May 2002
posts
You've
got to hand it to Holtz... (spoilers) -- The Last Jack,
12:42:20 05/14/02 Tue
The guy sees things through to the end. In the name of
justice (and later revenge), he chased Angel across time and
space, spent close to two decades in the worst of all hell
dimensions, and at the end of his life, even when he
realized revenge brought him no sense of pleasure or
satisfaction, he still stuck it to Angel one final time. I
am also impressed that he seemed to realize the monster he
had become. He believed he would be sent to hell for his
actions with Connor, yet even in death he couldn't give up
revenge, throwing away any chance of redemption he might
have had with his letter. We all have something to atone
for, as Doyle once said, and Holtz blew his last chance for
that.
[>
A couple of questions/comments -- Masq, 13:10:01
05/14/02 Tue
"He believed he would be sent to hell for his actions with
Connor"
Where did you get this impression? Can you
remember/paraphrase a line of dialogue that gave it to
you?
"throwing away any chance of redemption he might have had
with his letter.
It seemed to me he through away his chance at redemption by
framing Angel with the fake vampire bite on his neck. The
letter, if Connor ever got it, was kind and showed openness
towards Angel. Problem is, because of the neck bite, Connor
probably won't ever see it. I suppose it was meant to get
Angel's hopes up to torment Angel when Connor rejects him
and tries to kill him again.
[> [>
Re: A couple of questions/comments -- alcibiades,
13:18:12 05/14/02 Tue
Holtz tells Justine as she is killing him wtte of that she
can't follow him to hell this time either.
[> [> [>
Re: A couple of questions/comments -- Sofdog,
13:37:57 05/14/02 Tue
Holtz said that he wasn't asking her to follow him to Hell,
just to help send him there when she balked at killing
him.
[> [> [> [>
Re: A couple of questions/comments -- alcibiades,
13:51:49 05/14/02 Tue
Thanks for the correction -- it is hard to quote accurately
at work.
And it is the same point. Holtz is fully expecting to go to
hell as soon as Justine pokes him with her pointy stick.
Which is interesting symbolically given the implied S&M
eroticism of their affair over the previous months whether
or not it was "consummated" before the moment that Justine
kills Holtz.
[> [>
Answers to your questions. -- The Last Jack,
13:56:34 05/14/02 Tue
Holtz commented that he would be sent to hell when Justine
killed him. I took this to mean that he knew what he did to
Angel and Connor was really wrong, and thus believed himself
damned.
As for your other question/comment, I was trying to say
exactly what you said. Unfortunatly, I worded my sentence
wrong lol. I meant to say that his actions (fake vampire
bites, framing Angel for his death) invalidated the letter
he wrote, hence he threw away his chance for redemptions,
which in this case was the letter he wrote.
Hope that explains everything.
[> [> [>
Re: Answers to your questions. -- yabyumpan,
16:17:20 05/14/02 Tue
I haven't actually seen the ep yet so don't know how it
plays out but while I think that setting up the situation
where Connor/Stephen thinks that Angel killed him is
shocking and evil I also think that getting Justine to kill
him is also pretty shocking and evil. She's obviously a
pretty disturbed woman who he abused,manipulated and then
left. It must have been painful to her that Holtz didn't
really remember her when she's obviously got a huge
investment in him but to then get her to kill him is not
only damming him but her. He's supposed to be a godly and
rightous man and yet he was prepared to sacrfice her soul
aswell for his final revenge on Angel. I think he could be
dammend just for that if we are to apply the Cristian
tennents to his actions that he said he applied to his life,
didn't he say at one point he was doing God's work?
[> [> [> [>
My pet theory about Holtz (spoilers for
Benediction) -- Masq, 16:27:16 05/14/02 Tue
How Holtz died. There didn't seem to be much blood around
him, which is what you'd expect if a vampire had bit him
(the blood would be in the vampire). Since Justine made the
holes with an ice pick, though, one would expect blood
everywhere.
This assumes Holtz bled to death. I have a pet theory he
poisoned himself somehow, then moments before death had
Justine puncture him.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: My pet theory about Holtz (spoilers for
Benediction) -- yabyumpan, 16:40:56 05/14/02 Tue
Nice idea but wouldn't the blood keep pumping out blood for
a while or does the blood just stop flowing when the heart
stops? also, If he took poison wouldn't he froth at the
mouth or convulse or something?
