already given people names – e.g. Xander ‘The Bricklayer’,
Dawn is ‘Platelet’ (‘The Little Bit’ doesn’t work too well here).
[>
Re: impression from the promo for the wedding ;-) (spoilery if you haven't seen the promo) -
- John, 18:46:38 03/02/02 Sat
I'm more interested in the reception - I really hope D'Hoffryn does come! I like the idea of a clash
between the world of Buffy, and the 'real' world.
~ Slain by Buffy
[> [>
Re: impression from the promo for the wedding ;-) (spoilery if you haven't seen the promo) -
- vampire hunter D, 12:25:19 03/03/02 Sun
D'Hoffryn does come. He was in the promo. He's the one who geave Dawn the package that's:
"Fragile?" "No, Wiggly."
[> [> [>
Re: impression from the promo for the wedding ;-) (spoilery if you haven't seen the promo) -
- anom, 23:14:18 03/03/02 Sun
"D'Hoffryn does come. He was in the promo."
D'Hoffryn & Willow meet again? Could be interesting...think of the possibilities!
Buffy and Denial -- Kevin,
22:02:45 03/02/02 Sat
I recently watched both Restless and Buffy vs. Dracula the same night. I've only seen them once
before at the end of S4 and the beginning of S5. When I realized that both the First Slayer and
Dracula used the same line, "You think you know...what's to come...what you are. You haven't
even begun." I started looking at the two episodes together.
Especially throughout the Dracula episode, I noticed a constant theme throughout the dialog of
Dracula making a connection with Buffy as "kindred", "killer", "the
hunt" and allusions to the fact that their power had common roots. Every time, he tried to
make the connection, Buffy denied the connection.
Until the very last scene. She goes to Giles and admits that there might be a connection. She wants
to find out more about it, maybe control the power she might contain.
The first time I saw Dracula, I didn't make the connections with Restless. So I discounted Dracula's
statements about their common origins as just his trying to manipulate her. But after hearing the
same words from him and the First Slayer, I have to believe that he was telling her the truth.
I see a common thread with Buffy that continues up through AYW. She denies her connection with
vampires. She goes to Giles, the Watcher (a patriarch) to find out about her power. But the
Watchers came after. They're not connected to the Slayers power. They've tried to harness it and
direct it for their own good (saving mankind from demons), but they came after. Giles doesn't have
the answers she's looking for. By going to the Watcher for answers, she's still denying her
connection to a more ancient power.
I'm not saying the power has to be "dark" as Dracula and Spike have colored it, but it is
Primeval. A lot of Buffy's journey has seemed to be realizing that her power is not the civilized
wielding of library books that Giles is all about. I do believe her life will get a lot simpler when she
accepts what she is rather than denying it. Once she accepts it, then she'll be more at peace with
herself and her life.
[>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- John, 23:41:32 03/02/02 Sat
I think that's Buffy's current journey - embracing that source of her power. In the episode where
Spike's telling her about the slayers he's killed he says almost the same thing as Dracula and the
First; that her power is rooted in darkness, and that she's in love with darkness. I think S5
and S6 have been about Buffy coming to terms with this, and admitting that it's not just a case of
Buffy contre les Vampires - she has more in common with them than she'd like to admit.
I've read an interesting essay about the link between the First Slayer, and the First Evil (thing
which brought Angel back from hell in S3) - saying they're the same thing. It's possible we'll see
something on that later.
[> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- juliaabra, 01:32:09 03/03/02 Sun
john: where is that essay? i'd love to read it. thanks.
[> [> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- vandalia, 19:14:46 03/03/02 Sun
That essay was by me way back in November. The link is here:
The First...?
[> [> [> [>
Thanks for the link -- Kevin, 19:52:57 03/03/02 Sun
Thanks for the link...Really interesting thoughts about "The First" vs. "The First
Slayer".
I'm new to this posting board, so I've missed out on all the great ideas you guys have already
explored. I'm really enjoying this. I haven't had so much fun since my college mythology courses
exploring myth and current movies, etc.
I'm going to have to roll that one around for awhile...It certainly changes how I'd view Buffy's
role.
[>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- Terrapin, 10:55:27 03/03/02 Sun
You raise a very important issue that I thought season six would explore more. I have even thought
about this for a while. Especially when I saw Buffy vs Dracula. What I really want to know is where
her powers came from, and the connection between her power and evil(if there is a connection)
However, there is another side to this as well. In Restless, the First Slayer is trying to tell Buffy that
she is alone and in the dark. The first slayer tries to kill Buffy and her friends by seperating them.
The first slayer thinks that Buffy should do things the way the she did things. However, Buffy is too
smart for that. Buffy gives her speach how she walks, talks, doesn't sleep on bed of bones, etc... Buffy
is right. She even defeats the first slayer.
Next in Buffy VS. Dracula, Buffy is faced with the most famous vampire ever. He also possesses
powers of mind control that tricks his vitims into letting him bite them. His mind control powers
work on Buffy, but only for a little bit. Buffy then realizes what he is doing and is able to defeat him
also.
Buffy shows to be stronger than both the first slayer and Dracula, who both say that she really has
no idea who she really is.
Now in season six, Buffy finds her greatest connection with Spike, who is a vampire. He tells her
that she tries to be with her friends, but is only drawn to the darkness. I'm pretty sure that
something in her mind tries to believe this. Again, spike is acting just like the first slayer and
Dracula, by trying to make her belive that she a just a creature of the darkness, just like them.
However, Buffy is strong eventually tells Spike that it is over. Now, whenther she follows through
with what she says, well find out in the episodes to come.
So, could Buffy's power be linked to evil and darkness? Maybe. But I think the real challenge for
Buffy is find out who she really is. Buffy is very much human with a soul, who wans to fight the good
fight and make the world a better place.
[> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- Kevin, 11:11:18 03/03/02 Sun
I'm really hoping that the writers delve into the real source of the Slayer's power and the connections
to vampires. It was tantilizingly hinted at in Buffy vs. Dracula and Restless, but I don't feel like the
writers have really explored it. I'm hoping they're going to get back to it soon.
I love the mythology behind the action on BtVS...I think that's why I miss Giles and the library
books so much this season. He always seemed to fill in the background on this or that monster,
prophecy, etc. Without him there, it seems like the monsters just appear in a vacuum without being
fleshed out. I'm not sure that he can help with the Slayer origin, though.
[> [> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial -- Terrapin, 12:39:06 03/03/02 Sun
I totally agree with you Kevin. Restless is probably one of my fav. episodes.(if not, my fav.)That
episode really made me want to know more about who Buffy really is and how her powers affect her
true self. But, I think that Buffy has to overcome her problems in this season, get her life back
together, and be happy with who she is.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial - A couple of thoughts -- wiscoboy, 15:55:03 03/03/02 Sun
First, in retrospect to the parallel lines spoken by the 1st Slayer & Dracula: didn't Tara also
speak those same lines to Buffy earlier this season(I forget whether it was in a dream or trance
state)?
Secondly, you talk about whether Buffy's power is rooted in darkness. If that is true, how could it be
she was pulled from Heaven back into this realm(her Hell)? Are you saying her heaven is in reality
Hell?
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Buffy and Denial - A couple of thoughts -- Kevin, 17:16:10 03/03/02 Sun
In my first post I said:
"I'm not saying the power has to be "dark" as Dracula and Spike have colored it,
but it is Primeval. A lot of Buffy's journey has seemed to be realizing that her power is not the
civilized wielding of library books that Giles is all about. I do believe her life will get a lot simpler
when she accepts what she is rather than denying it. Once she accepts it, then she'll be more at
peace with herself and her life."
I don't see it as "darkness". A common source doesn't mean that the power is identical.
In fact I would see it as perhaps a yin/yang sort of thing. I usually tend towards shades of grey
rather absolutes of dark/light, hell/heaven, evil/good.
I'm interested in the connection...the commonalties. What's the real story of their power's origin.
It's an intriguing mythology that was hinted at in those episodes that I'm wishing the writers would
follow up on.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: darkness, not evil -- leslie,
18:09:26 03/03/02 Sun
Darkness is not necessarily evil. Black can be the color of death, but it's also the color of fertile earth.
White is the color of purity, but also of sterility. Underground is where the dead live, but it is also
where new (plant) life is generated; the womb is also dark.
