March 2001 Voy posts
A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Marya, 01:18:33 03/01/01 Thu
This was the most authentic depiction of death as experienced
by the living
that has ever been committed to film.
I'd love to go into an in depth analysis of the angles, lighting
acting,
etc, but even now, more than 24 hours later I'm still just too
blown away.
Suffice it to say that the most amazing thing to me was the way
it removed
the viewer from the position of observer to participant, conveying
the
emotions in a truly visceral sense.
I have read the comments and criticisms of others. To those who
were
dissatisfied or dissappointed, while I absoulutely see and sympathize
with
your points of view, for me this was just a flawless piece of
filmmaking.
And I want it on DVD! Please!!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Calliope, 00:42:26
03/02/01 Fri
Your posts make me see the show in a whole new light. Thank you
for your
interesting view of things.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Marya, 19:01:28
03/02/01 Fri
You are very kind to say so. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Rufus, 12:21:45
03/02/01 Fri
I've heard alot about what the people at Buffy did wrong in handling
the
details of the professionals such as the EMT guys. The Body wasn't
about
them, if it were they would have spent more time on them and be
more
factual. The Body was all about the differing reactions to a single
event,
the death of Joyce. Everyone has a different reaction and acted
against
their characters norm. The episode brings up different memories
or feelings
in each person. With the amount of talk about things not Buffy
but related
to death, the show was most successful in making us feel for the
situation.
When that vampire got up off that table you could clearly see
what it was
thinking. Nothing about death as much as in seeing Dawn as it
was the
reaction to hearing a dinner bell go off. We also get to see that
no matter
where Buffy is and what she is doing she is the chosen one, the
slayer, even
in grief.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Sue, 16:09:31
03/02/01 Fri
"Everyone has a different reaction and acted against their
characters norm."
Actually I thought they acted pretty much in character. Buffy
of course was
weak and confused, but we have seen in the past where personal
situations
have caused her to act that way.
Angry Xander, Willow the way she talked about her clothes, Giles
desperately
trying to keep in control, and the way Dawn reacted, seemed all
in line with
how we expect the characters to act.
All different reactions of course, because each of them an individual
who
handles grief in their own way.
Anya surprised us because we have come to believe that she has
little
concern and feeling for those around her (except Xander). But
the others
acted in line with what we know about their personalities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The
Body" -- Nina, 18:06:23
03/02/01 Fri
"Anya surprised us because we have come to believe that she
has little
concern and feeling for those around her"
I must say that I wasn't that surprised about Anya's reaction.
I was
touched, but not surprised. We have to wonder why in "Crush"
she had only
one line and that line was "I think you hurt his feelings"
(line said to
Xander about Spike). The fact that DF decided to give that line
to Anya was
a deliberate choice. That's all she says in the whole episode!
And she's
actually realizing that a vampire could have been hurt by Xander's
remark.
That blowed me away! I think that if we look back to earlier episodes,
her
reaction is not sudden. We have had little clues all along. We
just had to
pick them! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The Body"
-- Marya, 18:59:38
03/02/01 Fri
I really sympathize with people who are bugged when the accuracy
is perhaps
sacrificed for story. It's really hard to watch something that
you know a
lot about being portrayed all wrong. But the saddest thing to
me is in this
case those distractions prevented them from experiencing something
truly
profound.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: A Simple Statement in Praise of "The
Body" -- LoriAnn, 06:38:06
03/04/01 Sun
In my experience, when unimportant inconsistencies keep a person
from
appreciating the important elements of a work, the problem is
with the
distracted rather than with the distraction. I talked to a person
once who
wouldn't watch black and white movies, no matter how good the
movie was; he
said the distraction of not knowing what color things were, costumes
for
example, was more than he could take. Every medium has conventions
and
limitations, not one can realistically replicate real life, and
no one knows
everything about everything, so there will always be factual mistakes
and
production errors. Do we look at Van Gogh's Starry Night or any
of Monet's
water lillies and say but that's not how they really look? And
let's face
it, TV is not high art, nor is it very realistic. If it were,
that would be
a distraction hard to overcome. Think of people starting sentences
or ideas
only to lose track of what the point was and just trail off with
no
conclusion, as happens in everyday conversation, or the relatively
dull
dialog we indulge in most of the time. We would no longer have
the sharp
dialog between the SG or between Buffy and some talkative vamp.
Nobody talks
like that, not consistently, and there are no vampires anyway.
If an EMS team would NEVER leave Buffy alone with the body, Joss
should have
found another way to make his point. However, does the mistake
hurt what he
was trying to do, illustrate Buffy's reaction to her mother's
death?
Absolutely not.
What we wear, longish Spoilers -- fresne, 11:01:51 03/02/01 Fri
Spoilers
You
are
what
you
wear,
which
means
that
I
am
an
ewe.
Forgive me if I am repeating what anyone else has said, but I
felt the need
to start over...
The recent discussion of Lindsey's...sleeveless, ribbed, t-shirt,
to be
hereafter referred to as a t-shirt (As opposed, I suppose to the
ever
popular t-tunic), got me to thinking about a subject near and
dear to my
heart...clothing. Or rather I should say costuming.
Some brief context. As a hobby, I costume. Nothing hard core mind
you. I am,
however, currently engaged in sewing (slowly) a Vogue 1949 wool
suit. Last
year's project was a steel boned corset (32 pieces of spring steel
baby) and
a fan front 1860s ballgown.
Clothing, or again costuming, because I believe all clothes are
costumes of
one sort or another, changes how others perceive us and how we
perceive
ourselves.
Now of course, that's an obvious sort of statement to make, but
consider
that for most people there are entire groups of acquaintances
who only see
you in one kind of clothes. There are people who only see me in
my (fairly
bland) work clothes. There are people who only see me in fancy
dress (I
costume for period ballroom dance events). Thus we have in romance
stories
the power of the makeover. Dressing outside your context. Cinderella.
A form
of metamorphosis.
How I dress also effects how I behave towards others. One of the
most
interesting exercises in costuming is putting on a corset, a hoop
skirt, and
20 pounds or so of dress. It informs your behavior. You walk,
talk, move,
and breath differently (I reiterate 32 pieces of spring steel).
That's why I
loved that when Buffy put on the enchanted dress in Halloween,
she became
the corseted and necessarily cosseted person who would wear that
dress.
BtVS and AtS have always been fairly aware of costume as assumed
personna.
The leather pants of evil. The power of tweed. Willow's fuzzy
sweaters. The
evil coat fairy who periodically curses most of the female cast.
Drucilla's
floaty clothes. Little colorful Buffy surrounded by tall drab
olive green
Initiative troops.
Because all roads lead to Spike...William wore glasses, Spike
won't. Spike
bleaches his hair (which is my real concern in the does Spike
have a
bathroom debate) and paints his nails. Spike understands posture
and
presentation. When Spike bottomed out last season, he was reduced
to wearing
Xander's clothes, oh, the humiliation. In more recent history,
Spike
attempted to demonstrate to Buffy a change in attitude by a, yes,
that's
right, change in wardrobe. Spike, who has worn pretty much the
same clothes
through the entire series, wore something other than jeans. He
put aside the
coat that he took from the 70s slayer who he had killed and put
on a new
coat.
Lets talk about the significance of the coat itself. What a clothing
symbol.
Counting coup? A sign of respect? Somehow I think of various magics
in which
one puts on the skin of a seal or bear or wolf to become the thing
itself.
Contrast that thought to Spike's statement, (as always a paraphrase)
that he
is becoming a hollow shell with only Buffy inside, as if she would
be
wearing him like a coat.
Breaking free of the Spikey one, Willow's ambivalence about what
to wear to
the hospital in the Body reinforced this awareness of the significance
of
dress. "Why can't I be an adult?" As if clothing had
some power to imbue
maturity. She was out of sorts (to put it mildly) and therefore
nothing
suited her.
We have only seen Lindsey in suits, but we have really only seen
him in
professional situations. There is a constraint to a suit. You
paid a lot of
money for it. Suits are hot (I mean warm to wear). You don't have
as much
freedom of movement. There is a power in wearing a suit, but it
is the power
of paper and offices, courtrooms and parlors. You pay someone
else to do
your dirty work.
Obviously, Lindsey felt constrained to change. Without further
evidence I
couldn't say if he was going back to his roots (heritage, background,
youth,
primordial soup) or if these are his off hours clothes. I would
vote for a
little of both. At that moment, he needed to free himself from
the
constraint of the suit.
Actually the entire scene was very interesting. I really need
to go back and
reread literary critical theory on homosocial bonding before I
expound at
length (which is to say I won't but I'll think really hard about
it). But a
few observations. Homosocial bonding (from what I remember) is
when two
people of the same gender (generally men) fight and ultimately
relate to one
another through the medium of a third "something". That
something might be a
woman or it might be a maguffin, its largely immaterial. As Darla
would
paraphrasingly say, you're not interested in me, you're interested
in Angel.
So, lets look at the plot. Lindsey has felt dirty and disassociated
from
every but Darla. Lindsey was upset with Darla. Darla was wearing
comfort
clothes. Her body language was very inward, defensive. His body
language was
full of angry tension. For a moment, I thought he'd try to kill
her.
Instead, he goes to the closet, pushes aside Darla's clothes (clothes
that
he had wanted to move into his room, his closet) and changes his
clothes
into comfortable work clothes. He accessorizes (accessories make
the outfit)
with an old truck with a nice steel frame. (By the way, why does
it still
have Oklahoma license plates? Perhaps, he has had it in storage.
Kept locked
away. I like the symbolism of that so I'll keep it.) First he
batters Angel
with the truck. Then he drives in circles around him. (Paralleling
their
relationship?) Then he hits him with...wait for it.
A hammer. What an odd weapon to pick. Why a hammer? Now in terms
of
weaponry, knives, swords, guns, and of course the ubiquitous wooden
stake,
are all impaling/stabbing/rupturing weapons. And depending on
how Freudian
you want to be, they masculine weapons. I hate to call a sledge
hammer a
feminine weapon, it is a sledge hammer, and yet what an odd weapon
to use on
a vampire.
Unless you're trying to batter one. Unless, through a choice of
accessories
and how they are used, Lindsey was trying to express his frustration
with
everything. Lindsey wasn't trying to kill Angel. He was trying
to hurt him.
Again I find the whole tenor of their conversation very interesting.
Now I
realize that Lindsey went for a stake, but that wasn't his first
choice.
And how does it end for Lindsey. A battered truck. Dirty clothes.
An empty
closet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- purplegrrl, 13:54:19
03/02/01 Fri
fresne, once again I am awed by the power of your perceptions.
Lots to think about.
However, I agree that we make impressions/judgements based on
appearance,
i.e., clothing. And that different clothing can require different
behavior.
***The leather pants of evil.***
Yes, even the Host commmented on Angel's lack there of. Therefore,
he was
not evil or on the path there to.
(Although on the silly side, "the leather pants of evil"
sounds like it
should be a song title or a musical group. ;-) )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- Nina, 14:20:33
03/02/01 Fri
Are we talking clothes! As I seem to be more obsessed than ever
with the
psychological effect of clothes in the Buffyverse (oh yeah, I
know I've got
to go over it one day!) I'd just have to add that if leather pants
are meant
to show evil... what do we do with Buffy wearing some in the beginning
of
"Crush"? ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- Rufus,
14:41:49 03/02/01 Fri
Depends on the cut of the pants, Nina:):):)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers --
Nina, 14:51:20 03/02/01
Fri
Well... they seemed black and lethery to me !!!!! :) :) :)
Buffy's pants even matched Spike's leather coat. He wore the top
and her the
pants! :) Okay rambling here... got to stop my fingers! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- May, 16:36:33
03/02/01 Fri
SYMBOL - A person, act, or thing that has both literal significance
and
additional abstract meanings. Unlike an allegory, where such things
are
equated with one or two abstract ideas, a symbol usually refers
to several
complex ideas that may radiate contradictory or ambiguous meanings.