Not disagreeing just working it through:-)
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: My pet theory about Holtz (spoilers for
Benediction) -- Masq, 16:50:41 05/14/02 Tue
It doesn't have to be poison, just some non-violent way of
offing yourself that takes a while to kick in so he can
carry out his plan.
Wonder what would have happened if Justine hadn't come
along....
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: My pet theory about Holtz (spoilers for
Benediction) -- Cydney, 19:19:24 05/14/02 Tue
But why would Justine agree to kill Holtz? She admitted
previously that she trusted the wrong man - meaning she
should have trusted Wesley, not Holtz and Angel had just
saved her life! Is she going to let Connor believe that
Angel killed Holtz? Or will she come clean?
[> [> [> [> [>
No Need-- -- SingedCat, 06:33:14 05/15/02
Wed
Any ER doctore (or puncture victim) can tell you, puncture
wounds don't bleed much--unless they hit arteries. So
Justing stabbed him with the pick, missing the carotid and
killing him by hitting the brain or the spine, rather than
draining the blood out of him.
What, Connor was going to stay and do an autopsy?
OT to mole,
Darby, dH, Ixchel and others re Gould -- Sophist,
12:58:57 05/14/02 Tue
Those who read faster than I do have written reviews. The
April 16 issue of Science (ack! I'm really falling
behind in my reading thanks to him) has one, as does the
newsstand copy of New York Review of Books.
[>
thanks and a really shameless plug -- matching
mole, 13:56:32 05/14/02 Tue
I read a review in the NY Times (online) a month or so ago.
It was by Mark Ridley, a former student of Richard Dawkins
and was not very positive as you might expect. I'll look up
the Science review today.
And (extraordinarily OT) if anyone reads Discover magazine
there is a very tiny blurb about some of my wife's guppy
research in it.
[> [>
Thanks, Sophist! And matching mole... -- Ixchel,
15:10:56 05/14/02 Tue
Is Mark Ridley the one who wrote The Red Queen? I have to
confess to liking that book (it presented some ideas in a
way that I found easy to think about). If Dawkins doesn't
make very much sense to me, but I like Ridley's book, am I
_very_ confused about evolution? Usually Gould seems very
sensible (to me), except when he uses sports information to
explain a concept (what I know about sports would fit in a
thimble).
Congratulations to your wife. Is her research concerning
the colors of guppies and how the color relates to their
environment? The reason I ask is I have a vague memory of
reading about this recently.
Ixchel
[> [> [>
Matt Ridley wrote "The Red Queen." Confused
yet? -- d'Herblay, 15:32:24 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [> [>
Thanks, d'Herblay! Actually less confused now. :)
-- Ixchel, 15:46:54 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [>
Guppies (incredibly OT) -- matching mole,
21:25:51 05/14/02 Tue
That particular article has to do with the preference of
female guppies for the color orange which is a common
component of male coloration and also the color of a fruit
which commonly falls into streams and is fed upon by the
fish.
[> [> [> [>
Interesting, I'll have to read that. :) -- Ixchel,
21:35:58 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [> [>
Re: Guppies (incredibly OT) -- Darby, 07:51:06
05/15/02 Wed
I just read the article this morning (Discover's my
current breakfast reading and I was two pages from the
article when you posted, strangely enough) and I'm now
planning on swiping the info for when I teach about
evolution and behavior releasers. Pass my thanks along to
your wife.
I also ran into the info somewhere else in the last week,
but I can't for the life of me remember where - could it
have been obliquely referenced in a Natural History
article?
[> [> [> [> [>
It was in Science -- matching mole, 08:27:16
05/15/02 Wed
in the News and Views section a few weeks ago - which is
kind of ironic as Science rejected the original paper.
[> [>
Guppies -- Sophist, 09:00:16 05/15/02 Wed
I did see that mole, and I wondered about it when you
mentioned her research recently. Also, the current issue of
Science (I caught up yesterday) has letters regarding
guppy research from previous articles. Any references to
your wife in them?
[> [> [>
Re: Guppies -- matching mole, 09:52:26 05/15/02
Wed
The letters are some criticism of the original paper (or
rather the News and Views summary of it) and a response by
Kim (my wife) and her co-authors. Haven't read actually
read them myself but she did mention to me that it had just
appeared. I think her major collaborator was probably the
one who did the actual writing in this case. Incidentally
they are both avid BtVS fans.