Thinking along these lines, it seems that the First Slayer--and Spike--are seriously misinterpreted
when their calls to the "darkness" are seen as a temptation to evil. Buffy's gift was
death--a death that saved the world--but her death was also necessary for her to be reborn. The fact
that it has been a difficult rebirth does not mean that it was "wrong" (this season's
keyword). Likewise, one of the problems Spike seems to be dealing with is being "dark"
without being "evil." Dark, he can't stop; evil, maybe, but only if he changes his point of
view. Buffy has the same need for a mental shift. Well, frankly, they all do. I don't think its as much
a question of mediating the dichotomies as understanding that the equations (dark=evil) are not
necessarily immutable. This is myth, not math.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: darkness, not evil -- Arethusa, 19:17:38 03/03/02 Sun
This season is very interesting because Buffy's need to integrate the dark and light in her nature is
one we all must go through some time in our lives. I've known people who bury themselves in
slavish obedience to God (or their interpretation of God's wishes) because they could not accept their
darker impulses. (This is not a criticism of religion or religious people per se.)
Others let themselves sink into an animalistic version of themselves, ignoring anything they can't
eat, smoke, snort or, um, you know. Out of ignorance or moral laziness, they don't try to develop the
more spiritual and altruistic side of human nature.
The other Scoobies are exploring the same issues, as other posters have stated before me.
How many series are willing to expose their main character's weaknesses, foolish moments, lusts,
and faults in such depth? (Except AtS, of course.) Gotta love the Buffster, as another tv character
might say.
[> [>
Buffy's power linked to evil and darkness -- Spike Lover, 17:18:09 03/03/02 Sun
Sounds like you are describing Angel's powers- which is undoubtedly rooted in darkness and which
he tries to wield for good.
If B's powers are also rooted in darkness- then the shows really are running parallel of each
other.
[> [> [>
Re: Buffy's power linked to evil and darkness -- Terrapin, 19:01:25 03/03/02 Sun
Well, I'm really not quite sure. It's just a little specualtion that has been boggling in my mind for a
while. But I really hope to find out some time. It's definetely something to think about.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Buffy's power linked to evil and darkness (+ possible Fray spoilage) -- O'Cailleagh,
21:35:09 03/03/02 Sun
In the postings following the essay mentioned and linked earlier in this thread, it is stated that, in
the Fray comic-book, the First Slayer is not the First Evil.
It should also be remembered that vampires do have souls (I have posted this recently in another
thread)..... in The Harvest, Giles says 'The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a
human, mixed their blood. He was a human form possessed, infected by the demon's soul.'
Vampires therefore have souls, just not human ones.
It has already been established that not all demons are 'evil' (just as not all humans are 'good').
Darkness does not equate to evil, it refers to those parts of us that are not on display to the rest of
the world...the more primeval elements of our makeup.
Sorry if this doesn't make much sense, very tired.
You hurt the ones you love--or
destroy the place where you love the ones you hate.(spoilers) -- Grace, 22:02:55 03/02/02
Sat
It was Buffy who chose to blow up the lower level of Spike's crypt--the place she has been running to
get away from the world. Granted, it seemed a necessity in the circumstances but there was a
reason why she "drop the bomb" and not Riley. (This "bomb" also
foreshadowed her later "bomb" of breaking up with Spike. Again.). Buffy had
commented before that Spike had decorated the place nicely and it is not too far a stretch to assume
that Spike was making the place nice for her. Anyway–Buffy destroyed it and left Spike behind to
rummage through the remains. Again.
[>
Things the make you go hmmmm -- LeeAnn, 23:21:06 03/02/02 Sat
Things that make you go "hmmmm."
Spike breaks up the relationship between Buffy and Riley by showing Buffy Riley has been doing
something bad.
Riley breaks up the relationship between Buffy and Spike by showing Buffy Spike has been doing
something bad.
When Spike approaches Buffy to show her the bad, she is naked, vulnerable in the bed where she
earlier had sex with Riley.
When Riley approaches Buffy to show her the bad, she is naked, vulnerable in the bed where she
earlier had sex with Spike.
Buffy torches the house where Riley had been doing the bad.
Buffy bombs and burns the crypt where Spike had been doing the bad.
Spike had set Riley on the path to bad by helping convince him that Buffy needs a little monster in
her man.
Did Riley set Spike on the path to the bad? Him and his doctor wife?
Hmmmmm.
[> [>
Re: Things the make you go hmmmm -- juliaabra, 01:29:43 03/03/02 Sun
that reminds me of those presidents kennedy/lincoln reverse similarities. good points (of a triangle)
too!
Is ME making Season 6 mirror
Season 5? (spoilers thru AYW) -- LeeAnn, 06:13:27 03/03/02 Sun
Let's see. Does Season 6 mirror season 5?
Spike had dreams of kissing Buffy and fighting Buffy and having sex with Buffy in Out of My
Mind and in Family.
Buffy has a dream of sex and violence and Spike in Dead Things.
Spike breaks up the relationship between Buffy and Riley by showing Buffy Riley has been doing
something bad.
Riley breaks up the relationship between Buffy and Spike by showing Buffy Spike has been doing
something bad.
When Spike approaches Buffy to show her the bad, she is naked, vulnerable in the bed. where she
had sex with Riley earlier.
When Riley approaches Buffy to show her the bad, she is naked, vulnerable in a sort of bed where
she had sex with Spike earlier.
Buffy torches the house where Riley had been doing the bad.
Buffy bombs and burns the crypt where Spike had been doing the bad.
In Crush Spike's old girl friend Dru returns to remind him of happier times and try to pull
him back into his old life. This involves participating in the hunt together but is ultimately
unsatisfying.
In As You Were Buffy's old boyfriend Riley returns to remind her of happier times and try to
pull her back into her old life. This involves participating in the hunt together but is ultimately
unsatisfying.
Buffy was chained and threatened and menaced in Crush.
Spike was handcuffed in Dead Things and tormented in As We Were.
Spike allowed his old girl friend Dru to attack and insult Buffy while she was chained and not able to
fight while Spike threatened her himself.
Buffy allowed her old boyfriend Riley punch and humiliate Spike while she watched or participated
and Spike wasn't able to fight because of the chip. Very Crush like.
Dru offers to kill Buffy.
Riley offers to kill Spike.
If ME is mirroring then As You Were is a combination of Into the Woods and
Crush.
Does this mean that Spike will next go on a trip out of town?
Poor Spikey, and us Spike shipper, I think we got some more hard times ahead of us.
[>
Good points. What do you think this mirroring will lead to? -- CW, 06:33:19 03/03/02
Sun
[> [>
Re: Good points. What do you think this mirroring will lead to? -- LeeAnn, 06:42:36
03/03/02 Sun
I shudder to think. Spike will have to suffer some more. Will Buffy die again?
At the very least I think the sex is over.
Damn.
[>
Interesting, thanks. -- yez, 07:53:56 03/03/02 Sun
[>
Wonderful points! I hadn't even considered those parallels! -- Rob, 07:56:59 03/03/02
Sun
[>
Great points! -- Dariel, 13:09:04 03/03/02 Sun
Very astute. Wish I could see these things, but at least there are people like you to point them
out!
About Spike leaving town....I think things are heading in that direction, although it's hard to explain
why. I'm sure the writers want to mess with him/Buffy/us some more, and Spike skipping town
would fit the bill. Over the summer break, for maximum torture of us shippers, of course!
BTW, no spoilers here, just my thoughts.
[>
Re: Is ME making Season 6 mirror Season 5? (spoilers thru AYW) -- DustyMama,
14:55:08 03/03/02 Sun
Great observation!
As a Spike fan and S/B 'shipper, I have some speculation about where this "mirroring"
will lead.
I'm wondering if we'll see another ep like "Intervention," where Spike is tortured (at the
hands of Warren, maybe?) Only this time, *Buffy*, as opposed to the Buffybot, will be the one
insisting on saving Spike. Then, we could also get a similar scene to Intervention where the Scoobies
learn that she and Spike have been sleeping together.
[>
"hmmmmm." (Thanks, good notes to scribble in my mental notebook.) -- yuri,
22:20:00 03/03/02 Sun
Help with college paper,
please! -- Rob, 12:14:21 03/03/02 Sun
I have to write a paper for my Advanced British Literature class on "The Canterbury
Tales." In it, people tell stories to other characters, and are constantly being interrupted by the
other characters, about the quality of the story.
Could that be seen as a form of metanarration, since the characters in the book are commenting on a
story being told in the book, or is metanarration exclusively a reference to something external from
the book that hints that the characters in the book might know they're in a book (i.e. from
"Buffy," Buffy's line, "Dawn's in trouble, must be Tuesday," or Tara's grr
aargh! line in "Bargaining")?
Rob
[>
Re: Help with college paper, please! -- WW, 14:56:04 03/03/02 Sun
As far as I know, your latter definition is the right one, Rob. The characters would have to recognize
that they were characters in a book.
;o)
[> [>
Oh, well...Guess I'll have to change that word! -- Rob, 15:26:17 03/03/02 Sun
I wanted to throw in an impressive word to describe the situation, but using a big word incorrectly is
very unimpressive...and really embarassing!