See
ALLEGORY.
SYMBOLISM - The use of SYMBOLS, persons, acts, or things that
have both
literal significance and additional abstract meanings.
ster·e·o·type
Oversimplified conception: an oversimplified standardized image
or idea held
by one person or group of another
Especially in literary and drama, objects such as cars and clothing
take on
a larger meaning than themselves.
In this case the symbols of the "t-shirt" and the "truck"
were used to the
most despicable of ends. To demonize a whole social-economic group
in our
society. To play upon and re-enforce ugly stereotypes. To protray
a whole
group of people as less than human. As evil.
I found an interesting article about how negative sterotypes against
rural
people have in the past been used to justify injustices against
them.
Thought it might add to the discussion as it shows that this isn't
just a
trival concern.
'Hillbilly' stereotype evolved to justify huge land grab.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- May, 16:55:24
03/02/01 Fri
"Especially in and drama, objects such as cars and clothing
take on a larger
meaning than themselves. "
Sorry meant to say in literature and drama objects objects such
as cars and
clothing take on a larger meaning than themselves, becoming symbols.
This "check before post" function is great, but doesn't
help with mistakes
caught after.
Point is while in real life a "cigar sometimes only is cigar",
in drama such
as television shows, symbols are put into a scene for a reason.
In this case it was to attack a group of people. The "R"
word. It seems like
in this society, they are the only group of people it is ok to
attack in a
prejudicial manner.
I have been to the south, to rural areas. I have family there.
And my uncles
and cousins don't deserve the ugly stereotypes thrown at them.
But then
again, NOBODY DOES!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers --
Masquerade, 17:03:05
03/02/01 Fri
And may I add, before everyone jumps in with the "but the
writer" or "Joss
didn't INTEND to be stereotypical" or "this is just
Lindsey, not every rural
person" arguments, that the best judge of whether a stereotype
is used and
overused is someone from that group. I'm not discouraging rejoinders,
but
many rejoinders all aimed at one person's point tends to bring
out the
hostile responses we saw on the other board as that person feels
they aren't
being listened to.
Not that I expect any of this to happen. : )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers
-- Sean, 17:50:45 03/02/01
Fri
We have never seen Lindsey dress in such a manner before.
Do we really believe that Lindsey would drive such a truck? He
would
consider it beneath him.
Even the shooting script clearly indicates the images the writers
were going
for.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers
-- LoriAnn, 11:46:31
03/03/01 Sat
Let's not stop at clothes as stereotypes. What about Lyla's remark
that she
should have had babies like her mother told her. Clearly, we can
conclude
that this is stereotyping all working women, especially female
lawyers, as
baby killing sociopaths. They should file suit, and if they did,
they
wouldn't even have to pay for a lawyer.
Or you could say that's all a crock.
Lindsey's background, he's an Oklahoma s***kicker, doesn't stereotype
Oklahomans or anyone else who owns a pickup truck or wears boot,
but it does
tell us that Lindsey wasn't born in a law office and has a down
to earth
background that would give him the passion and physicality to
do what he
did. Can you see Holland having done something like that? Not
a chance.
Lindsey is earthy-guy. It explains a lot about him and stereotypes
no one.
Anyone notice the condition of the truck, it's beat up, even before
its
contact with Angel, the paint is faded, and the body is rusted.
This isn't
some kicker wannabe's truck. This was a truck owned by someone
who actually
needed a pickup truck, perhaps on a small ranch or farm. He drove
the fence
lines in this truck and delivered feed to the cattle in it during
droughts.
It's the truck of a person who is down to earth enough to feel
pain all the
way to his soul, not someone like Holland who could only see things
as
abstractions, and physically strong enough to take action on his
feelings.
The sledge hammer was a little surprising. Perhaps Lindsey thought
he would
need a heavier weapon that usual if he were going to beat the
details he
wanted out of Angel. Generally, what is found behind the seat
of those who
think its use might be necessary someday is an axe-handle. It
works well on
humans, but might be too light for the undead.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish
Spoilers -- Sean, 12:15:45
03/03/01 Sat
"Lindsey's background, he's an Oklahoma s***kicker, doesn't
stereotype
Oklahomans or anyone else who owns a pickup truck or wears boots..."
You wouldn't say this if it was Gunn acting in a stereotypical
manner. You
would be outraged and I would join you in that outrage.
There was a reason the writers had Lindsey dress that way. And
that pick-up
truck. It just wouldn't make sense for Lindsey to own it anymore.
There was
a reason that the truck was in that scene. A very ugly reason.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish
Spoilers -- Sanguinary,
18:29:09 03/03/01 Sat
Sean, there is something else you should consider here. Are rednecks
offended?
No. I am the daughter of a redneck. He isn't illerate or imbred.
He doesn't
play the bango or make moonshine. But he does own a pick-up, a
sledge-hammer
and a hunting dog. He has had a gun rack in the back of his truck,
we have
at least five assorted vehicles around our farm which don't work.
His neck
grows exteamly red during the summer and he confess that his hair
is just a
tad too long to be a perfect redneck. And yet, he is not offened
by the way
that Lindsey reacts.
The reasons for Lindsey having the pick-up truck and sledgehammer
are a
little less stero-typical.
A pick-up truck is _the_ most important vehicle someone can own
up here. I
am quite serious when I say this. And for a farm boy to head to
the city, he
would need decent transportaion. The kind of vehicle that can
carry your
stuff with room to spare. As for still owning it, he probley still
has it
for the same reason that I keep what most people would conside
useless or
trivial. Because it is special to him. Filled with memories of
a time when
life was simple and he was one of the good-guys. Obviouly, he
has enough
money to have it kept in storage indefantly.
As for the sledge-hammer, quite simple as well. An all purpose
tool for
around the farm. I know that we have two sledge hammers, a five
and a ten
pound. And Lindsey knows that he can't kill Angel, only hurt.
So that means
that the only other more popular tool around the farm, an axe,
can't be
used. Also, a sledghammer would be a tool his is used to. Something
that he
has handled on a daily basis in the past. And I would consider
it more out
of charcter for Lindsey to show up with a battle-axe than a sledge-hammer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear,
longish Spoilers -- May, 20:38:08
03/05/01 Mon
I have a hard time believing that people in any group don't mind
having ugly
images and stereotypes being promoted in the media against them.
The cost is just too high. Please read the article below.
'Hillbilly' stereotype evolved to justify huge land grab
How one is reflected in society relates to how society will treat
them. I
doubt you would be using such arguments if it was any other group
of people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: What
we wear, longish Spoilers -- Sanguinary,
10:06:55 03/06/01 Tue
Actualy, if this was any other group of people, I would step back
and let
someone who was from that group do the debating. I don't understand
how
other's feel about their stero-type nor do I pretend to. I belive
that it is
better to ask someone from the stero-type in question to express
their
feelings rather than insert my feelings in place.
Because I am not a true redneck, I asked my father who is to try
and explain
how what Lindsey was doing was stero-typing him. He didn't see
anything
wrong with it. As he said to me 'All that matters is if you are
comfertable
with your stero-type. If you are than nothing else is important.'
I always try to see from another person's point of view and there
are things
that I would find offensive if they were done to me. But what
I find
offensive and what someone else finds offensive are two very different
things.
And that is the reason you usually won't find me jumping into
this sort of
argurment.
I understand how you could think that this was rude or ignorant,
but
sometimes it's just best to let someone who has actually lived
with a
stero-type try to explain it.
But it's nice that you're showing concern about stero-types. But
their are
other, nastier stero-types out there. Being a Redneck isn't one
of them
though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
What we wear, longish Spoilers -- May,
15:48:07 03/06/01 Tue
Well then,
If people like you father don't care about the ugly ways the media
protrays
him so be it (did your Dad beat your Mother?)
If he doesn't care about how others in this society perceive him
just
because of the clothes he wears, the music he listens to, the
truck he
drives, etc. I guess I shouldn't go around defending people who
don't feel
the the need to be defended.
But these images will have an impact. Don't believe me, go ask
Richard
Jewell.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- May,
15:51:20 03/06/01 Tue
I don't believe that your Dad beat your mother, but others will,
just
because he fits "that stereotype".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers --
Sanguinary, 20:05:54 03/06/01 Tue
I'm afraid I haven't ever heard of the 'beating their wifes' part
of the
Redneck sterotype. As far as I know, Redneck women are almost
always as
stong as a Redneck man, somewhat smarter and sometimes corser.
But I've
never heard of them being beat. As far as I knew, wife beating
was for the
suburbs and white trash families. But that, of course, is a sterotype
so I
don't belive it.
My dad hasn't beat my mom, but he also doesn't carry her purse.
Let me explain. In some of the bigger less sterotyping centers,
one of the
major customs is to carry your wife's purse out of the restraunt.
This is
done to prove how chivleaious(sp?) they are. My father would never
do this
and my mother would never all him too. He belives that my mother
is adult
enough to look after herself without him interfearing.
You see, I understand that you are just trying to do what you
think is
right, I really do. I did the same thing when I was younger and
didn't
understand that sometimes all a person can do by butting in is
make things
worse.
In my class at school there was a native boy. He was one of the
only natives
in an almost all white school. The boys in my class called him
slang names
and I would always get angry and try to make them stop.
Finnaly one day, the native boy came up to me and asked me to
stop defending
him. He wasn't bothered by what the boys said because he always
had fun
coming up with names to call them.
Because I didn't understand that what was insulting to me might
not be
insulting to him, I had accidenly embarssed him in front of his
friends.
And the same thing is happening to me right now, only reversed.
I'm the
local freak and I enjoy being treated as such. People know that
if they're
feeling down or depressed, just a few minutes around me can make
them feel
better. And often people tease me about the way I act or the things
I talk
about. And I enjoy the attention and being able to be who I really
am in
public. Another young lady is trying to defend me though. She
doesn't
understand that what she finds insulting to her, is a complement
to me. I've
tried explaining it to her a few times, but she just doesn't get
it yet. As
soon as she finds her little nitch, she'll understand quite will.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers --
Traveler, 20:43:47 03/07/01 Wed
As I was growing up, people often called me nerd and geek. I tried
to ignore
them, but I hated it. Now, when people ask me what I do, I tell
them that
I'm a computer geek. Am I suppose to feel bad for liking computers?
Over
time, it's grown into a kind of a compliment. Also, I don't believe
that
authors are promoting a stereotype unless they make it prevasive
throughout
their "world." So far, I haven't seen a big hillbilly
message in Joss'
shows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: What we wear,
longish Spoilers -- rowan,
18:33:19 03/07/01 Wed
I feel kind of silly. I was so horrified by the violence of that
scene and
the way he kept relentless coming after Angel that I couldn't
even focus on
the clothing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- fresne, 23:58:05
03/02/01 Fri
Spoiling
for
more
closetspace
Purplegrrl
Yes, didn't you know that's the name of Giles' band. The Leather
Pants of
EVIL.
Giles, in Rocky Horror garb, lead singer with guitar. Spike, with
Slayer
coat, backing up on bass. Angel, well clearly not singing, wearing
the title
pair of leather pants of evil, maybe on keyboard. After this last
weeks
performance, Lindsey on drums. He can have leather pants too.