[> [> [> [>
I knew the SG would make the world safe for
Guppies. -- Sophist, 12:55:00 05/15/02 Wed
Blooper found in
tonight's episode -- The Last Jack, 17:55:34 05/14/02
Tue
Okay, exactly how did Spike, a vampire, make it out of the
United States, cross the atlantic, arrive on another
contient, and trek to an African tibe's sacred place (I am
assuming) all in one day?
[>
IITS (It's In The Script) -- Earl Allison,
18:15:52 05/14/02 Tue
The newsgroups have been all over this for at least a week -
- for the same reason. There is NO way, shy of
teleportation, that Spike can have made it to Africa (if
indeed it IS Africa) in the space of time the episodes
allowed.
On another note, if Spike knew of this demon already, why in
blue Hades did he not get the chip removed in Season Four?
Maybe we'll get some reason, but I find it EXTREMELY hard to
swallow that NOW Spike is desperate enough, and wasn't
before ...
Take it and run.
[> [>
Maybe that scene was a flash-forward -- RichardX1,
18:39:55 05/14/02 Tue
Or maybe, not needing the creature comforts of passenger
transport, Spike had himself FedEx'ed to the nearest
deliverable area on the continent.
Seriously, there is the occasional advantage to not needing
to breathe. Just call a shipping company that'll come to
your house, seal yourself in a box, and make sure they have
instructions that include indicating when you've arrived and
the sun's gone down. Maybe demon society even has a
company/guild/whatever kind of group like that.
Or maybe he just paid a teleporter. Directly or indirectly,
money can get you a lot. Especially in a fantasy
universe.
[> [> [>
Dramatic Unity breaking -tiny Villains spoiler --
Cleanthes,
19:55:56 05/14/02 Tue
Nothing about the scene demanded that it be coincident with
what was happening in Sunnydale. Spike left, some hours
past, Tara was shot. What Spike's up to in whatever place
he's gone needs to be shown where the dramatic flow allows,
not needfully when it happens in some forced chronology.
So, yeah, it was a flash-forward. Why the heck not? It's
not as if the Aristotle Inquisition is gonna show up and
haul ME off to a star chamber.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Dramatic Unity breaking -tiny Villains spoiler
-- RichardX1,
20:14:22 05/14/02 Tue
"NOBODY expects the Aristotle Inquisition!"
Sorry. Somebody had to say it, and the surviving members of
the Trio are busy doing time and waiting for unholy
judgement to arrive.
On that note, what was that "face" Willow was arguing with
at the beginning? Osiris himself? Whatever it was, I
assume it had a power level just this side of Michael. And
what happened when Willow screamed at it? Did it just say
to itself, "screw this, I'm outta here," or did she actually
knock it back into its own dimension? If the latter, then I
gotta say Willow's probably a Glory-level threat.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Dramatic Unity breaking - Villains spoiler --
Traveler, 20:28:19 05/14/02 Tue
"Willow's probably a Glory-level threat."
I think Glory would be pissing herself about now. Willow's
messing around with reality for Pete's sake. I have
no idea how ME is going to pull us out of this one.
[> [>
Spike found out from Clem... -- Dariel, 20:17:06
05/14/02 Tue
At the end of Seeing Red, Clem told Spike about "a kooky
shaman" who had, I believe, done a resurrection spell on
someone Clem knew. Must be the same shaman/demon guy. Clem
said the resurrectee had come out pretty wacky. So who knows
what the shaman will do with Spike!
[>
it can be done -- gds, 18:37:59 05/14/02 Tue
With the right plane schedules (and perhaps a charter to get
to somewhere really ouy of the way) it can be done. I
almost did something similar once, and I could have gone
further if I had tried. And my connections were FAR from
optimal. A long haul non-stop jet flight really makes a
difference.
[> [>
Why do you think...? -- Hauptman, 18:45:35
05/14/02 Tue
I would just like to ask why anyone thinks it was Africa
anyway?
[> [> [>
Re: Why do you think...? -- shiver, 19:44:29
05/14/02 Tue
Well, the tree they showed in the opening clip, is one of
those trees you find on the African savannah. I forget what
it's called. But it's on the Discovery Channel all the
time.
Also, Spike probably just turned into a bat, and flew there.
Probably had Dracula come back from Season 5, and show him
how.
[> [> [>
Re: Why do you think...? -- matching mole,
07:11:21 05/15/02 Wed
The initial shot of Acacia tortilis, a tree with a very
distinctive shape that is abundant in east Africa.