Thanks so much for the help! :o)
Rob
[> [> [>
You want an impressive term, Rob? -- d'Herblay, 16:39:26 03/03/02 Sun
Go with "Milesian tale." Short, snappy, and almost technically accurate.
[> [> [> [>
Cool, thanks! Your suggestion has inspired me to both "ooh" and
"aah"! -- Rob, 17:37:29 03/03/02 Sun
FICLET Three --
Etrangere, 12:28:29 03/03/02 Sun
TITLE : Three
FEEDBACK : This is my first fic, help me improve :) abymage@free.fr
RATING : errr... G ?
NOTES : Many thanks to Lady Starlight for advices and correcting my english
Three is a bloody magic number, you know that?
Wouldn't need Red or her wicca girl to tell me that, I know. I knew even before I died, I’d been
reading enough stupid pre-Raphaelite poetry for that.
It's like a plague, turning your life all around until all you can do is stare at the mess it made. Like
that old wicca warning, things returning to you threefold. Just like that. Magic always has
consequences. And so does doom.
So there you go, me being in love with three women in my sodding life. And every time I was broken
by it. And every time I tried again, made myself a new man, started a new life, found a new role
model, just for her, anything. And every time, every bloody time, a mess.
You'd think I'd learn by now, wouldn't you?
She said I was the only she could trust with it.
I guess she couldn't lay something that huge on any of her friends, but then, I wasn't a friend. I was
too surprised to say anything at first, then I raged, I yelled, and I begged. God, how I begged her
!
She would have none of it.
There's no way out, she told me, it's just how I was brought back, it's in the spell. We can't even
wait.
Guess I should just be glad for those few months of respite, of having her back and a chance to love
her and see it wasn't enough.
I wanted to tell her that the world could sod off, that they could all sod off, every bit of humanity, her
friends and the Nibblet. I said nothing, because it would have been useless, and though I would be
happy to see the end of the world as long as I was with her, I knew by then that having her with me
only because she'd be unconscious wouldn't be what I craved. I had learnt that much with Drusilla,
at least.
So in the end, I just told her the truth. "Buffy, I can't do that."
Her expression softened and she took my hand. "You have to, please, Spike. You can't...",
her voice wavered, "you can't leave me alone."
I closed my eyes for just a second, just an instant to remember, then I nodded ever so slightly. She
relaxed and let a sad little smile flicker across her face. "Thank you, I know it's... thank
you."
Of course she knew.
The third time. It was the third time I'd helped her prevent the end of the world. I had failed her the
first two times, one way or another. That was the price, for the moment I had raised my eyes from
Drusilla to see her fighting against Angelus, so close to losing and yet not willing to do anything.
That was the price for falling from the tower and failing to save Little Bit from Doc. 'Cause Three is
a magic number, and it'll always catch you back.
I caressed her cheek and kissed her eyes and then her lips because three’s magic, for goodbye, and I
killed my third Slayer.
Three is a bloody magic number, you know that?
[>
Re: FICLET Three -- Chris, 14:28:34 03/03/02 Sun
Powerful and perfect just as it is. Thank you.
[>
Re: FICLET Three -- Luvthistle1,
01:06:19 03/04/02 Mon
This is great! You are a very good writer. I should know, I'm a writer also. I think you have a lot of
potential, and can become a great writer.
[>
Loved it. -- Sophist, 10:41:45 03/04/02 Mon
"holtz" on the radio
& tapes -- anom, 15:18:26 03/03/02 Sun
I unexpectedly heard a name & voice from Angel on NPR's Weekend All Things Considered:
Keith Szarabajka. It was in a segment on people who read books on tape. (Some have to pay $800 to
audition!) There's not much of him in it, but you get to hear his voice, & didn't someone ask how
his name was pronounced? You can find out at http://www.npr.org/programs/watc/ after 9 Eastern
time tonight. Unfortunately, I don't know the title of the segment, but it was the next-to-last (I
think) on the program.
Enjoy!
[>
Re: "holtz" on the radio & tapes -- Peanut, 12:10:08 03/04/02 Mon
Huh - check out his entries from IMDB:
Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix (2002) (VG) (voice) .... Sgt. Peterson
We Were Soldiers (2002) .... Diplomatic Spook
"Heavy Gear: The Animated Series" (2001) TV Series (voice) .... Serge Garpenlov
"Angel" (1999/I) TV Series .... Daniel Holtz (2001-)
"Max Steel" (2000) TV Series .... Mairot/Psycho
Star Wars: Force Commander (2000) (VG) (voice) .... Dewback Trooper/Infiltrator/TIE Fighter Pilot
Escape from Monkey Island (2000) (VG) (voice) .... Reverend Rasputin
Typecast much? Military, Spy, Military, Psycho, Military, Rasputin...
Buffy and Supergirl:
Coincidence? -- Apophis, 16:48:04 03/03/02 Sun
Just in case anyone didn't know, I'm a comic book geek. As such, I've had the opportunity to observe
certain similarities between BtVS and comic book characters. Everyone knows about the
Angel/Batman thing, but I've encountered something else. The current incarnation of Supergirl (I'm
not even going to attempt to explain DC Comics continuity. Just take my word for it) and Buffy have
quite a bit in common. Examples:
* both are unnatural blondes (the current Supergirl wears a wig, while SMG dyes)
* both possess enhanced strength, speed, and durability (the current Supergirl is, admittedly,
stronger, tougher, and faster, but she can no longer fly or use any other Superman-esque
powers)
* both have a demonic sidekick who used to be an enemy and both are developing feelings for said
demon. We're all familiar with the Buffy/Spike thing. Supergirl has Buzz, a 2000 year old demon
trapped in human form who speaks with a British accent. He used to lead a cult and was
instrumental in Supergirl reaching her current incarnation (again, don't ask). He tried for a while to
kill her, but is now bound to her, apparently by God Himself (loooong story), and suffers incredible
pain/nose bleeds if he tries to escape. Lots of love/hate stuff between the two (see the current issues),
and lots of straddling the line between good and evil from Buzz.
* both were chosen by a higher power. Buffy was chosen by the PTB, while Supergirl was some kind
of Earth-born angel (I'm still not clear on this) who used to have conversations with God.
I have wondered about some of these coincidences (I think there's more, but I'm getting bored). Peter
David, the writer of Supergirl, has stated in interviews that he watches BtVS. The Supergirl/Buzz
thing started aproximately during last season, when the Buffy/Spike thing began. I'm not accusing
anyone of plagerism or ideological theft, I just noticed these things.
[>
Re: Buffy and Supergirl: Coincidence? -- Brian, 18:42:49 03/03/02 Sun
Peter David spoke of these similiarities in his weekly
"But I Digress" in Comic Buyer's Guide #1477, dated 3/8/02.
Basically, he was there first. Buffy was second.
[> [>
Ah -- Apophis, 20:40:22 03/03/02 Sun
[>
Re: Buffy and Power Girl: Coincidence? -- Darby, 10:21:08 03/04/02 Mon
'Way back in Killed By Death, I think we got a little wink to another DC super-heroine,
Power Girl, who would have been around in Joss' comics-reading years (a flashback to Buffy and her
cousin has the cousin, I think, pretending to be Power Girl). She was sort of an
"alternative" Supergirl, with power constraints like the current Supergirl, but also well-
known for being a bit shorter than your typical heroine and wearing outfits often showing cleavage,
which was Buffy of S1 & S2. I don't think that it was anything more than a nod and a
wink to a select slice of the audience, though.
I'd like to see Peter David take a shot at a Buffy script, though - he did some interesting
things on Babylon 5, and he certainly has the right feel for the humor and dialogue.
[> [>
Re: Buffy and Power Girl: Coincidence? -- O'Cailleagh, 15:56:15 03/04/02 Mon
The Powergirl thing always confused me...I couldn't tell if she was supposed to be Supergirl with a
new name or not!(I didn't have regular access to American comics) And what with the way DC
change their Universe every 3.74 seconds.....well it got very confusing...(Why do they do that
anyway?)
You guys are gonna love
this -- Benny, 17:12:25 03/03/02 Sun
Check out this post, "Once More With Joss"
http://pub19.ezboard.com/fjmdotcomrefugeeboardfrm5.showMessage?topicID=273.topic
Could s/he be right??
[>
Well, I loved it... ;o) -- Wisewoman, 19:30:16 03/03/02 Sun
She raises some very interesting points, including the metanarration of Buffy telling us that we
"can sing along." In fact, I'm hoping she's right as that would put to rest a lot of my
concern about how this season is going so far. Time will tell.