The implications of Buffy's leather pants. Hmmm. On one hand,
they may
indicate Buffy's darker side. Hunting and slaying. Also on a practical
front, well worn leather pants are comfortable and flexible. They
can take a
lot of abuse and they breath. I should think, provided they are
not purely
decorative, they would
be quite useful when crashing through the underbrush.
Nina
Yes, well I can't help discussing clothes. I mean, why do most
of Willow's
clothes have little images on them? What does that say about her?
And
returning to Restless, how interesting that her dream is that
she is in
costume. Why was Buffy a flapper? Is it some obscure reference
to her being
a college student. Do I just know too much about period costuming?
Why does
Xander wear Circus clothes? Well, obviously to make him seem silly.
So, he
dresses as James Bond for Halloween and feels like a waiter. Because
sometimes clothes require attitude. Wearing the clothes/cheese
and not
letting them wear you. VampWillow in her leather corset. She walks
into a
room and she owns it. Why because what she's wearing oozes intent.
And well,
structurally speaking that kind of corset does do something fun
to the way a
person walks. And clothing obsessed Glory. Sunnydale doesn't have
enough
malls. Is it a representation of her materialism? Interesting
that her
other, Ben, has mentioned clothes in his last two conversations
with Buffy.
May
Yes, the layers of meaning and symbolism which can be derived
from a set of
clothing is very interesting.
Forgive me as I slide into costuming nut phase, I will try not
to ramble too
much.
You make an excellent point on one aspect of the symbolism of
a t-shirt. In
previous eras (as preserved in the suit), one of the methods the
wealthy
used to indicate their economic status was the ostentatious layering
of
clothing (the more clothes, the more fabric, the more money you
must have).
Conversely, the less layers, the lower the economic status. For
a later day
example: in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Stanley is always pictured
as wearing a
t-shirt as a top without an outer shirt. The Fonz (sp?) on Happy
Days always
wore a t-shirt, jeans, and of course a leather jacket. This ensemble
resonated of the working lower class, rebelliousness, motorcycles,
and dare
I say "Coolness." James Dean. Marlon Brando. Gene Kelly
vs. Fred Astaire
(which given Kelley went to law school and Astaire only had two
years of
formal education is pretty funny).
Returning to Buffy and of course Spike, consider his clothes.
Black t-shirt,
unbuttoned overshirt (sometimes), black trench, jeans, and boots.
He
radiates rebellious cool. When Giles ate the candy in Band Candy,
he changed
not only his accent and his behavior. He changed his clothes.
And what goes
with rebellion, well jeans and a t-shirt, of course. Because there
is still
that slight remnant, almost forgotten, that a t-shirt is an undergarment.
Like wearing a bra in public. Of course, the rebellious symbolism
of wearing
a t-shirt in public is buried under almost half a century of t-shirts
as
outerwear, but it still lurks.
Now I really must mention an odd personal bias of my own. My father,
the
L.A. lawyer, always wore a suit and tie with court shoes to work.
On the
weekends, he wore jeans, boots, unbuttoned shirts, and shall I
pause for
emphasis,...I think shall...ready...are you sure...well then...a
t-shirt. So, when I
saw Lindsey's idea of off work clothes, I had to laugh. Anyway,
all of this
means I see a fairly interesting symbolism in Lindsey's makeover.
Lindsey changes from tight constricting clothes, clothes that
bind, clothes
that symbolize both his rise in the world and his loss of innocence.
He has
done terrible things in suits. Lindsey became a lawyer, became
a suit,
joined W&H, gave up on being a good man so no one could make
him feel
powerless. Lindsey's working class father was a good man, but
it didn't stop
his family from losing their home. But a suit didn't stop Lindsey
from
losing his hand. A suit doesn't stop Lindsey from feeling the
weight of his
deeds. Feelings showers won't clean. A suit can't make Darla love
him.
So, he changes back into working class clothes. Clothes that are
good to
fight in. Clothes good to rebel in. I wonder if their choice of
truck wasn't
meant to evoke a sense of that 50'sish rebellion. I mean a modern
Ford tough
truck would have been sufficiently sturdy. But they used a vintage
truck. A
bit of James Dean. I'd say a bit of my father, but he was a Harley
riding
beatnik in the 50s. So, whatever. Although thankfully, no leather
pants of
evil.
And really, they are evil. The Host said so. Angelus demonstrated
it. Did
Faith ever wear leather pants? Darla? Well, new Darla. Old Darla
dressed as
a demonic schoolgirl. Which of course, was meant to parallel the
blond
Darla, not a schoolgirl, with blond Buffy, schoolgirl. What kind
of pants
did Kendra wear? The 70s slayer. Perhaps, we can come up with
a theory for
Slayers using the leather pants of evil for well, good and not
evil. I
should stop. I'm using my powers for silliness and not seriousness.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- J9, 10:01:52
03/06/01 Tue
Don't have time to add much - But yes Faith wore leather Pants
(a lot).
However, in the seminole scene of Graduation Day Part 1 where
Buffy goes to
get Faith to feed to Angel, I recall Buffy in Red leather pants,
and I think
Faith had changed from previous scenes to just jeans.?!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers -- Rendyl,
20:15:21 03/06/01 Tue
***For a later day example: in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Stanley
is always
pictured as wearing a t-shirt as a top without an outer shirt.***
Er...Stanley was in Streetcar Named Desire. Brick was in Cat on
a Hot Tin
Roof - (wearing yummy pajamas for the entire play no less) and
appropriate
to the Buffyverse for mentions of 'no-neck monsters'.
-Rendyl's evil, evil twin who is addicted to Tennessee
Williams...Bwahahahahaha! -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: What we wear, longish Spoilers --
fresne, 11:59:40 03/07/01
Wed
Woops, thanks. Guess that goes to show what happens when I think
about
clothes too much.
When, oh, when will I ever be done quilt stitching my collar and
get back to
machine sewing my suit jacket? And as an aside, I've found that
I can sew to
just about any tv show but BtVS and AtS. I around, a couple hours
have gone
by, and I haven't gotten anything done.
Buffy premonition??? -- Nicole, 11:43:17 03/02/01 Fri
I was going through a quote list from season 4 earlier, and came
upon
something that I thought to be a little interesting.... thought
I would
share it.
At the season 4 opener ( The Freshman ) Buffy and Willow were
gathering
books, and Buffy casually said to Willow, "I can't wait till
mom gets the
bill for these books. I hope it's a funny aneurysm."
I know that it was said in passing, and just meant to reflect
the
skyrocketing price students pay for books nowadays, but still...
ya know?
The doctors say it's probably and aneurysm that killed Joyce....
Thought I
would share this little insight. Happy BtVS Watching!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy premonition??? -- Marya, 01:10:23 03/06/01 Tue
Nicole, you were just struck with that weird sense of deja vu
in reverse you
get when you watch or read older eps. It's well known that Joss
plots these
stories well in advance, but I for one haven't figured out a way
to tell for
sure when a line is forshadowing or just a clever line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Nina, 18:50:14 03/02/01 Fri
I just read a very fascinating post on another board and thought
I'd share
some thoughts with you.
That last scene when Spike goes to order the Buffybot in IWMtLY,
many
details don't fit well together if we want to believe that Spike
is ordering
the Buffybot for himself.
1- He knows that April's boyfriend was named Warren, but where
did he find
his address ? (he doesn't have access to the computer files like
Willow
does)
2- Spike says that he wants to place an order. How come Warren
understands
that he's talking about a robot? Doesn't even ask what kind of
order? He
says directly that he doesn't make any more girls? Does this mean
that he
used to for other people? Otherwise his answer seems weird.
3- Now the very disturbing fact is that Spike comes in without
a blanket in
Warren's house. It means that it's night. The lighting in the
house proves
it too. Which means that this scene takes place after Buffy discovers
the
body. (because buffy wears the same clothes she had with April
and it's
still day when she comes home - she has her leather coat on her
arm)
Now how can we explain the Buffybot? We are lead to believe that
Spike is
ordering it for himself to get a playmate, but what if he was
asked to order
it?
Spike in IWMtLY has had two scenes in which he was left unable
to speak. One
with Buffy, the other with the SG. That's the first time (to my
knowledge)
that Spike ever got quiet, unable to respond. Suddenly we see
him at the end
of the episode all confident again. What has changed?
When I first saw him put Buffy's things in a box I was convinced
he was
going to burn them. He was not going to see Warren. The energy
in those two
scenes are way too different. Something happened between the moment
Spike
throw his Buffy shrine in the box and the moment he went to Warren's
house.
It's not only Spike deciding that a Buffybot will save him!
When Spike goes to Warren's he's come back to his confident self.
The Spike
we know who knows that he is important. That he is "the strongest
person"
who can protect Dawn. So here's my very weird theory for now.
What if we are
led to believe that Spike's agenda is to have a bot for himself
but that he
is actually answering Giles' request. What if Giles, despite the
fact that
he threw Spike out had to come to him and ask him to go to Warren?
With Buffy losing her mother, maybe Giles understood that she
wouldn't be
able to do her duty for a while. Maybe he is the one who compromised
and
sought for Spike's help. We've seen Buffy do that a lot even though
she
didn't want to ("I don't need you", but at the end of
Checkpoint she goes to
him anyway)
Maybe it has something to do with Buffy looking out the window
before
calling Giles. She said she was coming. We thought it was Glory,
but maybe
she meant "the first slayer"... the darkside of her
is coming. Maybe she
told Giles who tried to see how to find something to protect Buffy.
Maybe
the Buffybot is the solution.
Much rambling on an idea that is not even mine to start with,
but I liked
it. What do you think?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Aquitaine, 19:21:22
03/02/01 Fri
Nina, although I agree with most of your exposition, your theory
is the
wackiest I have heard yet! And, who knows, you may be completely
right:)
"Spike in IWMtLY has had two scenes in which he was left
unable to speak.
One with Buffy, the other with the SG. That's the first time (to
my
knowledge) that Spike ever got quiet, unable to respond. Suddenly
we see him
at the end of the episode all confident again. What has changed?"
I, personally, thought that he was going to follow the robot trail
back to
the Initiative in an effort to have the ship removed... But you
are right,
there definitely seems to be something screwy with the timeline
as well as
with Spike.
***
So, shall we baptise you, Nina *bringer of a myriad theories*?
LOL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Nina, 19:31:05
03/02/01 Fri
"So, shall we baptise you, Nina *bringer of a myriad theories*?
LOL."
Hee hee! Okay I grant you that to involve Giles in there is a
little and
even very weird. I am not sure I believe it myself. But now that
I have
watched Spike's scenes in that episode again, I must say that
I am fairly
certain that the reason behind is request is not what it looks
like! It
wouldn't be the first time we are being misled... and what a better
opportunity to mislead us just before the body - episode with
no Spike in
it!
Spike wasn't there because he was ordering the Buffybot!
But really even thought I know that this little theory is far
out how can
Spike possibly know where to find Warren on the only fact that
Anya told him
that April was a robot? Grrrrrr.... and we have to wait two more
weeks to be
misled again! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Aquitaine,
19:56:46 03/02/01
Fri
"in an effort to have the ship removed..."
I CAN'T believe I wrote ship instead of chip. ROFL. Of course,
ship or chip
works:)
"and what a better opportunity to mislead us just before
the body"
Hmmm. Yes.
Finally, I too wondered exactly how he found Warren so quickly.
'night
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- June, 19:25:44 03/02/01
Fri
I thought you were going to say that Spike was going to have Warren
make
another Joyce for Buffy
I think what Buffy said was "She's here, come now" or
something like that. I
took that for Buffy being so distraught as not to make sense.
I know I have said things at stressful times that after coming
from my mouth
I thought "that didn't make sense".