[> [> [>
Re: Why do you think...? -- Talia, 08:28:16
05/15/02 Wed
In addition to the acacias, Spike passed a person in African
tribal dress before entering the cave.
On a slightly different note, did anyone else think the
demon-thingy Spike was talking to looked kind of like an
evil Ent? (Ent=Tolkien's tree-lookalike people). Maybe
that was just me and my tv picture quality being less than
ideal last night.
[>
Re: Blooper found in tonight's episode -- luvthistle1,
20:50:57 05/14/02 Tue
I wonder that also. I know he can't drive his tinted car
to
Africa. If he take a plane , he would have to make sure he
leave at night and arrive there at night. Hide below deck on
someone boat , maybe? also, where did he get the money to
travel? is there some more demon eggs that we do not know
about?
[> [>
Like I said in another branch of this thread... --
RichardX1,
21:07:49 05/14/02 Tue
He could easily hide from the sun: he could lock himself in
a box and be shipped as a parcel (not like he has to worry
about suffocation and temperature extremes, you know?)
[> [> [>
Perils of mailing yourself -- matching mole,
09:44:31 05/15/02 Wed
Having himself shipped is probably the only way Spike could
go somewhere quickly , especially if he has to cross
international borders (I doubt he has a valid passport and
going to many places in the world would require him to get a
visa). That's basically how Dracula did it after all and he
had his gypsy minions along to make sure nothing untoward
happened to the package.
In this security conscious age it somes unlikely that a
package large enough to hold even the most svelte of
vampires would be likely to escape fairly detailed scrutiny
if it was shipped overseas. Spike would be taking a big
risk.
For more details on possible hazards of mailing yourself
listen to 'The Gift' by the Velvet Underground from the
White Light White Heat LP/CD. It's very amusing in a
gruesome and cynical way.
WHAT THE For-
Unlawful-Carnal-Knowledge!!!!!????? (Spoilers for whatever
tonight's ep was called) -- RichardX1,
18:22:29 05/14/02 Tue
"Bored now"? "Bored now"? "Bored
now"!!!???
Okay, Willow is officially lost. No, make that Lost
with a capital "L". She has crossed the line, and she isn't
coming back. If there's gonna be a season 7, it'll be
without Willow. And really, with the big three shattered,
they'd just fall apart anyway.
But what really concerns me is what she meant by "One
down..." How many "to go"? Two (Andrew and Jonathan)? A
hundred? SIX BILLION, PERHAPS?
[>
Spoilers for "Villains", technically, I
guess -- RichardX1,
18:32:36 05/14/02 Tue
And the next episode title in the index gives a clue to
Willow's meaning of "One down..." But, assuming the remains
of the Scoobies can't stop her, will she be able to stop at
two?
Excuse me for going Trio on the group, but was Anakin able
to stop with one Sandpeople tribe?
(and before you get on me for spoiling "Attack of the
Clones", the plot's been out in novel, comic, and children's
storybook format for two weeks now so shut up)
[> [>
Upset about recent developments, are ya? :) --
SingedCat, 18:37:24 05/14/02 Tue
I have to quote the guy in the M&M commercial, that's all I
can do:
That was just disturbing.
[> [> [>
"That was just disturbing" -- RichardX1,
18:44:22 05/14/02 Tue
What, tonight's ep or my reaction to it?
[> [> [> [>
The ep-- the reaction was natural, and mirror-amusing.
:) -- SingedCat, 06:23:52 05/15/02 Wed
[> [> [>
"That was just disturbing" -- MaeveRigan,
08:26:47 05/15/02 Wed
I think what you mean is: "This just can't get more
disturbing," as Willow said to VampWillow in
"Doppelgangland."
Oh, how I miss VampWillow. She was a barrel of laughs,
compared to DarkMagicWillow.
[> [>
Spoilers for Star Wars, Attack of The Clones above
-- Traveler, 19:47:06 05/14/02 Tue
Spoiler warnings are useful ANYTIME you think people might
not have seen the movie/show you were talking about. I
haven't read the sources you cited nor was I planning to
until I had seen the movie.
[> [> [>
Re: Spoilers for Star Wars, Attack of The Clones
above -- RichardX1,
20:07:09 05/14/02 Tue
Oh, please. LucasFilm is going out of its way to spoil the
movie itself.