[> [>
Great analysis, I agree. Though it's hard to sing along if the song's off key. --
mundusmundi, 19:53:53 03/03/02 Sun
[>
I choose to think that she is right. (And a small Q about other boards.) -- yuri, 22:57:15
03/03/02 Sun
The alternative is too depressing. (Meaning, I choose to think the writers intend the sort of
whatever-you-want-to-call-it weirdness of this season rather than that they're messing up. I've kind
of stated that already, though, so sorry to repeat.)
BTW - I don't go to any other message boards but this one, and every once in a while someone links
to a good post somewhere else. Are there any other places with consistant high-quality posting? If
not, are people letting the good posters know about AtPoBtVS? I feel sorry for lots of them who get
only "WOW good point!" replies with no banter or flames or interesting, informed
agreement.
(Not that I'm really the Queen of quality banter/flames/informed agreement, but I'm learning.)
[> [>
Re: (And a small Q about other boards.) -- Etrangere, 05:30:50 03/04/02 Mon
You know, it's not because this place's name all things philosophical on BtVS that it means it's the
only place where people talk about philosophies, symboles and metaphores :)
And yeah, there's often good stuffs at the Big Bad Board, Someone just re-posted a very good
analysis of Spike/William's personnality that I advice you to read.
[> [>
Re: I choose to think that she is right. (And a small Q about other boards.) -- grifter,
12:32:46 03/04/02 Mon
The "The Kitten, the witches and the bad wardrobe" board is a nice place if you like
Willow and Tara. There´re some really good posts about them from time to time, and the episode
discussions are great.
[>
I thought it was just great! -- Rahael, 02:42:26 03/04/02 Mon
Now I'm off to rewatch OMWF, or at least I will when I actually finish work and all that. Lots of
things to think about there.....
[>
Re: You guys are gonna love this -- Caroline, 07:09:02 03/04/02 Mon
Thanks for bringing this post to our attention. A lot of people on this board have been arguing either
from a psychological or mythological perspective that the Buffy/Spike interaction has not been
resolved yet, so it's interesting to get an interpretation from another form that this may be the case.
And how like Joss to poke fun at and play with us!
[>
Re: You guys are gonna love this -- ponygirl, 08:01:14 03/04/02 Mon
Thanks for posting this! Lot of great analysis. It had always seemed to me that OMWF was very
much about burnout: Buffy's emotional, the dancers' literal, and Joss' fear of creative burnout.
[>
Imagine my surprise!!! -- cynesthesia, 20:17:33 03/04/02 Mon
when I got back to this board today and found this thread. Yep, that is/was me. For once I came here
to post as well as lurk and I find out I'm already day-old bread ;-) Oh well, I posted it anyway.
Glad to hear that it struck a chord with others outside the BigBadBoard (which is a great place,
ahem). So maybe I'm not just stuck in my own wacky Whedon nightmare. I will now resume my
regularly scheduled lurking. :)
Cynthia
Old quotes from Whedon and
Noxon that seem appropriate now -- yez, 20:18:31 03/03/02 Sun
A few quotes from The Watcher's Guide, Volume 2 that I found particularly striking in light
of this season and how it's engaged me (or not). In case others are interested and haven't already
read the book (which I'm really enjoying, btw -- it's well done). yez
The steering
Whedon:
"I believe this show will probably go on longer than I will go on with it." (323-324)
Noxon:
"I don't think Joss is going to stay with the show forever. I have very mixed feelings about
what that means for the rest of us. Part of me thinks, 'How can we ever do this without him? How
could it ever be what it is, because it is so much his vision?'" (326-327)
Change
WG: "How about the changes from Season Three to Season Four?"
Noxon: "It felt like we were almost starting a whole new show, in a way. Buffy: The Later
Years. Same core group of wonderful characters, and then their circumstances just changed
entirely. Buffy without Angel, what is that? And all of them in college, what is that?
"A lot of characters we have gotten to know and people have gotten attached to -- like Faith
and the Mayor -- suddenly weren't there anymore.
"I think that stuff keeps the show very fresh and alive for people. But it's also a real challenge
from a writer's point of view. And I think the audience feels challenged. We've definitely gotten some
response this year -- 'Why isn't everything the same?' -- and you want to say as a writer, 'Well, it's
not the same because you'd be really bored if it was.' I know it's hard to understand when you're
feeling the lack of something, but it has to change by its very definition. ... I feel really grateful that
we haven't lost any of those 'core' characters. I still love the show ER. But when Sherrie
Stringfield left, I felt something change, and it's never been the same for me." (326)
Spike's alienation
Noxon:
"Joss has called the Faith character Buffy's shadow self. Faith was what Buffy would have
been without love and support. Without her team. A superhero isn't super unless hey have support
and love just like anybody else. Those energies and those impulses can be turned to the dark side if
you don't have people you care about and values you care about, and those are instilled by
community." (325)
[>
Oh, and Whedon / Giles parallels -- yez, 06:51:08 03/04/02 Mon
Also got me thinking how Giles left Buffy at the point when she really needed him most, and perhaps
Whedon is less involved at the point when BtVS needs him most.
yez
Exactly What It Seems -
Thoughts on *As You Were* ... ( ***Spoilers*** ) -- OnM, 20:28:56 03/03/02 Sun
*******
Nothing is ever what it seems, but everything is exactly what it is.
............ Buckaroo Banzai
*******
Starting out by quoting a fictional character is as good a way as any to sum up my feelings about
As You Were-- this episode had a number of good moments, but despite the occasional
appearance of potentially deep profundity, it feels more cartoonish in ways that I an unused to
seeing in the series. My expectations, which were very high going into the opening of the show last
Tuesday, may have contributed to the let-down.
Being a big fan of the Riley character, I was eagerly looking forward to finally achieving a resolution
of the story arc that was left hanging well over a year ago when Riley took his leave from Sunnydale-
- and Buffy. That episode left many fans with seriously mixed feelings as to who was to blame for the
whole messy breakup, excepting of course those clever folk who clearly saw that it (a) was entirely
Buffy’s fault or (b) was entirely Riley’s fault.
OK, so no one seems to definitively agree about anything when it comes to these two.
Fine with me, ambiguity is a hallmark of the Buffyverse. Certainly it isn’t a comparable situation to
the relationship between Buffy and Spike, so... uhh... errr... All right, it is comparable.
(Sheesh...)
There was that whole stab-him-in-the-heart-with-a-plastic-stake and then-have-a-drink-with-him
scene, so we did have foreshadowing that there was going to be a parallel of some kind drawn
between Spike and Riley, we just weren’t sure what kind would evolve. Then Riley goes away, the
world nearly gets hell-dimensionalized, Buffy dies, the world is saved (a lot), Buffy gets
resurrected/reborn, much angst ensues, Buffy eventually turns out to be ‘normal’, more angst
ensues, coupled with eau de hamburger. Egad, ya’all.
So I was looking forward, and now here I am looking backward, and thinking-- huh? How did Riley
turn into this incredibly perfect individual? And where did he find this incredibly perfect woman to
marry? Lovably im-perfect Buffy made the perfectly accurate observation when she asked Riley if he
had waited ‘until just this exact moment’ to come back into her life, because the timing of the whole
thing was certainly... uhhh.... errr... perfect ??
Way too much perfection here, sorry. This review is going to be pretty doggone short this
week for the simple reason that I don’t have a lot to say beyond the statement that-- once again-- I’m
waiting for the remainder of the season to play out to see if this discomfiture gets resolved in a
satisfactory manner. I have been reading over most of the board for the last week, and there is a
serious problem when the conspiracy scenarios of the fans are more creative than those of the show’s
writers.
This is especially true in light of the fact that the writer for As You Were, Doug Petrie, is one
of the shining lights of the series, from a writerly standpoint. Indeed, there were many little points of
light throughout the show-- the Machiavelli reference at the opening, the many clever little bon mots
that made me laugh out loud at times, the parallels that did indeed play out between Spike and
Riley, such as the significance of Buffy being naked when Spike comes to show her about Riley’s
dalliances with the vamp hookers, mirrored by her also being naked when Riley finds her with Spike.
There was obviously effort placed into making this episode rife with little details and subtexts, yet I
find it hard to get over the uncharacteristic bluntness with which the Riley/Buffy/Sam triangle
played out.
The new character of ‘Sam’, in fact, is even harder to believe in terms of behavior than Riley. One of
the more recent and talented contributors to our ATPo community has speculated that the answer is
simply that Sam is evil, or even eeeevviiillll. I’m all for that. Nobody is that nice and
understanding (well, maybe Mother Teresa, but I’ve never met her), not even Tara, who to date has
been the most gracious and compassionate denizen of Hellmouth City. Since Petrie also directed the
show along with performing the writing duties, I have to presume that either the actress played the
role the exact way he wanted her to, or else she just couldn’t get the right reading and they gave up
trying after a few takes. Were the rest of the Scoobies just so generally dumbstruck with Riley’s
return that they simply didn’t notice how odd she was?