I think if we would translate what Buffy was trying to say but
didn't have
the where with all to was "My mother's here lying on the
ground dead, I need
you Giles to come here because I am too upset and in a state of
shock to
deal with it all myself. And I have to pull myself together because
I need
to go to Dawn's school to tell her the bad news"
All she could muster was "She's here, come". But who
could blame her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Nina, 19:41:25
03/02/01 Fri
"I think what Buffy said was "She's here, come now"
or something like that.
I took that for Buffy being so distraught as not to make sense."
Somehow I can't believe that it doesn't make sense. The look at
the window,
the stare at the phone... maybe I am wrong and it has nothing
to do with the
first slayer, but for a second there it was more than just "my
mother is
here, come". Well, that's my point of view at least. "The
Body" is obviously
a point of no return. Whatever happened before will never be again.
Joyce's
death is going to change everything. In "Restless" the
first slayer said
that Buffy was going to be alone, Spike told her in FFL that he
links to the
world was her family. It doesn't seem too much of a stretch to
me to see
Buffy's world coming to an end for her and having vision of the
first slayer
when he mother dies.
All she has left is Dawn and the SG. We may say that Joyce wasn't
a
clairvoyant mother, but her presence was balancing Buffy's world.
Now the
balance is gone and the darkness might just begin.
Okay rambling again! Sorry folks! Too late.... I need some sleep!
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- June,
23:15:04 03/02/01 Fri
Lots of things Buffy was saying and doing at that point didn't
make sense.
She was in total shock. I found Sarah Michelle Geller's protrayal
of a
person in shock after losing a love one very well protrayed. She
was in a
daze.
She seemed so helpless. Especially after the EMS personnel left
and she
walked to the back door, and then threw up.
I don't think we can read anything more into it than that. When
Buffy called
Giles there was so much she had to say, it just came out in a
jumbled mess.
She just couldn't get much of it out.
"All she has left is Dawn and the SG. We may say that Joyce
wasn't a
clairvoyant mother, but her presence was balancing Buffy's world.
Now the
balance is gone and the darkness might just begin."
Exactly.
And all Dawn has left is Buffy. If Buffy becomes withdrawn emotionally,
what
will Dawn have left to hold on to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- June,
23:24:53 03/02/01 Fri
In "Restless" the first slayer said that Buffy was going
to be alone.
I believe the first slayer said that Buffy SHOULD be alone. That
she should
have nothing in her life but slaying, kind of how we saw Kendra
protrayed.
No friends, just the kill!
The spirit of the first slayer was angry that Buffy depended on
others for
help. The First slayer was kind of one dimensional.
Buffy's greatest strength though comes from her being Buffy, not
the slayer.
Although her slayer strength and abilities are important, time
and time
again its the strength she finds from her friends, family and
her own
sensitive, caring nature that has carried the day where others
slayers would
have failed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Misdirection with the Buffybot? -- Ayala, 07:27:37 03/03/01
Sat
Love the theory. Don't buy it but I love it.
Spike does know something about computers. He was able to find
Buffy and
Willow's room number on a computer way back in season four. There
are plenty
of places that have public access to computers and I'm sure Spike
could have
convinced some unsuspecting female to help him with the trickier
bits.
(Spike in the public library -- delicious thought.)
Maybe Warren had a booming robot business in college; I'm sure
there would
have been a demand.
Hadn't thought about the fact that it was probably night. I doubt
Warren's
mom would have let anyone in who was smoking (literally) under
a blanket.
I think Spike's renewed confidence was the result of having settled
on a
course of action. I really don't see Giles going to Spike for
any sort of
help after their previous encounter. If nothing else, I think
Giles would be
worried about the same sort of Spike/Buffybot action that the
rest of us are
dreading. I also don't see how a robot could be built soon enough
to help
Buffy during her worst period of grief.
I am still hoping that Spike has some purpose besides robot sex.
Someone (it
may have been someone on this board -- if so, humble acknowledgement
of your
brilliance) suggested that it is really a vengence bot aimed at
the
Scoobies. I can go with this. Spike was royally ticked off after
their last
enounter and he may also want to cut Buffy off from all ties except
himself
(think FFL.) In a depressing way, Joyce's death would fit into
this plan. I
still hope/expect Spike to show some grief on learning of Joyce's
death, but
then I am one of those dreaded Redemptionistas and we have so
little hope to
cling to these days.
I am also a cat-loving newbie so please be gentle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Not Fair to Spike -- Sue, 08:33:08 03/03/01 Sat
"I still hope/expect Spike to show some grief on learning
of Joyce's death."
Not fair to expect Spike to think and act in human ways.
Spike is not Human.
Spike is a Vampire.
He can't help being the way he is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being the way he is --
LoriAnn, 10:41:06
03/03/01 Sat
"Spike can't help being the way he is"
Obviously, he can help. If he couldn't choose not to go around
biting people
on the neck and sucking their blood, the chip would not be able
to keep him
from doing it, and Spike would have one helluva headache 100%
of the time.
As far as Spike's call on Warren goes, I've posted on the other
board that
my own opinion is that he has a motive that we can't see yet.
So,
misdirection? You bet. If this is as clear cut a case of Spike's
substitute
for love or sex with Buffy as it seems to be, I'll be very disappointed
with
the deviousness, not to mention creativity, of JW.
Would anyone care to comment on the last look on Spike's face
that we see in
his scene with Warren?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Is Spike going the self-help route? --
Aquitaine, 12:07:35
03/03/01 Sat
"Would anyone care to comment on the last look on Spike's
face that we see
in his scene with Warren?"
*Cough* Me:)
Stream of consciousness thoughts re: his look:
Determined, industrious, disgusted, steely, 'don't want to play
games
anymore', no nonsense, 'wants me to get over this thing' then
I bloody well
will, I'll order myself up a Buffy robot that I can both hit on
AND hit, a
Buffy who will either want me or want to kill me (because Warren
will make
her 'real good' for me), none of this 'spare him cause he's got
a chip'.
Final impression = he had a very 'I'll should them all', very
human look.
IMO, Spike didn't look to be in revenge mode but I could be wrong.
Anya did
say it would be a big year for vengeance, right? I don't know.
Spike is too
febrile emotionally these days to read.
However, I cannot reconcile Spike's initial speechlessness with
his
dismantling of the shrine or with the ordering of the Robot. Ummm.
Anyone
care to comment on the speechlessness vs the action-mode? LOL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the self-help
route? -- LoriAnn, 12:38:14
03/03/01 Sat
Aquitaine,
Since I respect your opinion--you think things out--I'll look
at this part
of the ep again before I post anything else about it, but I had
an entirely
different impression of Spike's expression, perhaps not the earlier
expressions, but the very last one in that scene.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Oh my GOD!!! -- Aquitaine,
13:20:53 03/03/01 Sat
"Since I respect your opinion--you think things out--I'll
look at this part
of the ep again before I post anything else about it, but I had
an entirely
different impression of Spike's expression, perhaps not the earlier
expressions, but the very last one in that scene."
Gulp... You made me go back and check the scene again, which I
should have
done in the first place, mind you. LOL.
I think you are referring to the very last, mildly seductive but
latently
threatening, blink-with-smile look. Right then... up to that point
my
analysis works but that last look *is* a bit jarring. Funny, I
hadn't
registered the smile before.
Question: Is it nighttime when Buffy calls Ben and leaves the
message
because Glory and her minion seem to be in a lit room as if it's
nighttime.
And, it is definitely nighttime when Spike visits Warren but then
it is
afternoon when Buffy arrives to find Joyce dead. Very disconcerting.
***
OMG OMG OMG OMG - Now you've gone and done it! You've made me
watch the last
Spike scene in IWMTLY several times and now I swear that you can
see Spike's
reflection in the mirror while Warren is on the phone. Check it
out
people!!! I'm not joking. It's *right* before Katrina hangs up.
OMG. What does that mean???? It cannot be a production error.
No way. OMG
My palms just got sweaty...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Oh my GOD!!! --
Nina, 13:33:58 03/03/01 Sat
Hee hee! I think the mirror bit might be a mistake... they did
the same in
FFL in the subway. We see his reflection there too.
I'm waiting for the shooting script to determine if it's day or
night... but
I wonder if they don't hold them for now. They don't seem to be
available
(Crush and IWMtLY) and we have no idea of the future episodes
either (not
even titles!) so maybe it's a big conspiracy to make our grey
cells turned a
little more grey! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Oh my GOD!!!
-- Aquitaine, 13:41:12 03/03/01 Sat
Nina, is that you being the voice of reason? ROFL.
I am thinking that the entire scene is set up to show/hide that
little
reflection. Notice how the reflection isn't there when the mirror
moves out
of the frame as the camera follows Warren but appears for a brief
instant
after that and then, bam, Spike's in Warren's face.
I can't think that they would choose to shoot in front of a mirror
(which is
hard to orchestrate so that the production equipment and cameras
aren't
reflected) unless there was a point to it.
Signed Aquitaine *the conspiracy theorist* ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Oh my
GOD!!! -- Nina, 13:49:18 03/03/01 Sat
I'd love to believe that.... but that would mean that he isn't
a vampire
anymore...right?
As far as I would like that... seems even weirder than Giles asking
Spike
for help! Maybe we can form a duo and come with very weird theories
about
the show! :) LOL
I'll have to believe you on that one anyway (I mean the mirror
bit) because
I watched the scene over and over, but I get FOX with a very bad
image
quality here and I can't see the reflection myself... I just thought
that it
may have been a mistake like in FFL... but maybe you are on something.
Glad
if my wacky theory made people watch the scene over and over again!
:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Oh my GOD!!! -- Aquitaine, 14:01:04
03/03/01 Sat
"I'll have to believe you on that one anyway (I mean the
mirror bit) because
I watched the scene over and over, but I get FOX with a very bad
image
quality here and I can't see the reflection myself... I just thought
that it
may have been a mistake like in FFL"
LOL. Anyone (with cable;) want to comment about the reflection
in the
mirror?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Oh my GOD!!! -- Nina, 14:41:36 03/03/01
Sat
Okay.... I finally saw it! The blond head in the back in the mirror!
So what does it mean to you Aquitaine? We'll have an answer with
the
shooting script, but do you think it means he's actually becoming
human?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> The deeper meaning. -- Sean, 14:47:18
03/03/01 Sat
It means the production crew needs to be more careful, because
the
viewership is very observant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: The deeper meaning. -- Aquitaine,
15:46:10 03/03/01 Sat
"It means the production crew needs to be more careful, because
the
viewership is very observant."
LOL. Well, I'm of the opinion that they *know* just how observant
the
viewers are and make *that* kind of mistake in *that* kind of
scene.
Actually, what originally caught my attention wasn't the reflection
but the
fact that the camera doesn't really follow Warren on that shot.
I was also
really bothered that there would be such a seemingly stupid scene
with
Warren (who cares about him and his romantic woes anyway) chattering
away
just before Buffy finds her mother dead - it just felt wrong.
So, as my mind
was wandering and wondering, I suddenly noticed how the camera
pans more
slowly than Warren is moving and then it seems that Warren is
no longer the
focus of the composition either. Then, we only lose sight of the
mirror for
a few seconds before it pans more rapidly to show the mirror and
the
reflection.
OK. Am I crazy here? Is this as nutty as my no-chip theory?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> Two possible theories..... --
Sebastian, 17:35:31 03/05/01 Mon
Do you think Spike might be having a BuffyBot made to so he can
kidnap the
*real* Buffy - and implant the Scoobies with the Bot?
I can't see Spike wanting a copy of what he would desires most
- he would
want the original - and what a way to get back at the ones who
spurned him
by putting a fake in their midst?
or......