[> [> [> [>
So what? -- Traveler, 20:18:44 05/14/02 Tue
I don't want to be spoiled by Lucas either, so I've been
mostly staying away from Star Wars related articles. Besides
which, you went to all the bother of saying "I didn't write
'spoiler' in the header, because..." Wouldn't it have been
easier and more useful to just write it in the header? I
mean, is it really so difficult and time consuming for you
to do this? Maybe I'm the only person on the board who cares
about off topic spoilers for movies, but even if that's
true, then I'm asking you person to person, please don't do
it.
[> [> [> [> [>
I second this... I'd prefer to be surprised by AotC,
just as I prefer it for BtVS & AtS. -- Solitude1056,
20:26:44 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> [>
My apologies (speculations not spoilers in this
post) -- RichardX1,
20:32:41 05/14/02 Tue
Like I care if I get banned from posting... anyone can tell
the show's ending this year.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Don't care if you get banned from posting? And the
show isn't ending this year, Spoiler-demon... --
OtherEric, 21:29:27 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: And the show isn't ending this year, Spoiler-
demon... -- RichardX1,
21:41:23 05/14/02 Tue
Then I'll gather all the dark magicks that I can to torture
and destroy AOHell for taking so long to connect and making
me so pissed off that I didn't care what I said.
(... you know, if I don't get approached by a lawyer
regarding anything I posted tonight, It'll be proof that God
exists)
[> [> [> [>
Re: Spoilers for Star Wars, Attack of The Clones
above -- Belladonna, 20:25:01 05/14/02 Tue
It's terribly inconsiderate to assume that because you've
been spoiled on the plot that others don't mind it. It's
not difficult to say spoiler. If you have to defend your
actions in your own post, then maybe you shouldn't do
it!
[> [>
Re: Spoilers -- Robert, 22:24:41 05/14/02
Tue
>> "(and before you get on me for spoiling "Attack of the
Clones", the plot's been out in novel, comic, and children's
storybook format for two weeks now so shut up)"
No ... you shut up! I haven't seen the movie yet and I don't
intend to read the novel or comics. Your spoiler was a
total cheap shot and completely uncalled for. This board is
constructed upon the trust that people will mark their
spoilers. Should I now avoid reading anything by RichardX1,
as protection against future spoiling?
[>
Re: WHAT THE For-Unlawful-Carnal-Knowledge!!!!!?????
(Spoilers for whatever tonight's ep was called) --
ahira, 18:36:47 05/14/02 Tue
Ummm, yeah. "Bored Now" practically knocked me out of my
chair. In that cold vampwillow voice with no expression, I
just sat there for a bit and not sure if I even
breathed.
Classically, one down, two to go. So yeah, on the surface a
reference to the rest of the troika. But, jacked up as
Willow is right now, not sure if the 6 billion might be an
exaggeration.....
(sets about working on his time alteration spell....don't
wanna wait a whole week...)
[> [>
Re: WHAT THE For-Unlawful-Carnal-Knowledge!!!!!?????
(Spoilers for whatever tonight's ep was called) --
Doriander, 19:28:58 05/14/02 Tue
Thoughts off the bat.
To be honest, I was not moved until the final act. The
episode was virtually a cat and mouse game. I really should
stop watching the previews because I knew that Willow would
catch up to Warren, and it didn't happen until the final
act. The preview spoiled any suspense.
So, "Bored now." actually elicited a "HA!" from me. It's
when I caught on to Willow's righteous vengeance vibe. Gotta
say, her abrupt skinning of Warren absolutely THREW me. I
hadn't anticipated anything THAT disturbing. That was, WOW.
And to think that this week I'd just been scanning through
images of works by Francis Bacon.
Other stuff. I was basking in Clem love last week and had
this scenario in my head, of Dawn coming to Spike's crypt
finding Clem there, and they hang out. I'm amused that it
was actualized. Another scenario forming right now, buying
into Spike will come back as human speculation (here's
hoping that won't happen). Final act of the finale, Giles
arrives at his flat, finding Spike in his living room,
wonders how he got in without the invite. I miss Giles.
I giggle everytime Warren brags about his uh, ahem,
"organization." The Trio. "Oh come on," indeed. The
fans came up with cooler names than that: Legion of
Dorkness, The Troika, etc.