In last week’s review of Older and far Away, I ventured that the program quality seemed to
suffer for being forced into the 42 minute time restriction, and I felt that even more so this week.
This arc should have been granted at least a full hour, maybe even a two-parter. I mean, we take
over a year and a half to build up the Riley/Buffy ‘ship, and we resolve it in a piddling 42 minutes?
Either something has to happen again in the future, if not in the current season then in the next, to
flesh this out more substantially. Granting the point that Buffy was supposed to use the reunion
with her ex to show her that she could do better than Spike, and regain her sense of self-worth again,
it wasn’t necessary that Riley and Sam have a ‘perfect’ relationship, it was only necessary that Buffy
could see that they were happy with one another and not too dysfunctional.
So, I vote for the conspiracy theory (any of them) for the time being, other than maybe the Riley and
Sam-bot ones. (I doubt that the Deadly Dweebs had enough background on Riley to effectively
program a ‘bot, even if time permitted).
That’s about it, nothing more to say that hasn’t already been said as well or better by many others
during the last week, including some very elegant (and likely accurate) deconstructions on the
‘points of light’ mentioned previously. I’m seldom at a loss for wordage, (as well ya’all know) but I am
this week. Given a choice between Willow on drugs/sugar/sex/magic and James Bondy-Riley Finn
and his Good Sam-aritan, let’s bring back Rack, already.
I don’t wish to end on a negative note, since one weak eppie doesn’t by any means ruin an otherwise
excellent season, so I will state for the record that I did really like the scene where Riley
wants to compare stories of his and Buffy’s more recent ‘adventures’, and Buffy gets that wonderful
and subtle little smile on her face and points out that ‘unless Riley died’, she’d win.
Now that’s my girl.
:)
[>
Re: Exactly What It Seems - Thoughts on *As You Were* ... ( ***Spoilers*** ) -- Cactus
Watcher, 21:05:26 03/03/02 Sun
As I said briefly in a reply to another post this morning, I think it is a mistake to think that Riley
and Sam really are perfect. We are, in fact, seeing them though Buffy's eyes. She is the one who
sees them as perfect. Take a hard look at Riley. He's scarred. He makes silly mistakes around his old
girlfriend. In fact, other than it's "Buffy's town" why do they bother looking her up at
all? They know the drill. These aren't monsters Sam and Riley haven't dealt with on their own
before. Why? Because Sam and Riley have their own issues. Riley still wonders what it would have
been like if Buffy had fallen in love with him. Why else would he not immediately tell Buffy about
Sam? Sam, for all her bravado, is insecure around Buffy. How many times does she ask Buffy if she
is getting in the way. Sam says it took Riley a year to get over Buffy. Look at the calender! Is he
really over her, and can Sam be sure he's over her? What is the first thing she says to Buffy? 'What
are you doing with my husband?' Granted they were giving each other a meaningful stare, but given
Buffy's behavior lately, they could have been doing a lot worse!
The important thing to note about the episode is the 'wheel of life' references. The tarot card The
Wheel depicts people at the top and people at the bottom of their luck. Buffy sees Sam and Riley as
better than they are, hence that is the way we tend to see them. Just as the tarot card indicates,
luck changes. But, as Riley says, Buffy, luck or no luck, is still Buffy. Things will change for her,
and her break with Spike is a step in the right direction.
[>
I knew it! -- Rufus, 22:04:48 03/03/02 Sun
I knew you had a secret thing for Rack.....;)
[>
Re: Exactly What It Seems - Thoughts on *As You Were* ... ( ***Spoilers*** ) -- Shiver,
22:49:11 03/03/02 Sun
My theory on the perfection of Sam comes from the perspective of having gone to a function where I
met the ex-girlfriend and ex-friends of my new hubby. I knew in advance quite a lot about these
people, the importance that they had once had in his life, and I was determined to be on my absolute
best behavior at this function. I was the sweetest, nicest, vision of perfection you could ever hope to
see. All of the things about me that compliment my spouse, I brought to the fore, and purposefully
swallowed any vestige of disharmony or imperfection (even though our relationship - wonderful as it
is - is wrought with such difficulties on occasion). It was one weekend (reunion thingy), about 12
hours of putting forward my best face, and I pulled it off beautifully. We're so used to seeing the
Buffy gang as their true selves (dysfunctional family/best friends, no need to be anything other than
themselves) that we perhaps naturally expect everyone on the show to bare their soul from the first
moment?
I put to you, then, that Sam was simply on her best behavior, performing the role of perfect wife, for
her husband's ex-es. Not that difficult to understand, and no conspiracy theory necessary.
I do agree that it felt rushed - that I would have liked it to be an hour long, no commercials, or
perhaps a two-parter. There's enough Xanya wedding stuff going on to have filled up the rest of the
time, and we could've had some sort of scene explaining to us the demon egg scheme being hatched
(groan) in Spike's brain. But, on the other hand, I think it was supposed to feel rushed. Demon
hunters on a secret mission are usually pressed for time, one would assume. When your ex shows up
with his spouse, you aren't supposed to have a long moment alone to discuss old times. (I think it
took them a while to get to the dam, though, so Buffy prob filled him in on Joyce's death and her own
death during that time. At the very least, if Riley hadn't known Joyce died, he would've asked where
she was when they got to the house, one would assume). So I think that it was supposed to feel
rushed - but it was enough of a push to bring Buffy back around to the realization that she isn't on a
very healthy track right now. And my god, what must her cholesterol be like, eating all that fast
food!
[> [>
Re: Exactly What It Seems - Thoughts on *As You Were* ... ( ***Spoilers*** ) -- JM,
04:45:47 03/04/02 Mon
Exactly, so glad that someone else picked up on Sam's vibe. I saw it because I've done it myself. Not
saying that she's not a nice person, but she was on her best behavior. She made a deliberate decision
at the damn. Her first few words seem to indicate that she was threatened and a little pissed. With
a less attractive attitude the whole night could have turned out quite differently.
Riley definitely got his stuff together, but his behavior wasn't one-hundred percent perfect. I got the
impression that the trip to the dam was his chance to impress Buffy and to get just a little time with
her all to himself. Not for any nefarious purposes, but just to remember their best times -- which
were always in the hunt -- and to show her that he's not the mess he was anymore. The mess that he
still thinks she rejected.
The other sad thing that got reinforced is that Riley is better off without Buffy. (Just like some
people have pointed out the Tara might be doing better without Willow.) Quitting the Iniative was
the right thing to do, but quitting the military was obviously not. Riley needs the structure and
discipline of the military and the adrenaline rush of his dangerous job. In retrospect his spin out in
season five was as much about loosing his vocation as difficulties in his relationship with Buffy.
There was no way she would be able to replace everything he turned his back on at the end of season
four. Though he made a misguided and ultimately distructive attempt to reorient his life around her
the way he had once lived for the mission.
[>
I've got your answers *As You Were*...(***Spoilers***) -- JBone, 19:20:35 03/04/02
Mon
I never thought that I would quote characters, but here I am hoping to illustrate my point. This is
from The Initiative.
INT. LOWELL HOUSE - NIGHT
Willow and Riley stand together in a corner, watching Buffy dance with a cute guy. Riley's got the
glazed-over thousand-yard stare of a shell-shocked veteran.
RILEY: I can't believe it. I choked.
WILLOW: You really, really did.
RILEY: You don't understand. I'm good at things. That's what I do. Work hard, apply myself, get it
done.
WILLOW: You failed extremely well.
RILEY: That's a great comfort to me.
WILLOW: You have to relax. You're not proposing --I sincerely hope -- you're just making contact.
Getting a reaction. Any reaction is okay, except projectile vomiting and what are the chances of --
Well the point I'm trying to make is that Riley never failed at anything, until Buffy. Is is really such
a surprise or shock that once he "got away" from Buffy and into a situation that he could
excel at, that this is exactly what he does? Golden Boys do exist.
[>
"Perfection" -- verdantheart, 20:30:11 03/04/02 Mon
Gung-ho, together Riley is not my idea of perfection. It seems to me that he did not have a complete
idea of what was going on with the demon eggs, just enough to get his job done. You're not going to
get a much reflection with Mr. Finn. Perhaps that's part of what Buffy was so wistful about. If only
she could return to the days when good was good and evil was evil.
Meanwhile, is there anything we can do about the time issue? I don't think I could boycott ... I'm just
being selfish, and weak ...
Spike's moral nature --
Mindtrekker, 23:09:28 03/03/02 Sun
Many seem to see Spike as returning to evil in As You Were and even see it as inconsistent with the
last year in which he professes to have changed and even seems to show himself to have changed
with his actions.