Why not create a BuffyBot that's dangerous. Create a Buffy that
commits all
these heinous acts - one that would horrify the Scoobies and Giles
with its
actions. And not knowing its a BuffyBot - they inadvertently spurn
the
*real* Buffy. Buffy - now an outcast and already mourning the
loss of her
mother - is forced to turn *to* Spike.
Spike even said in FFL that its friends/family that keeps her
grounded.
Joyce dead - and the Scoobies and Giles tricked into thinking
she has become
a rogue slayer...its all about pushing Buffy into that dark place
that has
been hinted at all season.....
Thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Re: Two possible
theories.....*mild spoiler* -- Nina, 18:18:42 03/05/01 Mon
Hmmmm.... Spike alone without a woman, without any links to the
world is
pretty hard to conceive. We've never seen him like that before.
It could be
possible that as a vengence he wants to outcast Buffy from her
peers as
well. Give her the same treatment he received.
Yet something tells me that because Warren seemed to know Spike
and what he
was (a vampire that is) this whole robot thing is completely something
else.
Something we can't figure out yet, because we don't have the clues.
The next episode is called "Intention" (with an "s"
or not I am not sure)
could it refer to Spike intentions towards the Buffybot? ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Intervention.....*mild
spoiler* -- Aquitaine, 18:55:24 03/05/01 Mon
Hi Nina, the names of the next episodes are Intervention, Forever
and Tough
Love. The titles all sound very emotional and dramatic but I haven't
formulated any speculative theories based on them (yet:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Two possible
theories.....*mild spoiler* -- rowan, 20:15:15 03/05/01 Mon
The more I review the end of IWMTLY, the more Warren's reaction
just doesn't
seem right...he's not surprised enough to see Spike...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Two possible
theories.....*mild spoiler* -- ann, 08:39:46 03/06/01 Tue
I'm a bit cynical. I think the mirror reflection was a production
boo-boo.
Warren's character thorughout IWMtLY seemed so cowardly, I expected
him to
jump out of his shoes when confronted with Spike. (How would he
know Spike
is harmless? Why did he invite Spike in?) If I were Warren, I
would warn the
SG.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Two possible
theories.....*mild spoiler* -- purplegrrl, 15:34:04 03/08/01 Thu
Okay, maybe I don't remember IWMtLY well enough, but why *would*
Warren be
frightened of Spike? When Spike doesn't have his "game face"
on, he looks
pretty normal. How would Warren know that Spike is a vampire?
Looks like Buffy-marathon weekend for me!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Re: Two possible theories.....
-- jade, 19:49:20 03/05/01 Mon
While I agree with your thought that Spike would want the real
Buffy, and
not a cheap substitute, he would have no means of kidnapping Buffy
and
holding her against her will as long as he has the chip in his
head. He
doesn't have Dru or anyone else now to do the rough stuff for
him. Plus I
think Buffy is going to get to that dark place all by herself,
with no help
needed from Spike. And I also believe Dawn is going to join her
there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Two possible
theories..... -- rowan, 20:18:08 03/05/01 Mon
But I think Spike could hold Buffy against her will. He was able
to chain
her up while she was unconscious in The Crush. As long as his
intention
wasn't to kill or seriously harm her, no pain, right? If he thought
he was
chaining her up out of love, would he have pain from the chip?
(of course, I
have a theory that the chip is not working anymore anyway).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Oh my GOD!!! --
LoriAnn, 20:21:39 03/03/01 Sat
Aquitaine,
I finally got to look again and again at the part of the ep where
Spike
orders the Buffybot. I can't agree that Spike's reflection is
in the mirror.
I played it over and over as some friends and I watched, and we
could all
see what might be mistaken for Spike, but it doesn't really seem
to be him.
He was carrying a large box, and there's no box in the reflection.
There is
a white round thing, could be a head, with a black thing below,
could be a
black leather jacket. But I don't think so. More than that, if
it takes
numerous replays for a person to be, at best, unsure, JW surely
isn't trying
very hard to give us a clue. An extremely brief, but reasonably
clear
reflection might be a clue. I'd love to believe, but I can't.
On the other hand, the last look on Spike's face in the scene--you
were
right, the one when he blinks--shows something interesting, maybe
even a
reflection. I agree with you that up until that last look he was
being
confident and mildly threatening--a mild threat seemed to be all
it took
with Warren. But then his expression changed, and I can understand
if no one
agrees, but I can swear the look was pleased in a good way, not
with Warren,
but with the thought of what he was doing and perhaps why he was
doing it
and for whom. I thought I saw a reflection in that look, a reflection
of
William the Bloody Awful Poet, and I thing he may be up to good,
rather than
no good. Am I projecting my own desires into the scene? Maybe.
Regardless of whether I see something real or not, I agree with
everyone who
thinks, for whatever reason, that this scene with Warren can't
be taken at
face value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Reflections of...
-- Aquitaine, 08:14:14 03/04/01
Sun
"I'd love to believe, but I can't."
Me too, frankly. It does take quite a bit of rewatching to see
the
reflection (btw, I have a huge bone to pick with you and Nina
for making me
watch this scene until I started seeing things and developing
another crazy
theory! I think I'm too old to be obsessing over this stuff:)
"I thought I saw a reflection in that look, a reflection
of William the
Bloody Awful Poet, and I thing he may be up to good, rather than
no good."
As plausible a theory as any:) It was certainly a self-satisfied
look. Now,
whether he was contemplating Warren's creativity as benevolent
tool or
whether he was thinking about all the future havoc he could wreak
is
anyone's guess.
"Am I projecting my own desires into the scene? Maybe."
Hell, yes! But aren't we all? Besides, what else would we *do*
with our
time? LOL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Reflections
of... -- Rufus, 08:58:16 03/04/01
Sun
Aquitaine, your visions are a result of rerun hell. The delayed
gratification of seeing the end of the season is causing you to
see Spike in
every mirror. There is medication for that....:):):) Sorry can't
help myself
here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Reflections of... -- Aquitaine, 09:41:59
03/04/01 Sun
"There is medication for that....:):):)"
So I'm suffering from rerunnitis, am I? ROFL. Dr. Rufus is in:)
***
You know, if by the end of the season we find out that that reflection
was
real and that there is no chip in Spike's brain, I'm expecting
an extra
special delivery from you via UPS: a ten-pound box of milk chocolate
and a
big huge 'you were right' poster;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the self-help
route? -- Nina, 12:46:26
03/03/01 Sat
"Anyone care to comment on the speechlessness vs the action-mode?
LOL."
*cough* Me? (very small voice!) ;)
You know what this scene reminds me of? The end of BvD when Dawn
was first
introduced. People went crazy for weeks trying to say that JW
had gone mad,
that Buffy didn't have a sister... and eventually we had an answer.
I think
that showing Spike ordering the Buffybot has a similar effect.
It's
misdirection at its best. People fear a Buffybot sex scene (or
want it -
yeah I read that!) but let's forget my crazy theory for a minute
and put
Giles out of the picture (because honesty I like it but don't
really believe
it myself!) Spike's attitude is way too confident vs the Spike
we saw
earlier throwing his Buffy shrine in the box.
It's also one of the few episodes when we are not seeing things
through
Spike eyes. Usually we all know what's going on. In IWMtLY, we
are seeing
the other side of the rope. We see things through Buffy's eyes
and the SG's
eyes... not Spike's. This change is very interesting. We can't
possibly know
what Spike is up to, because we are not seeing things from his
perspective
anymore.
This is probably one of the best move they could have come with.
We've seen
things through Spike's eyes for too long now... let him surprise
us! :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the self-help
route? -- Aquitaine,
13:31:53 03/03/01 Sat
"It's misdirection at its best."
Well, if that is Spike's reflection in the mirror then the whole
ordering of
the Buffybot was just a diversion as was that whole long boring
one-sided
phone conversation between Warren and Katrina.
"It's also one of the few episodes when we are not seeing
things through
Spike eyes."
I hadn't noticed but you are right. Interestingly, the new perspective
really makes the SG look nasty re: its treatment of Spike.
"This change is very interesting."
I'm warming to it, yes:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the
self-help route? -- Nina,
13:41:50 03/03/01 Sat
"I hadn't noticed but you are right. Interestingly, the new
perspective
really makes the SG look nasty re: its treatment of Spike."
I think this is why so many fans were very disturbed by Buffy
and the SG
reaction to Spike. For the first time in a long time we got to
be on their
side and see things from their perspective.
Talking about perspective... when you take every episode from
this season
after OomM and watch them on Buffy and SG's perspective... Spike's
behavior
is very weird. (as it is now for us with the Buffybot) When you
think about
it, when Buffy last saw Spike in OomM he wanted to kill her, he
had just
lauched at her and almost bit her neck. Next time she sees him
he's hiding
behing a tree saying that she has stupid hair!
It's all about perception. With IWMtLY we finally switch team.
We were on
Spike's team, now we aren't anymore. We get to see him and his
action as a
stranger would, as a spectator. Hmmmm.... maybe that's the part
when he
starts making threatening pauses and we throw him money?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going
the self-help route? --
Aquitaine, 14:05:17 03/03/01 Sat
"We get to see him and his action as a stranger would, as
a spectator.
Hmmmm.... maybe that's the part when he starts making threatening
pauses and
we throw him money?"
LOL. Very funny. All roads either lead to Spike or to Restless.
So, could we then be said to be throwing good money after Big
Bad? (Sorry,
couldn't resist!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the self-help
route? -- rowan, 07:47:10
03/04/01 Sun
I thought Spike's actions in dismembering (he,he) the shrine were
very
consistent with the typical adolescent reaction to one's declaration
of love
being rejected by everyone's who's heard it.
I thought the reaction to go to Warren was odd. I too wonder how
he figured
all this out and got over to Warren's so quickly. I was also wondering
exactly what Spike had done to Warren's mother. Spike looked more
like the
old Spike to me (pre-Buffylove Spike) in that scene, so I assumed
the whole
intention behind the robot was not good for the SG.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the self-help
route? -- Nina, 09:21:33
03/04/01 Sun
One thing is awfully odd. It's the fact that even though Warren
is startled
to see Spike (reaction enhenced by the music!) he doesn't say
"Who are you?"
but "How did you get in here?" (or something similar)
I agree to throw away the Giles and mirror theory :), but this
has got to
mean something. When you look back at the scene (I'll send you
a bone for
your dog Aquitaine for making you watch the scene again!) Warren
seems to
know who Spike is. His question could even mean that he knows
that he is a
vampire.
I just can't wait to see the shooting script where I am sure we
won't have
any answer for that... proving once more that I led you on a false
grail!
Sorry for that!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Is Spike going the
self-help route? -- Aquitaine,
09:53:07 03/04/01 Sun
*** he doesn't say "Who are you?" but "How did
you get in here?" ... Warren
seems to know who Spike is. His question could even mean that
he knows that
he is a vampire. ***
I agree.
Anyone want to share their thoughts on the fact that shooting
scripts for
Crush and IWMTLY are not available? I'm feeling a little gun-shy
of the
conspiracy theory front today:)
+++
Nina, my dog says "thanks" for the bone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Warren and
Spike -- LoriAnn, 10:21:05 03/04/01
Sun
Granted Warren went to high school with Buffy and knew who she
was, but I
noticed, too, that Warren also seemed to know who and what Spike
was as soon
as he saw Spike. That does seem strange.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> How did you get
in here? -- purplegrrl, 15:44:48
03/08/01 Thu
Isn't "How did you get in here?" sort of a typical response
when someone
(either known or unknown) comes into your private domain? We've
heard this
line often enough in the movies and other television shows. I
don't think
this line proves that Warren knew Spike or knew that he is a vampire.