Some things that do not ring true. Buffy allowing Dawn to
stay at Spike's. Now I know we could chalk it up to her
concern for Dawn's state of mind, finding her huddled in the
corner watching over Tara's dead body. She probably couldn't
take the news that her other caretaker tried to rape her
sister the previous night. Still, I'm totally siding with
Xander on that one. Buffy shouldn't take a chance with
Spike. Surely she could let Dawn stay elsewhere, like that
place uttered so often, Janice's. So when they actually
went, and dear Buff called for him, even asked when he'll be
back, it elicited a "tsk, tsk, tsk" from me.
Is it just me or does Africa look so much like that beach in
"Go Fish"? Only populated with tents, tourists and one
native. And that exotic cave, look so much like Adam's
intricate lair? Only painted with caemen drawings? (Sigh,
budget). Because like the others, I'm wondering how Spike
got to Africa that fast.
Looking forward to next week's showdown.
[> [> [>
Re: WHAT THE For-Unlawful-Carnal-Knowledge!!!!!?????
(Spoilers for whatever tonight's ep was called) --
clg0107, 08:28:45 05/15/02 Wed
>>Still, I'm totally siding with Xander on that one. Buffy
shouldn't take a chance with Spike. Surely she could let
>>Dawn stay elsewhere, like that place uttered so often,
Janice's. So when they actually went, and dear Buff called
>>for him, even asked when he'll be back, it elicited a
"tsk, tsk, tsk" from me.
I didn't find it that illogical. It avoided/ended an
argument to give Dawn her own way in her second option,
since B. wasn't about to let her come with.
And the fact is that whatever else has happened, Buffy knows
that 1) he can't physically harm Dawn and, more
significantly 2) he wouldn't. Which means that in her heart
of hearts, she's still doesn't think and feel just one way
about Spike. She's justifiably angry about what happended
between the two of them, but she can still trust him in
certain ways, and under particular circumstances.
And, it probably gave her pause that when he left CLEARLY
upset, he was so upset that he kept going.
~clg0107
[>
Go Willow! Go Willow! It's your birthday... (Spoilers
Villains, trailer for next week) -- Traveler,
19:38:27 05/14/02 Tue
I have to say, I LOVE evil Willow. None of this namby pamby
"we gotta do the right thing" hero crap that Buffy was
spouting off. No, Willow just rips off his skin! I admit
that I was shocked and horrified at the time, but in
retrospect, damn that was just cool. The special effects
sure have improved, haven't they? Wow. I'm not too crazy
about her going up against Buffy next week. Not sure how
Buffy could possibly win, for that matter. But eh, I guess
time will tell.
Also, notice how Willow was paralleling Spike? Both got cast
in black and white (as has been mentioned before), and both
seem to have completely turned their back on
redemption/humanity.
There's a lot more to talk about with this episode, but for
now, let me repeat myself: wow.
[>
Re: The WHAT THE post w/ answers [for
"Villains"] and a whole lot more ... -- Mike
J, 20:43:23 05/14/02 Tue
Like the others said, "...Two to go" [which is also the
title of Part One of the season finale Two Parter (the other
title being "Grave")]. As for Willow being "Lost," I
wouldn't say that. Yes, she went over the edge and killed
Warren [in one of the more grotesque, but nonetheless cool,
fashions I've seen in a while] ... but that doesn't mean her
friends will give up on her [not that anyone said they
would].
Faith [whose actions in Season 3 are most likely influencing
Buffy's drive to stop Willow before it gets too late] was
approached [mostly by Buffy] on more than one occasion to
stop her from following a dark path in regard to her
accidental murder. And even though accidental, it was not
justified. One could say Warren's murder was justified
considering he killed Tara and attempted to kill Buffy.
[Which is a different discussion I continue down below ... :-
)]Suffice it to say, the Scooby Gang [whatever's left of
them after this season] will do their best to help Willow
... hopefully. [Finished with original answers here]
Now onto the "Right and Wrong" debate, figure I might as
well get this out of my system ... :-) Bear with me, its all
convoluted and somewhat unconnected at times, but it all
comes together [hopefully] in the end ... sort of like
Season Six!
A topic which has been hinted at in the past [comments such
as Buffy's in Season Three's "Gingerbread" - "Okay. Then
while you're looking for the meaning of that symbol thingy,
could you also find a loophole in that 'Slayers don't kill
people' rule?"] is the difference between the "laws which
govern humanity and demons (as a multi-faceted species, I
guess, although I suppose its a no-no to refer to them in
scientific terms)." Humanity, in its thousands upon
thousands of years of existence, has evolved to have a
sophisticated set of laws which rule over many aspects of
life [depending on what part of the globe you reside in].