But I would argue that it's completely consistent because AYW does NOT portray Spike as evil. As
far as we know, he has no evil intent in holding the demon eggs. He seeks money, not the end of the
world or even the death of innocent people. Evil no doubt would come of his scheme but not because
Spike seeks evil. Rather, he just doesn't get in its way.
Riley gave us the correct word for understanding Spike when he called him "amoral." In
other words, Spike has no allegiance to the cause of either evil or good. If working for the good guys
against Angelus (in seasons past) suits his purposes, he'll do that. If encouraging Buffy's dark side
this season seems to be the way to bring her into his orbit, he'll do that. It's not that Spike seeks to
do evil. In fact, he sometimes is well intentioned. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that he was
selling the demon eggs on the black market because he wanted to buy something for Buffy, express
his love in some extravagant way like paying off her house or something. The problem with Spike is
that any means would justify any ends because he has no conscious to prevent him from evil or to
make him do anything about it when he sees it happening around him. He's constantly getting
himself in trouble with Buffy because he makes offensive remarks about killing people, which he
sees as perfectly innocent jokes because he truly doesn't know the difference between right and
wrong.
"Dead Things" illustrated this perfectly when Spike's first response to Buffy's belief that
she had killed an innocent was to hide the body. ( Some people I talk to seem to think Spike's
response was NOT morally wrong because the death would clearly have been an accident if Buffy
had been at fault. But I ask you, if you accidently kill someone with your car, should you hide the
body? Do you think that basketball player who accidentally shot his chauffer was right to try to
make it look like a suicide? ) Buffy's conscious makes her feel pain and regret concerning her
responsibility for the girl's death. To live with herself, she must turn herself in. Spike, on the other
hand, feels no responsibility for anyone.
It is the stark difference in value systems that makes it impossible for Buffy to ever love Spike.
It's a subtle distinction to make between being immoral and amoral, but it's an important one
because it explains how Spike can so often switch back and forth between being a good guy or a bad
guy. It also explains why he hasn't grown into a moral person that Buffy can love despite his real
efforts to do so. The problem is that no matter how much he tries to take the moral path, it doesn't
work because he doesn't understand it, either in his head or in his heart. The demon in him that
makes him a vampire makes it impossible for him to understand.
There is clearly humanity in him. He does love. He does show loyalty, compassion, understanding,
friendship. But all these things stem from his love of Buffy rather than from an abstract or general
sense of morality towards all human beings. This in strong contrast to Buffy who's whole life is about
protecting the good of all people, most of whom she does not know.
Even the positive things about Spike I would argue flow from his past life, the life of William, not
from Spike. As Buffy says, Spike the vampire is a "thing" with no conscience and no
feeling for human life. That's why, at the end of AYW, she will apologize to William but not to Spike.
She will not apologize to the monster.
What's great about this storyline, is that William--I believe--became Spike precisely because he was
rejected by women, or perhaps one woman in particular. Now, it's his choice to become Spike that is
the CAUSE of his rejection.
What I could imagine now is a quest on Spike's part to find a way to become William again--a quest
that Spike would use any means, evil or good, to fulfill.
[>
I disagree, I argue Spike is merely insane by demon standards -- Charlemagne20, 00:20:27 03/04/02 Mon
Spike clearly stayed with the gang after Buffy's deathand has an affection for all the Scoobies even
they would both be considerably more comfortable if they weren't wondering whether they would be
safer with the others dead.
I argue demons do possess a "soul" but it is not an absense but an actual system that
draws them to evil like humans are drawn to good-joss himself has confirmed this is true.
Spike is hence a crimminally insane demon as just like people such as the Trio and Mayor can be evil
thus can Spike be good...but of course like most insane and evil people among humans they are still
capable of some acts of Good while Spike is still capable of some acts of evil
[>
Spike is evil -- change, 03:53:37 03/04/02 Mon
But I would argue that it's completely consistent because AYW does NOT portray Spike as evil. As
far as we know, he has no evil intent in holding the demon eggs. He seeks money, not the end of the
world or even the death of innocent people. Evil no doubt would come of his scheme but not because
Spike seeks evil. Rather, he just doesn't get in its way.
So is it okay for a plastics company to pollute a town's ground water with PCB's if all they want to do
is make cute little baby dolls?
Riley gave us the correct word for understanding Spike when he called him "amoral." In
other words, Spike has no allegiance to the cause of either evil or good.
Being amoral is being evil. Being evil means being willing to use any means to accomplish your ends
without reguard to whether or not you will hurt other people in doing so. Darkness is the absence of
light. Evil is the absense of Good.
There is clearly humanity in him. He does love. He does show loyalty, compassion, understanding,
friendship.
Hitler was very loyal to the people in his inner circle. He had trouble with incompetent secretaries,
but couldn't bear to reprimend them or fire them. He was a vegitarian because he couldn't bear to
kill animals. However, that didn't stop him from murdering 20 million people.
[>
Re: Spike's moral nature -- John,
13:10:27 03/04/02 Mon
You might like to read an essay I've written on the subject:
http://www.daydreamnation.co.uk/buffy/bornbad.html
My theory is essentially that Spike's chip has repressed the evil in him, so his moral centre is now
based around his memories of being human. So essentially Spike is evil, but thinks he's good,
because he evil is being repressed. As we've seen, once he thinks he can bite, then he does; the
repression doesn't come from the chip, but from his reaction to it.
Because Spike can't bite, the only way he can deal with living is to revert to his pre-vampiric state. I
think this is interesting, because it clearly shows how a possessing demon can be influenced by the
human brain that its using.
[> [>
Re: Spike's moral nature -- Rufus, 13:46:11 03/04/02 Mon
My theory is essentially that Spike's chip has repressed the evil in him, so his moral centre is now
based around his memories of being human. So essentially Spike is evil, but thinks he's good,
because he evil is being repressed.
I don't think the chip does anything more than to inhibit Spike from attacking a person. Of course
that didn't stop him from trying to create chaos through another party, Harmony. What this has
accomplished is to create strife for Spike, the type of strife that causes changes and
growth(something vampires aren't known for). Instead of acting out on his impulsive need to kill,
Spike was forced to reflect and struggle with his nature. The chip did some of that but his ability to
love left over from the human in him did that last bit. This idea that vampires are only capable of
evil has never seemed to be challenged by vampires themselves. They are so stuck in that need to
create chaos they don't seem to think about a big picture and attempt to co-exist with people. But
that's what curses are all about, and that's how I view the vampires creation. That last demon that
left this reality, bit a human, a painful, toothy, non verbal form of a curse. That demon wanted evil
to infect humanity, and what better way than to set man against himself. One thing that wasn't
taken into consideration was the complexity of the mind and emotions of modern man. I feel a Spike
would eventually have happened, for whatever reason.
[> [> [>
Re: Spike's moral nature -- John, 15:19:52 03/04/02 Mon
Is the story of vampire creation based on something specific in BtVS, Rufus, or is it your own theory?
All I can remember from the show itself is that demons once ruled the earth, but they were somehow
cast out - but by that time they already intermixed with the human population.
The suggestion was that vampires are like the bastard children of humans and demons - which when
you think of it is a departure from the vampirism = disease metaphor in many original myths.
[> [> [> [>
Here you go..... -- Rufus, 06:05:41 03/05/02 Tue
Season one The Harvest (from Psyches Transcripts)
Giles: This world is older than any of you know. Contrary to popular mythology, it did not begin
as a paradise. For untold eons demons walked the Earth. They made it their home, their... their Hell.
But in time they lost their purchase on this reality. The way was made for mortal animals, for, for
man. All that remains of the old ones are vestiges, certain magicks, certain creatures...
Giles: The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a human, mixed their blood. He was a
human form possessed, infected by the demon's soul. He bit another, and another, and so they walk
the Earth, feeding... Killing some, mixing their blood with others to make more of their kind. Waiting
for the animals to die out, and the old ones to return.
I see that bite from the last demon as a curse...not as specific as a direct spoken curse like the
Gypsies did to Angel, but the intention is the same, the wish for evil to happen to the person or
persons cursed.
curse Pronunciation Key (kûrs)
n.
1.
a: An appeal or prayer for evil or misfortune to befall someone or something.
b: The evil or misfortune that comes in or as if in response to such an appeal: bewailed the curse of ill
health.
2. One that is accursed.
3. A source or cause of evil; a scourge: "Selfishness is the greatest curse of the human
race" (William Ewart Gladstone).