Warren
was pretty jumpy about the whole April-gone-looking-for-him issue,
so I
chalk it up to residual jumpiness.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: How
did you get in here? -- Nina, 15:58:33
03/08/01 Thu
Well now that I have read the script I completely agree with you!
Mostly because I realized that he does something similar with
Buffy when she
comes to see him. He jumps immediately to the conclusion that
she is there
for April.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being the way he
is -- Malandanza, 07:11:51
03/05/01 Mon
""Spike can't help being the way he is""
"Obviously, he can help. If he couldn't choose not to go
around biting
people on the neck and sucking their blood, the chip would not
be able to
keep him from doing it, and Spike would have one helluva headache
100% of
the time."
I think you've made an excellent point. Spike isn't just a creature
of pure
instinct -- he is capable of contolling his violent impulses,
but would
prefer not to do so. Before he discovered that he could hurt demons
and
vampires, he even refrained from offering them violence. Furthermore,
we
have seen a few occasions where he was willing to take the "blinding"
pain
of the chip -- fighting his way out of the Initiative, attacking
a demon
when before he knew there would be no pain and picking up a shotgun
to go
after Buffy. Add to that the recent Joss Whedon quote on souls
(souless
creature can do good but are drawn to evil) and Spike is not a
victim -- he
is a malignant creature who chooses to do evil.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being the way
he is -- Rufus, 22:31:48
03/05/01 Mon
Let's add a little more to the fire. Let's look at what William
was and what
Spike became. William was a shy loner that wanted to be respected
for who he
was. Instead he was bullied by his peers and rejected by the woman
he loved.
So what did Spike, by choice become, the very bully he hated in
life. He
chose to become what he is. Liam was a drunk and a womaniser,
William was a
good man, and his choice of evil is so pathetic given the good
man he was.
He had to be seen if only over the bodies of those he killed.
He dreaded
mediocrity but became a cowardly killer. All by choice. I know
that his
moral needle is pointed twords evil, but William was no drunken
whoring
lout, he was an educated man who could have done more than become
a black
leather wearing thug. I believe that Spike can make steps in a
process to
redeem himself but I want it to be because he understands what
he has become
is wrong, not because he may get the girl as a reward. I want
Spike to get
an epiphany, one that shows him just how pathetic his choices
have made him.
A man isn't the leather coat, the hair, or sex appeal, a man is
someone that
doesn't get attention by making others suffer. Spike has been
evil part
because he is drawn to it and more because he chooses it. But
he is no man,
not by a long shot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being
the way he is -- Marya,
01:05:00 03/06/01 Tue
I'm pretty much in the "he's a demon and he'll never be any
good" camp. But
Lori Ann and Malandanza make a good point. If vampires couldn't
help
themselves, pain wouldn't stop them. In fact it usually doesn't.
Slow them
down maybe, but not stop them. If it did, a few punches from Buffy
and
they'd be a runnin'. Makes you wonder a little about Spike's fortitude,
though. A little headache and it's all can't hunt, can't kill.
Okay a really
big blinding headache, but still. Or was our little Spikey just
looking for
an excuse to change his ways? And if so, change them how? Since
getting the
chip he has mostly behaved like an opportunistic, free loading
sycophant.
And I have to disagree that William was a good man. He was a whiney
coward
with delusions of grandeur and a fixation on a woman who was above
his
station. Hmmm, sounds familiar. He was a poser as a human and
is a poser as
a vampire. Of course that's not to say I don't think he can change.
There
must be some reason they've brought in this, to me confusing storyline,
putting him in a more sympathetic light. I just haven't figured
it out.
And frankly, despite all of the above, I love the character. He's
fascinating. But then evil often is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help
being the way he is -- LoriAnn,
04:08:12 03/06/01 Tue
Malandanza, why is Spike a coward? Anyone who will tackle several
slayers,
even if he's wise enough to know that leaving the battle is better
than
losiing it, can't very well be a coward. The slayers aren't called
vampire
slayers for nothing.
I don't want to offend anyone, but does Spike's story resonate
with anyone
else as similar to the school shootings that have sadly plagued
our society
in the past few years: the bullied and belittled, getting the
opportunity,
strike out when they can't stand the abuse, real or perceived,
anymore?
Was Spike pathetic? That's clearly what William's peers thought,
and I
didn't find them any too sensitive or admirable. Was his choice
to remake
himself pathetic? In a sense, perhaps it was, but wouldn't anyone
want to
change circumstances that had caused him or her so much pain?
That brings up
Spike's currently painful situation. More change coming?
I see posts often about Spike choosing darkness. I didn't see
Dru hand him a
"Concent to Be Bitten" form and tell him not to miss
the small print. He
didn't choose darkness; he chose a release from his pain by someone
who
seemed sympathetic, if a lot more than just a little strange.
After that,
the pull toward evil made him comfortable becoming the anti-William,
everything William was not. After all, being William hadn't worked
very well
for him, and William the Vampire would just have been someone
for other
vamps to bully and ridicule. "As my pale face toward your
neck is bent/Yours
grows pale and mine effulgent." He'd be the laughing stock
of his vamp
poetry slam.
Whatever, Spike is an arresting character, and we can hope that
his part in
the Buffster's saga will continue in fine form, although the idea
of Spike
as a dust bunny does have a whimsical attraction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't
help being the way he is --
Aquitaine, 06:27:46 03/06/01 Tue
"Was Spike pathetic? That's clearly what William's peers
thought, and I
didn't find them any too sensitive or admirable. Was his choice
to remake
himself pathetic? In a sense, perhaps it was, but wouldn't anyone
want to
change circumstances that had caused him or her so much pain?
That brings up
Spike's currently painful situation. More change coming?"
I think that both Spike and Buffy are pathetic insofar as their
lives were
completely turned around by seemingly random events. But, prior
to their
metamorphoses, they were just 'mediocre'. It is this combination
of pathos
and ne plus ultra that draws us to them so that, even when their
actions are
questionable or unseemly, we champion them, are entertained and
maybe even
inspired by them.
As to whether William was pathetic... his peers thought so but
he obviously
thought he had something special and it was his pride in this
fact that got
him vamped. I actually thought that IWMTLY did a good job mirroring
the
reactions of Cecily and William's peers in Buffy and the SG. The
dismantling
of the shrine looked a lot like the tearing up of the poem. I'm
not quite
sure how the ordering of the Buffybot equates to the vamping,
though:) -
Anyone have a theory? - But I do agree that Spike might like to
kill the
love dead, so to speak, by killing the Buffybot.
IWMTLY also showed how April possessed certain attributes of both
Spike and
Buffy. Seeing them react to and interact with her spoke volumes
about their
own insecurities and fears.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike
can't help being the way he is --
rowan, 19:44:27 03/06/01 Tue
Did Spike take any action against Cecily after being vamped? I
don't recall
all the details of the episode (next week I will tape it). That
might prove
instructive about his future behavior with Buffy, since the whole
spurned
lover pattern appears to be very similar.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
verdantheart, 06:56:54 03/08/01 Thu
No, that wasn't shown. I've also thought that it would be interesting
to
know whether he felt it necessary to deal with her or he was just
quits with
her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't
help being the way he is --
Malandanza, 07:22:07 03/06/01 Tue
"Malandanza, why is Spike a coward? Anyone who will tackle
several slayers,
even if he's wise enough to know that leaving the battle is better
than
losiing it, can't very well be a coward. The slayers aren't called
vampire
slayers for nothing."
Actually, Rufus was the person who called Spike a "cowardly
killer," not me.
But I do think that Spike is a bully -- and inside every bully
is coward.
His cowardice is particularly demonstrated in his interactions
with
Angel/Angelus. Remember when Angelus was bent on destroying the
world? Spike
makes a deal with the Slayer -- hits Angelus from behind, then
runs off to
leave Buffy to fight Angelus alone (with a final "He's going
to kill that
girl" remark, then a shrug). In the flashback scenes, we
saw Angelus pushing
Spike around and all Spike did was take it. He talks a big game
("don't you
get tired of battles you know you're going to win?") but
what chance does a
disorganized mob of humans really have against a group of vampires
that
includes Angelus and Darla? Also, when Spike wanted the gem of
Amara from
Angel, he hired another vampire to do his dirty work -- although
we did see
Spike strike Angel while he was chained up and being tortured.
As for the
battles with the former Slayers, there was never a moment in those
two
fights where I thought that Spike was going to lose. When he is
losing, he
is quick to turn tail and flee (remember when he had the gem of
Amara? He
was eager to fight Buffy -- his courage vanished with the ring).
Think of
his reaction to the Troll -- he was ready to start a fight (chip
or no) when
someone bumped into him, but quickly backed down and became respectful
when
he saw who had done the bumping (he could have fought the Troll
without the
chip affecting him). Buffy and Angel are heroic -- they have fought
in
battles when the outcome was uncertain. Spike is more "pragmatic;"
for all
his talk of getting a thrill from being at the edge of death,
he tends to
fight only when the odds are clearly stacked in his favor.
"I don't want to offend anyone, but does Spike's story resonate
with anyone
else as similar to the school shootings that have sadly plagued
our society
in the past few years: the bullied and belittled, getting the
opportunity,
strike out when they can't stand the abuse, real or perceived,
anymore?"
I think the parallel would be more clear if the lashing out had
been a one
time event. Instead Spike became exactly the type of character
that had
tormented him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike
can't help being the way he is --
Rufus, 12:49:05 03/06/01 Tue
You bet it was me that called Spike a coward. And the reason is
he only
fights when he thinks he will win. Sure he killed a couple of
slayers, but
is that heroic? He is a bully. He treats other vampires like servants
or
minions, he is a snob when it comes to others of his kind. In
Lovers Walk he
clearly said to the one vampire something like you used to work
for me. And
when he brags about his killings you have to remember on thing,
he has
killed two slayers, how many innocent, weak humans has he killed
to pass
time? We have to be honest about this guy before even considering
redemption
for him. He has to be aware and want to atone for all the murder
and grief
he has caused. We can't feel sorry for him because at one time
he used to be
a good man. Until he understands that what he has done is pointless
and
wrong he isn't anywhere near redemption. The moment he gets it,
gets what a
waste he has become, and regrets it, then we can talk about redemption.
I
like the character of Spike alot, I see potential for him to become
better
than he is. But, while he is just a posturing thug in a leather
coat, I see
him for what he is, a cowardly bully that kills the innocent.
Now that he
isn't killing he has a reprieve that lasts as long as it takes
him to kill
another human. He got close in Crush. I wonder if a machine can
teach him
something about humanity that the humans can't?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
Aquitaine, 17:06:46 03/06/01 Tue
"I wonder if a machine can teach him something about humanity
that the
humans can't?"
... or aren't willing to? I like this angle. Buffy surely learned
something
from April. No?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike can't help being the way he is --
Rufus, 18:28:03 03/06/01 Tue
They aren't willing to at the moment because he is threatening
to them. He
has behaved badly and that can change at any time. I think they
set up the
Buffybot to teach Spike humanity as the others don't know how.
Spike is
lonely but will a machine be able to fill the emptiness that nags
him? I
think it will be a grand irony if the robot teaches Spike about
himself and
how to become the type of person that not only others could want
to be with
but even Buffy can learn to trust. It's either that or back to
the old evil
drawing board.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Spike can't help being the way he is
-- rowan, 20:21:34 03/08/01 Thu
Then couldn't a chip be a chance for redemption? I don't think
we should
fault Spike because we don't like his motives; if he is struggling
to
change, the initiating reason shouldn't be a judgement point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: Spike can't help being the way he
is -- Rufus, 21:37:12 03/08/01 Thu
We should judge carefully any motives coming from Spike. We have
to remember
that this is the guy that had a shrine going and is now having
a Buffybot
made. There are certain things he did that made me hope for change,
but the
events in Crush were meant to show that he had invaded Buffys
life more than
we first thought. The chip is what initially started the stoppage
in killing
humans, then his love for Buffy insured it. Now we have to wonder
what his
motives are now. He is angry and hurt. He could go a couple of
ways. When he
was William he never got the chance to have a real relationship
with a woman
other than his mother and perhaps a sibling. His unlife has been
all about
becoming a man to be admired. Unfortunately where William may
have gone into
the Military or done something to change his life, Spike is stuck
in the
confines of demon reality where evil is the norm. The people he
wanted the
attention of the most would only fear him. He is clearly unhappy
in his
unlife. He has no companionship, he sees the other vamps as servants
or
minions. He hasn't a clue about a sane relationship with a woman
as neither
Dru(insane) or Harmony(dim) count. Buffy fits his ideal of a mate
because he
desires and admires her. His treatment of her in the Crush was
confusing. He
let Dru go at her with the cattle prod and then changed the game
mid stride.
I feel that Dru would have picked up on what he was about to do,
so I have
to assume that he made the choice at the moment he zapped Dru.
His actions
are all over the map. His anger and hurt gave way to his need
to be heard
and seen. His methods sucked. So we now have him making a Buffydoll.
We can
only guess what he wants to do with that. And remember if he has
an original
plan it can change anytime because Spike is always changing his
mind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being the way
he is -- verdantheart, 07:32:29 03/09/01 Fri
Spike planned to let Dru kill Buffy if Buffy wouldn't give him
any hope for
his love. What happened to change his mind was that he saw Dru
actually
attacking Buffy. His natural instinct toward evil was suddenly
outweighed by
the immediate danger of seeing his beloved die before his eyes.
Seeing that,
he was able to brush Harmony aside (whom he was having rather
surprising
difficulty with previously -- postponing the decision, Spike?)
and rush to
release Buffy. He probably didn't even think, just acted. - vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
rowan, 19:50:06 03/06/01 Tue
I guess I'm not sure that being worthy of redemption is actually
a
prerequisite for getting a chance at it. What acts did Angelus
perform that
made him worthy of redemption? It was a gypsy's curse, right?
Mysterious
ways...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike can't help being the way he is --
Traveler, 20:24:23 03/07/01 Wed
I don't completely disagree with you, but the Angelus' curse wasn't
redemption. It was... a curse, meant to torment him for the rest
of his
unlife. Redemption is what he has been struggling for (until recently).
The
real question is: did the curse grant him his "chance"
for redemption?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help being
the way he is -- rowan,
19:41:09 03/06/01 Tue
I think William fantastized about himself as heroic and romantic.
However,
he was shy, introverted, and untalented, while at the same time
being
sensitive and intelligent enough to eventually realize it. He
was, in other
words, a stereotypical, garden variety, average joe with too much
imagination.
When vamped, Spike became the active, evil embodiment of those
ideals (the
loyal vamp lover/slave to Dru as he had longed to be for Cecily
and the
slayer-killer as he had longed to be the chivalrous knight or
warrior for
love).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't help
being the way he is -- Aquitaine,
05:33:03 03/07/01 Wed
"However, he was shy, introverted, and untalented, while
at the same time
being sensitive and intelligent enough to eventually realize it.
He was, in
other words, a stereotypical, garden variety, average joe with
too much
imagination."
Rowan, yours is the best description of William I have read to
date. I guess
that part of the reason that viewers (accidentally?) liked William
so much
wasn't necessarily because he was an especially nice person but
because he
was such an Everyman. At one point during our lives, we have all
been or
felt like William.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't
help being the way he is -- rowan,
18:19:45 03/07/01 Wed
Thank you Aquitaine! You made my observation sound alot classier,
though...I
like the Everyman notion!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike can't
help being the way he is -- Rufus,
19:32:51 03/07/01 Wed
Disagree about Spike being an everyman while William. He was a
member of the
upper crust, they would have the time to write poetry while not
starving to
do so. If he had been a working guy who had to punch a clock and
stress out
about money then he would have been an everyman. Williams problem
was that
he wanted recognition but had done little to deserve it. It's
when he "died"
that things got interesting. He chucked the high class stint for
a journey
into the lower classes. Gone were the poncy accent, precise clothes,
and his
glasses. He took on the visage of a low class tough, or what he
thought one
was. He became fearless, but was still the same man inside. What
I found
appealing about the character is the fact that he has always failed
miserably when he pretends to be something he isn't. He could
kill thousands
of slayers and he will still be William inside, fearful, hoping
for
recognition. Where he could start going in the right direction
would be to
drop the tough guy I don't care talk, and start to be genuine
with people.
Any time we see a glimpse of the man behind the monster there
is a hope that
a good man could still surface. He would have to be willing to
do good acts
not for recognition, but because he wanted to. He would have to
see people
not as Happy Meals on legs but as someone to care for. He has
to stop being
a big ol fibber and say what he thinks not what he thinks will
make him look
good. He's got a ways to go.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike
can't help being the way he is --
Aquitaine, 19:57:11 03/07/01 Wed
"He has to stop being a big ol fibber and say what he thinks
not what he
thinks will make him look good. He's got a ways to go."
I agree with this point completely. It *is* amusing that he hasn't
clued in
to the fact that Buffy probably finds the sh*thead Spike more
appealing than
the ingratiating Spike:)
***
As for the notion of Everyman, I was referring more to the mystery
play
paradigm than to the Common man. As such, the concept of Everyman
is that of
an abstraction playing out the drama of its own mortality. It
is in that
sense that I meant that we could all identify with William.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
Rufus, 22:30:53 03/07/01 Wed
Okay I agree with you Spike is a sh*thead:):):):)
Sorry couldn't help myself. He does piss me off at times. He has
to do
things the hard way when it could be so easy. He has been a poser
for so
long he is reluctant to give up the pose or the comforting image
he has of
himself. I wonder if he realises how people even other vampires
see him? I
find his pose stale. He has to work harder to earn a place with
humanity.
Good works speak for themselves only if done consistantly and
with genuine
intent. Does he have it in him?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike can't help being the way he is --
LoriAnn, 02:48:11 03/08/01 Thu
"He [Spike] has to work harder to earn a place with humanity.
Good works
speak for themselves only if done consistantly and with genuine
intent."
If those are the requirements of humanity, how many of us are
really human?
Do we hold Spike up to a higher standard than we can meet ourselves?
Do we
hold him up to a higher standard than we do Buffy? Although whatever
she
does is with genuine intent of some kind, since her "good
works" have been
inconsistant--she does something not "good" at all now
and then--is she
something other than human? Most of the vampires on BtVS are quite
inhuman,
one-dimentional appetites that prey on human beings; however,
some have been
remarkably human, not in any consistency, but in their inconsistencies,
in
their wandering from any one narrow path. The humans have done
likewise,
generally. In the major characters, humanity does not seem to
be a genuine
issue; conceptually, they're all human, vampire or otherwise,
and in them,
the concepts of good and bad--fuzzy words at best--are not absolute,
are not
discrete concepts like "on" and "off," but
together encompass many
indeterminate and intermediate states. If this weren't the case,
we wouldn't
be having this discussion. Dramatically, we need flawed antagonists
as well
as flawed protagonists; absolute bad is as boringly predictable
as absolute
good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Spike can't help being the way he is
-- Rufus, 09:03:19 03/08/01 Thu
Since Spike has been a murdering coward preying on the weak, yes
I hold him
to a higher standard. For me to believe that he is worth redemption
he has
to do more than lust after the slayer. He wants points everytime
he does
something. What he needs to do is first stop thinking of a dinner
bell
everytime he sees a human being and then do good works out of
desire to be a
better being than to make points with Buffy. Right now he is expecting
a
surprise for little effort. So they don't trust him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Spike can't help being the way he is
-- Rufus, 21:41:30 03/08/01 Thu
Why I hold Spike to a higher standard is that he is a murderer
and has to
atone. How many people have killed the amount of humans he has
killed. As he
has caused much suffering he has to atone and good works are a
start. Most
people I wouldn't hold to that standard as they are not murderers
and have
not the same need to atone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Spike: corruption by good -- verdantheart,
10:14:14 03/08/01 Thu
Good intent?
Here we are back to the idea that souled creatures instinct is
toward good
and unsouled creatures' instinct is toward evil.
Since he discovered his feelings for Buffy, Spike has often begun
actions
with evil intent only to find that his feelings cause him to act
contrary to
that (The road to heaven is paved with bad intentions? -- Hm).
He certainly
meant to let Dru have Buffy in "Crush", but when he
saw her in danger, he
couldn't go through with it. Buffy didn't free herself, Spike
freed her.
Spike meant to kill Buffy in "Fool for Love", but when
he got there, he
found that Buffy's pain was more important than his own, so he
attempted to
comfort her instead. Spike has even consciously attempted to modify
his
behavior if only to impress Buffy/do what he thinks she would
want him to
do. Not that that got him anywhere, and why should it?
Does his motivation have to be to do good for good's sake? That's
so dry and
dispassionate. If anything, Spike is passionate. What if his motive
starts
with love for Buffy? Couldn't that corruption spread to love for
mankind
(corruption by good, since he is soulless).
(For those in the lust camp, sure, Spike wants Buffy. But remember
what he
said to Riley about Riley's situation: "To be all alone even
when you're
holding her ..." He doesn't just want to satisfy his lust,
he wants Buffy to
love him back. I don't think mere lust would have stopped him
from killing
her/allowing Dru to kill her.)
But then, basically I'm a romantic. I'd like to believe that where
there's
love, there's hope. Sure, Spike has a very long way to go. And
of course he
naturally resists going toward the light--it's contrary to his
instincts.
Look at Angel. Even with the benefit of a soul and supportive
friends, he's
struggled. Spike doesn't have either of those. All he has is love--love
which he can't expect to ever be returned.
I love complex characters!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
rowan, 20:23:00 03/08/01 Thu
Aquitaine:
Me too -- I got the reference.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike
can't help being the way he is --
verdantheart, 12:20:47 03/08/01 Thu
Yes, Spike should say what he thinks. But is that ever really
that easy for
anyone? Look at how hard that is for Spike. When has he spoken
his mind to
someone else (post-chip)? Let's see. To Riley, after Spike "outed
him" to
Buffy. To Dru, about the chip, only after she saw through his
bluff. To
Dawn, about her feelings and situation (since Spike chained and
threatened
Buffy, Dawn isn't likely to talk with him again anytime soon).
To Buffy,
only after she confronted him about his feelings and he could
no longer
disguise them--and, of course, she didn't want to listen. He can't
have any
vampire friends since he drove Dru away (and, let's face it, Harmony
just
wouldn't do). There's no trust between him and the Scoobies, for
good
reason; how could he speak his mind to them?
It's not easy to say what you think when you're in danger of humiliation.
Spike's had enough painful experience with that as William. He
dared not
risk revealing his feelings for Buffy with the potential for rejection
and
ridicule. No wonder he feels that he has to hide his vulnerability
under a
pile of bluster.
But now that he's been completely exposed and humiliated, it will
be
interesting to see where things go.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Spike can't help being the way he is --
Rufus, 13:00:28 03/08/01 Thu
That's what I'm waiting for, with hope mind you. Other than the
dead girl he
had fed off of with Dru, he has to our knowledge stayed clean(I
think of
killing as an addiction with him). So far there has been no indication
that
he has resumed killing, of course we haven't seen much of him.
Vampires
don't need to kill to feed, they get carried away and enjoy it
too much.
Spike has done fine on animal blood. So what next for the fellow?