4. A profane word or phrase; a swearword.
5. Ecclesiastical. A censure, ban, or anathema.
6. Slang. Menstruation. Used with the.
That last demon may not have expressed his intentions in words, but his intent was clear, he hated
humanity and wanted vengeance for having to leave his home. The vampires are the result of this
wish. The vampire is called both a possession and an infection.....so I think we can talk in both terms
in describing them. The vampire is possessed by the soul of the last demon, the result the human
hybrid we see in the show.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Here you go..... -- John, 11:55:08 03/05/02 Tue
Yep, I'd agree with that. It's pretty clear that the vampirism was the last act of evil - it also seems to
be suggesting that vampires are somehow preparing the way for demons to return; which would
agree with events in BtVS, most notably the end of Season 2, with Angel trying to bring about Hell
on Earth.
New Philosophical concept!
Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- Charlemagne20, 00:29:59 03/04/02 Mon
Joss clearly likes Riley and the writers keep liking Riley because he's that awwww shucks nice guy
most people wanted to be in High school and college because they were percieved as perfect- on the
basketball team, straight a students, respectful, and good looking
I remember two from my class.
However I question if these people are nearly so perfect in real life and also the fact that the people
in Jossworld don't seem to learn that Riley is a perception of perfection not an actual being in and of
himself. Superman is actually a bit more realistic than Riley because his integrity is maintained by
his upbringing and lack of violating these essential concepts along with a firm respect for his equals
and in some cases superiors. Superman and Wonderland are always the divergent shippers couple of
DC. Riley cheats on buffy, nags on her, and is uncomfortable with her strength. Even his hitting
Parker in what most people wanted to do was actually artificial and forced because we didn't see any
lead up to it really from affection from Buffy.
However the writers keep bringing back Riley and defending him as what Buffy should be...
*Warning riley hate ahead*
NEWS FLASH JOSS
BUFFY IS BETTER THAN RILEY, BUFFY IS TOO GOOD FOR RILEY, RILEY IS NOT
SUPERMAN
It's weird but watching Riley I get the impression I'm surounded by the certain members of the
student's union at our Christian council meeting....i'm an aspiring minister but I always feel a great
deal of arrogance and elitism in their beliefs...including also hatred and flaws they tout as
virtues
That's riley to me and unworthy of this show
[>
Re: New Philosophical concept! Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- cjc36, 02:29:14 03/04/02 Mon
I was one of about five people in the known universe who actually liked Riley (or at least had
sympathy for him--coming after DB's Angel character was gonna be hell no matter WHO the next
guy was). I see Riley as merely the opposite of Angel; blonde and human and basically good at heart.
An innocent quality. But that isn‘t perfection, as his fall from what he knew showed.
But what could he have been?
To quote A Few Good Men, "We need him on that wall." Types like Riley are confident or
arrogant. They would be useless in their role as protector/fighter if they weren’t. What intrigued me
about Riley is the eventual fallout with the military he went through. He thought he knew the
world, but didn't. He thought he could compete with his own fears regarding Buffy and her more
powerful nature. But he couldn't. He WASN'T perfect, after all. And I loved the character more for
it.
But, again, nobody after Angel was gonna be given any chance at all by the greater BtVS fandom.
I wonder what would've happened if there had been no Riley and Spike/Buffy would have been the
NEXT THING. Would Spike have been accepted?
[> [>
Re: New Philosophical concept! Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- LeeAnn,
02:44:56 03/04/02 Mon
Riley was smug and arrogant, without empathy or humor and as deep as a puddle. What was there
to like about him?
[> [> [>
Wow, even more irrational Riley hatred. -- Hanayashiki, 03:26:13 03/04/02 Mon
[> [> [>
Re: New Philosophical concept! Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- cjc36, 04:36:11 03/04/02 Mon
QUOTE: Author: LeeAnn
Riley was smug and arrogant, without empathy or humor and as deep as a puddle. What was
there to like about him?
He gained empathy from me when he realized Buffy didn't love him for real. He then started
doubting himself, and that meant something for me.
As far as what was to like about him? When we first saw him, Riley was a smart, nice, polite young
man who seemed willing to help new freshman women orient themselves, without any smarmy plays
for sexual quid pro quo.
Yep, you're absolutely right! Nothing to like there!
[>
To play Devil's Advocate -- Earl Allison,
02:41:28 03/04/02 Mon
Me defending Riley? Who'd a thunk it? Hell must have frozen over :)
Seriously, while a certain view of Riley does seem to be being shoved down the viewer's throat, Buffy
has at some times been something less than a prize herself -- the difference is, we SEE the
progression of her actions, reactions, and behavior.
Buffy snubs her friends, and treats them rather badly during "When She Was Bad,"
especially Angel and Xander. Sure, she was moving towards getting over her death at the hands of
the Master, but still ...
Buffy treats Kendra rather badly overall, and shows a LOT of jealousy over Kendra'a being more
studious and having a "Slayer's Handbook." She gets over it, and befriends Kendra, but
hardly grieves for her (nor does anyone else) when she is killed -- of course, the same could be said
for Willow and Xander in regards to Jesse, but I digress ...
Buffy's jealousy returns with a vengeance not once, but twice more -- she's initially very jealous of
her mother's attentions being directed towards "Ted," even BEFORE we know anything
is wrong with him. She does the same in regards to Faith -- and while I don't believe it in fact, given
what we actually SEE, neither she nor the Scoobies EVER make much effort to include her -- I know
part of it was necessary for the story arc, part probably due to Eliza's schedule, and part because the
writers can't show us every little detail -- but it really does sometimes come off like they abandoned
her, and she lived down to their worst expectations.
Buffy RUNS AWAY after Season Two -- abandoning her family and friends -- while her Mom had
kicked her out, surely any of her friends would have taken her in? I know why she did it, but she did
in essence abandon her friends to the Hellmouth for a few months.
Let me state, I ABHOR Riley. Didn't like the character (nothing against the actor, BTW, just the
character as written), didn't like the way the Initiative was handled, and while I understand that
Riley was starting off in the hole coming so soon after Angel, he didn't do a lot to endear himself to
me.
Riley just signifies something different than Buffy and the Scoobies, more of a hive-mind mentality
in needing the rigid structure of the military to function at peak. It's not bad, merely different.
He's actually useful for a different viewpoint on things, and remember, he as a character doesn't
know everything that came before like we as viewers do -- so temper the judgements with that.
While I can't condone things he did, ESPECIALLY staking vamp-Sandy after in essence setting her
up, they were no more terrible than things Buffy had done -- if anything, Riley was rock-stupid to set
such a quick timeframe for, basically, being forgiven or cast off. I know the story called for it, but if
you're stupid enough to back someone into a corner and demand that they acquise to you, don't be
too surprised when they DO lash out. That, on top of Xander's speech, really got to me. Riley made
the error, and he's basically DEMANDING that Buffy let it go, or he leaves? Let me help you pack
those bags, soldier :)
Actually, the worst thing he AND Buffy did, was not communicate. If, as Riley said to Xander, he
really BELIEVED that Buffy didn't love him, why not TALK to her? Why didn't she ever let him
into her life (I know, Angel hurt her, but still)? Both are to blame.
Take it and run.
[>
Re: New Philosophical concept! Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- luvthistle1, 04:01:39 03/04/02 Mon
I agree with you. Riley appears to be too perfact. But, will
a perfact person leave when he needed the most? He is very
arrogance . 1. When Buffy mom was sick, he was more concern with WHY she didn't tell him, then
why her mother was sick. He pick that time to leave, instead of trying to stick around and helping
her to cope. (Spike would have, did rather)so what if he found out from Spike, he did not ask her
how Spike found out. He had no right to come down so hard on Buffy for being with Spike, after all
she not the only one to have a thing for "vamps". I remember he had a couple of
"Vamp Tramps" on the side when they were dating. She never been a normal girl, she is
the slayer and she died. What is his excuse?
[>
Re: New Philosophical concept! Riley, Superman, and the stick beating fans -- luvthistle1, 04:23:37 03/04/02 Mon
I agree with you. Riley appears to be too perfact. But, will
a perfact person leave, when he's needed the most? He is very arrogance . 1. When Buffy mom was
sick, he was more concern with WHY she didn't tell him, then why her mother was sick. He pick that
time to leave, instead of trying to stick around and helping her to cope. (Spike would have, did
rather)so what if he found out from Spike, he did not ask her how Spike found out.2. He had no
right to come down so hard on Buffy for being with Spike, after all she not the only one to have a
thing for "vamps". I remember he had a couple of "Vamp Tramps" on the
side when they were dating. She never been a normal girl, she is the slayer and she died. What is his
excuse?
[>
What´s up with the blind Riley-bashing Charlemagne20? -- grifter, 11:46:40 03/04/02
Mon
You posting drunk? I´m used to better stuff coming from you then moronic character-bashing.