I hope he
reforms, I never think he will be like a teddy bear, but he could
be useful.
Now the best thing for him would be to find a purpose other than
sitting
around and stewing about his losses. I just can't get a feel of
what they
will do with him. He will either revert to bad guy (boring), or
find a
middle ground where he can coexist with the SG. We'll see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike can't help being the way he is --
Nina, 14:14:22 03/08/01 Thu
That's where the third path theory is interesting... No love (seen
that done
that in "Something Blue"), no redemption (seen that,
done that with Angel...
one is enough!) so third path options are pretty large... only
they have
nothing to do with those two prior choices!
If we want to get surprised... third path is the way to go, no?
Buffy and Dawn -- Javoher, 22:34:58 03/03/01 Sat
Mild spoiler...
I wonder if Joyce's death (kudos to Ms. Sutherland's performance!)
could be
a way of introducing a new, possibly very complicated character...the
girls'
father. The last we heard he was in Spain with his secretary,
and supposedly
had very little contact with his daughters. But Dawn is a minor,
and it's
likely that in the Buffyverse same as in the Realverse custody
of her would
go to their father instead of to Buffy. It might take a while
to sort that
out, though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy and Dawn -- Marya, 01:45:02 03/04/01 Sun
Whether or not Buffy's -- and ostensibly Dawn's -- father appears
to claim
custody could serve to answer some nagging questions about Dawn.
How far
reaching is the false memory spell? Does Hank Summers remember
having two
daughters? If not and if he arrives to attend the funeral will
the spell
suddenly take effect? Or will Dawn be a stranger to him?
The easiest way to handle the custody matter would be to have
the spell be
local and just have Hank continue to be the stereotypically distant
divorced
father, leaving him in Spain with his "secretary." Sadly
meaning more angst
for Buffy and Dawn.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Buffy and Dawn -- past poster wrote, 15:01:02 03/05/01
Mon
< | Forward>>
& her EXIT
Thursday, 22-Feb-01 22:18:52
Sppeaking of Dawn and the late Joyce, could Joyce's death be a
way to get
rid of Dawn after this season? Eventually she'd have to go with
her Father
in LA
after all this Glory business. I kinda hoped for another sacrifice
- Dawn,
say to save Buffy, dies reconverting into the Key engery
< | Forward>>
I don't feel anything special for the character Dawn, but i'd
be shocked to
see a bitter sweet ending to Dawn like Angel's at the end of season
2. Been
there, done that. i guess i would see her moving to Los Angeles
with Pappa
and losing the house in SunnyDale all together.
-Niche
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Buffy and Dawn -- Niche, 15:10:31 03/05/01 Mon
Speaking of Dawn and Buffy. It's interesting to think that Dawn
is only one
year younger than when Buffy was first called to be the vampire
slayer. It's
weird mainly because the image I have is 20-year-old SMG back
in '97. oh
well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Buffy and Dawn -- May, 15:54:56 03/06/01
Tue
I like Dawn. I find a real warmth in the character.
I hope they keep her on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Buffy and Dawn -- Sean, 11:07:56 03/07/01
Wed
I like Dawn as well.
A very important addition to the cast.
Soul vs. Unsouled...... -- Rufus, 08:04:59 03/04/01 Sun
Got this little bit from Ain't it Cool News. It is the soul question
posted
to Joss Whedon at the "Angel" evening at the 18th annual
William S Paley
Television Festival at the Director's Guild Theatre in Los Angeles.
"Someone asked Whendon how he defined "a soul"
and how Angel (a vampire with
a soul) differed from the soulless vampires (like Spike). Whedon
posited
that soulless creatures can do good and souled creatures can do
evil, but
that the soul-free are instinctually drawn toward doing evil while
those
with souls tend to instinctually want to do good. So there you
have it."
Yippie, now that makes sense. Because without that explanation
none of the
vampires behavior made any at all. They would have been incapable
of making
any decision that would have had good consequences. Shows why
Spike and Dru
can love, and why Spike could even entertain helping humanity
in B2.
Vampires are demons infected with evil via a demon soul, but to
function the
vampire uses the human hosts mind which is missing the human soul
with a
conscience. But as the vampire is a host infected with evil, I
always
felt(read any of my old stuff)the residual humanity could help
determine
future behavior. It also explains why Buffy doesn't slay all vampires
on
sight. If they are doing no wrong she just doesn't(vamp hooker
excluded).
Now to the subject of vampire love. Why can Spike and Dru "love
well, if not
wisely", simple, they experienced the ability to love in
life. Angelus and
Darla had more traumatic encounters with love confusing it with
sex or
weakness.
I always said get a good look at the man and you will have an
idea what kind
of vampire they may be. That also gives us a reason for the episode
of Fool
for Love. Spikes instinct is for evil but something else can kick
in and
prompt him to make good decisions. If he had only been capable
of evil his
love for Buffy would have been impossible and he would have shot
her in FFL,
headache or not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Soul vs. Unsouled...... -- Aquitaine, 08:22:02 03/04/01
Sun
"Whedon posited that soulless creatures can do good and souled
creatures can
do evil, but that the soul-free are instinctually drawn toward
doing evil
while those with souls tend to instinctually want to do good."
I'm so glad he went with a simple, flexible definition. Thanks
for posting
this, Rufus. Food for thought.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Link to where that quote came from??? -- Masquerade,
09:00:53 03/04/01
Sun
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Link to where that quote came from??? --
Rufus, 09:44:05
03/04/01 Sun
You bet, here it is:
http://www.aintitcool.com/section.cgi?type=Coaxial
Hope that helps you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: soul vs no soul -- Nina, 11:06:48
03/04/01 Sun
Thanks Rufus,
I think that now the debate soul vs no soul can be reviewed in
a new light!
At least in JW's light! ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Soul vs. Unsouled...... -- Boxd_man, 13:10:03 03/04/01
Sun
Actually, what Dru said was that they could love "If not
ALWAYS wisely."
This is an important distinction IMO. It means they can love wisely.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Soul vs. Unsouled...... -- Rufus, 13:43:42 03/04/01
Sun
The direct quote from Psyches transcripts was:
Dru: "Oh we can you know. We can love quite well. If not
wisely."
I almost thought she was referring to herself when she said the
not wisely,
as Spike had changed the game on her. It can also explain why
she cut him
loose so many months ago as she knew before he did that he was
in love with
Buffy. Buffy had been under the impression that as Spike had no
soul that he
was incapable of love. Dru corrected her on that point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Soul vs. Unsouled...... -- Boxd_man, 07:05:54
03/05/01 Mon
*blush*
oops. Well, I guess the always was just implied for me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Another quote... on love this time!
-- Nina, 09:18:34
03/05/01 Mon
I don't know if you heard about it in December (sorry if you did!)
but there
was an interview with Marti Noxon that explained Spike and Buffy's
direction:
"Spike's feeling's for Buffy are very real, very sincere,"
Noxon
acknowledges. "It's not just meant to be played for comedy,
and so
eventually, it will be played for something other than comedy.
It's not a
subplot without any destination."
"The whole notion that, because Buffy can kind of beat him
up like nobody
else, he's madly in love with her, just sort of fit Spike's character,"
she
says. "He needs this kind of abuse from a woman. And after
Drusilla (Juliet
Landau) left, he couldn't get it from anybody but Buffy."
(http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/insider/001219a.asp)
This kind of goes with my new third path theory...there's a destination
for
that love plot line and it doesn't seem to be what we expect....
well I
still hope to be surprised! :)
The fact that MN refers as Spike as a man who likes to be abused
is very
insightful. Spike doesn't stand alone by himself he needs a woman
to feel
alive (well kind of! :) I love the parallel there is between April
and
Spike. Both tried their best to become the best girlfriend/boyfriend
for
their object of desire, ready to sacrifice everything. Yet they
were both
rejected.
Psychologically speaking it's not unfamiliar to see people who
are always
rejected seeking similar situation. To diminish the pain, it's
easier to
feel always the same kind of pain. At least it's known territory.
In the FFL script, the way Spike is described as William is not
flaterring
at all. He's described as being the biggest sissy ever (something
similar).
The original motivation was not to make us like him, but to see
that he was
an empty shell of a man with no stamina. Fan's reaction, once
more, was all
different. People loved the guy or at least felt sympathy for
him.
It's very interesting how much fan do influence that show! More
than any
other show I believe! :)
Crush script is up -- Masquerade, 15:10:10 03/04/01 Sun
Hey all you Spike-debaters, Rayne just put up the shooting script
for
"Crush":
http://www.mustreadtv.com/buffyscripts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Crush script is up -- Rufus, 19:13:45 03/04/01 Sun
Oh so you just want to hit us with the bomb and run to a safe
distance while
we get it to blow up?:):):) You're more evil than me, must be
the chocolate.
Liked the script very much it cleared up the status of the girl
he bit(for
activation of the chip). Sure shows how the demon adapts the memories
of the
host and twists them to fit a new reality. Spike is the result
of Williams
unrealised romantic dreams. With his compass neddle pointed at
evil it's
facinating to see how the demon translates the feelings of love
into it's
own twisted moral code. It's Buffys reaction to Spikes or any
vampires
ability to love that I like the most. She just had one of her
canons dashed
upon reality. Does that make Spike or any vampire less dangerous,
not at
all. It does explain that they do have to rely on the host personality
and
memories to function.
If Holland Manners and the folk at Wolfram and Hart can screw
up so much and
allow so much evil into their lives, what does that say to the
same thing
happening to even one vampire? I see the vampire as our mirror
image where
everything in the moral department is reversed. But there is enough
influence of humanity to cause occasional breaks from behavioral
norm. What
would the typical vampire see Spike as, a traitor to be punished
or feared?
Or a vampire that has become preverse with humanity? When I see
vampire
behavior I question our own much more. If we see a good star,
why are we
capable of evil that dwarfs that of many demons?
As for the Buffy shrine, it was disturbing as he had to get pictures
somewhere. You have to wonder just how close he follows her. And
why she
seems to be oblivious to his presence? The bloody bandage?????
Won't even go
there. I did enjoy him getting his comeuppance at the hands of
all the women
in his life......Harmony has to practice, practice, practice.....she
may get
it right someday(the crossbow that is).
My only question is did Buffy tell Giles that Spike actually loved
her over
an above the stalker boy bit and what would Giles reaction be?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Crush script is up -- Masquerade, 20:24:46 03/04/01
Sun
Hey, I've been sweating over a hot "Epiphany" analysis
all day, I didn't
just run off! But I do tend to high-tail it when the Spike talk
starts,
because unless the big boys and girls in the writing staff speak,
I don't
think we have good answers to the questions that plague the debaters.
And
one side or the other, possibly both, will end up unhappy with
the
resolution given. I tend to be in the Spike=evil camp, but that's
from how
much I *loved* him as a character in Season 2!
I was watching Season 2 last night with a friend I'm converting
to Buffyism
and Spike just railed on Angel about being "the slayer's
lap-dog" and how
sick it made him and why the hell wouldn't Angelus just kill her
already.
One can say he protested too much, but the sub-text just wasn't
there, yet.
That came later. I remember thinking during Lover's Walk that
Spike seemed
sickeningly... soft.
But that's just me. I continue to try to be as *objective* on
my website as
I can possibly be. My cats are looking over my shoulder every
time I work on
it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Crush script is up -- Rufus, 21:00:48 03/04/01
Sun
I'm just happy with anything that leaves us in a big ambiguous
mess. To be
evil absolute just makes Spike a big ol bore as you would be able
to
determine all his reactions. As for being a shipper, I've always
been on the
fence on the relationship stuff as they can blow up at any time.
Also the
life expectancy of a