[> [>
I don't drink, it just was an ephiphany -- Charlemagne20, 12:35:32 03/04/02 Mon
The general idea was the fact that it occured to me Riley was being used as a leverage of real life
against Buffy's life which is both staid, pathetic, and tragic while he's off enjoying himself. However
the writers seem to me to have failed to realize that in the Buffyverse Xander, Willow, Buffy, and
even Giles to an extent are normal people-or at least as normal as Riley is. His normal life of
marriage and in general perfection is not in any way superior or more normal than the Scoobies. For
some reason it truly grit my teeth that they misjudged their characters so completely in that
particular respect.
I admit though my writing was poorly done
[> [> [>
Re: What a load of cobblers! -- John, 13:01:49 03/04/02 Mon
I don't really understand what's being said here - I can't remember any instances when Riley was
held up as some kind of parragon of demon slaying, or as a 'better' or 'normal' man. He's always been
shown as incompetent and unable to see moral shades of grey, something which is vital in the
Buffyverse. In fact I think the reverse is true; Riley represented what Buffy shouldn't
be.
Riley represented cold, blind government, concerned only with moral absolutes. His journey from
solider to 'anarchist' was overwhelmingly positive, and made me understand and, yes, really
like the character.
I strongly dislike it when personal opinion gets in the way of discussion; I might not like some
character in Buffy, but that doesn't mean I feel the need to dredge up tenuous reasons for it.
I don't like Darla, but not because she's a poorly drawn character, or incongrous to the mythology of
BtVS, or AtS. I don't like her because Julie Benz annoys me, and I'm not going to invent arguable
reasons for that; my dislike is purely irrational. I also don't like Anya's shoes, but I'm not about to
write an essay about how Anya's shoes are damaging to the plot of the show, and are representative
of how fashion is being unwisely held up as a 'better' lifestyle than demon slaying.
[> [> [> [>
Throwing cobblestones -- Sophist, 13:21:32 03/04/02 Mon
I completely agree about your characterization of Riley in S4 and S5, though I never did develop any
sympathy for him.
I think that characterization is part of the problem people are having now. We were clearly intended
to see him as a paragon in AYW -- Buffy herself says so, and the shooting script makes it pretty
obvious -- but that doesn't fit with our previous image of him. As a result, the message he was
supposed to deliver to Buffy didn't work for me or for others.
There is a line between criticism and bashing that's not always easy to draw. I think I've drawn it in
my discussions of AYW, but others may not agree. It is important to avoid throwing stones.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Throwing cobblestones -- Simone, 21:33:46 03/04/02 Mon
I didn't get out of AYW that *we* were expected to see Riley as a paragon. What I got was that Buffy
and the SG saw him as such. But I was never one to assume that whatever B/X/W believed was
unquestionably true, that the way the perceived things was always the correct one, or that their
choices were always the right ones. And this season seems to be precisely about how wrong-headed,
confused, immature and delusional they can be. Their perception of Riley was just one thing on a
very long list of stuff they're misinterpreting.
At least that's how I see it. There's ambiguity aplenty, no doubt about that, and I suspect it's all very
much intentional. ME knows what they're doing. Also, they're evil.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Throwing cobblestones -- grifter, 08:25:05 03/05/02 Tue
Not throwing stones here (well, maybe little, fluffy ones), but I think that Joss "Sweet"
Whedon thinks that his viewers are all grown up now. He thinks they can differenciate between
what the characters believe and what the viewers believe. He thinks we are "grown up"
enough to understand that the Riley/Sam-thing wasn´t as perfect (and it clearly wasn´t, I won´t
argue why now, other people have done that already)as it was percieved by the characters and only
meant to show Buffy and the others their own mistakes. There just isn´t enough time to explain
everything that´s going on within 42 minutes. So Joss assumes we are "grown up"
enough to "get" stuff like that without him having to explain it.
It´s okay for all the Riley-haters to still hate him, but it´s ridicolous to blame it on Joss and ME.
Fine, you don´t like Riley, hundreds of thousands of other viewers do, so get over it already...
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Throwing cobblestones from glass houses -- Sophist, 09:00:57 03/05/02 Tue
I'm not sure there's any real disagreement here, but maybe my original post wasn't very clear.
I myself certainly did not see Riley as a paragon. I argued very forcefully in an archived post that he
was not and is not.
OTOH, Buffy clearly did see him as one, and I think it also clear that we were intended to see her
see him as one.
I had 2 problems with this device. The first is that because I can't see Riley as a paragon, I have a
hard time seeing him as one even through Buffy's eyes. She shouldn't see him as one. The
second is that I don't think the portrayal "through Buffy's eyes" was very persuasive on
its own merits. I don't think she was likely to see Sam as a paragon (note Willow's initial reaction to
Sam), yet she did; I don't think that Willow was likely to see Sam as a paragon, yet that's how Sam
appeared when we saw her through Willow's eyes. If these are so unlikely, then why should I accept
the portrayal of Riley we were intended to get "through Buffy's eyes"? And if I don't
accept that, then why should I accept that Buffy will have a revelation about her mistakes (and we'd
have to agree about what her mistakes were, which may not be the case) just by seeing Riley?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Throwing cobblestones from glass houses -- grifter, 10:13:55 03/05/02 Tue
If this story-line doesn´t work for you, that´s fine, I have neither the nerve nor the rethoric
capabilities to try and convince you otherwise. All I am saying is that blaming ME for a a story-line
you don´t get is wrong. I think all of us here agree that ME write good stories, and I´m pretty sure
there was one story or one character or so for everyone which (or whom) they didn´t like. But that
doesn´t make ME´s work brilliant.
Sophist, you didn´t do this and my post wasn´t directed in your direction, but rather Charlemagne´s,
who basically told us earlier that ME fucked up with Riley, which just isn´t true.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Fair enough. Thanks. -- Sophist, 10:49:00 03/05/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Same here - I was only responding to Charlemane, as I haven't read your AYW analysis --
John, 12:00:13 03/05/02 Tue
Additions, Extensions to the
mythology - longish. (Fray, Tales of the Slayers, AYW spoilers) -- Darby, 07:58:08 03/04/02
Mon
Figured I'd try to sneak this into the Monday-morning "lull," although Riley has kept the
discussion coasting farther than usual...
For those who don't know, Joss & company have just issued two comics enterprises: Tales of
the Slayers, various short stories about various slayers past and future, written by Joss and
various writers from the show (and Amber Benson), and Fray, a mini-series (still in progress)
about a Slayer from the semi-distant future, written by Joss. Because these are coming from Joss
and the TV personnel, I'm assuming that mythology-related points are, as they say,
"canonical" - i.e, they actually add to the BtVS lore officially, as the other comics and
novel treatments do not.
Anyway, here are some of the points, with my reactions to them...
From a Tale of the First Slayer, it is suggested that she has been given a demon-spirit, almost
the same way vampires share space. It makes her own creators fear her. Having suggested
something a while back myself (remember the annoying demons guzzling beer and bitching about
each other's earthly agents?), I kind of like the idea, but I would have been just as happy if it had
been left more ambiguous. You could say that the shaman are only talking about what they
assume has happened, but this is pretty close to the "horse's mouth," since they
cast the Slayer spell. Some support for this comes from Fray, where the Slayer is being
trained by a demon who quite emphatically denies being associated with the Watchers (but he is
working for somebody magical, maybe demonic), who had gone quite culty and nuts. From
Tales, it's also established that the Watchers are the "descendants" of the original
shaman, whatever that means.
From then on, it is said in Fray, many girls are born with the Slayer's power in two aspects:
the physical attributes, which Fray has had since childhood, and access to the experiences of the
former Slayers (which it turns out her twin brother got), a gift that makes itself known through
dreams but also in a kind of "programming" of fighting instincts. When a Slayer dies (as
long as there are monsters to fight - see later paragraph), a new one is "Chosen," but
what that term means is very fuzzy - I had always thought that a formerly-normal girl got
imbued with the Slayer powers, but apparently not. What the heck does it mean, and how is this
new Slayer "found" by the Watchers? (This does explain how potential Slayers
could be found, though.) Magic, presumably. The implication here is that at any given moment,
given the intense turnaround in Slayers, there are at least a dozen girls in the world with's Buffy's
physical gifts. Why aren't we seeing these girls - the Kendras, the Faiths, the others-in-waiting
whom Watchers haven't found or haven't been able to get to - in the Olympics? Hell, why wasn't
Buffy a world-class figure skater before she was called?
It's also said that experienced vamps know the Slayer's moves, even if the Slayer is new. Since Fray
has not had access to the programming, she has an advantage over the vamps she faces. Unless
some sort of grapevine (but how many survive to tell the tale?) or shared consciousness (which flies
in the face of any current continuity) is working, it's hard to come up with a rationale for this. But it
does tie into...