Killing, murder, etc. is planetarily frowned upon ... there
are laws set up in almost every scenario to deal with such
horrid crimes [and if said laws are not able to compete with
the gray areas revolving around said crimes, then that is
taken to court to figure out what exactly to do]. Humanity
[and in this case the United States of America, as the
murder(s) this little rant of mine is focused on took place
within that nation] has the right to deal with the murderer
[in this case, Warren] by their own guidelines and laws. Due
process may be a *****, but there's a reason for it.
The Scooby Gang fights evil, have done so [together] since
their sophmore year in Sunnydale High School. However, the
evil they fight is [usually] always tied into the mystical.
Buffy, the current Vampire Slayer, slays vampires, demons,
etc. while battling any human forces which have come under
their influence, but never ever bringing herself to kill any
humans [such as Ethan Rayne, although he is usually in
"control" of the mystical forces (Speaking of which, I wish
Rayne would show up again somewhere ... he was always a FUN
villain, and now that the Initiative is up & gone, maybe he
should break out or something? Who knows)] involved. If
humans [such as members of the Knights of Byzantium during
"Spiral," there is an off chance one or two might have been
fatally wounded during the entire running away-fight scene]
are killed, it is unintentional [and most likely not a
direct result of Buffy's action].
The Watcher's Council [as insinuated from the aforementioned
Buffy comment from "Gingerbread"] have laid out guidelines
about not killing humans, most likely from past experiences
[as suggested by Giles in Season Three's "Consequences"].
Buffy has had no trouble following them ... even when Glory
reverted back to Ben, she could not kill him. She is, as
Giles said, a true hero. Human heroes tend to regard human
life as sacred ... the demons, of course, are not as such
... they're, after all, here to take away humanity's birth-
home. Fear of killing someone has shaken the Scoobies
before, such as with Buffy in regard to the Mayor's aide in
"Bad Girls" & "Consequences" or with Oz in regard to
innocents killed by something feral in "Beauty and the
Beasts." Only under extreme circumstances could any of them
bring themselves to consider killing humans as an option
[Buffy's comment in "Gingerbread" was due to the trauma
brought upon her mom upon discovering the murdered [ghosts]
children; Giles killing Ben in order to stop Glory once &
for all (He was justified, and he had to be "mature" about
this. The writers made it easier to accept it with Ben
betraying Dawn's trust and his selfiousness); Xander
considered killing Ben an option, but of course was
disgusted with himself about it].
Extreme [and often adverse] circumstances do indeed seem to
influence humans in regard to killing in the Buffyverse
[that often applies to our universe as well] along with
other things [demons, magic, etc.]. Warren was driven by his
developing sociopathic tendencies, combined with frustration
and a whole bunch of things psychologists would love to go
over for hours, but I don't have the time. :-) He thought
the solution to his problems would be to kill Buffy ...
after all, that "solved" Katrina, right? Apparently, he was
wrong ... his attempt [and unfortunate (and unintentional)
success with Tara] has only landed him in deeper trouble.
It is said that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely." While the good of humanity has been shown time
and again, in the Buffyverse, we can sometimes just be so
damn corruptable [ok, and in our universe too ...]. The Trio
were corrupted by their greed & the such. The "absolute
power corruption" apparently hits Willow full on in the two-
hour/part season finale ["Two to Go" & "Grave"] as seen in
the trailer for next week. As said during the entire
Ascension story arc during Season Three in regard to Faith,
killing gives one the feeling of being more powerful than
they were ... it is like a drug, and can easily corrupt &
ruin a person [one of the main reasons Buffy fears for
Willow's actions - "I won't let Willow destroy herself"].
Willow, one of the most gentle & caring [and loved]
characters on the show, has been shattered by the murder of
her love. In hopes of doing what she did for Buffy, she
turned to magic to try and bring Tara back ... but failed.
Magic and science do not interact in the Buffyverse ...
bringing back someone killed by natural means [in perfect
condition] isn't a possible task. Already having started
back into magic, Willow goes and pulls out the big guns as
she did for Glory [although they were needed then, not now
... even with Warren's little machine / magic toys] ...
acquiring all the black arts she needs for vengeance. Driven
by horror / sadness / hate / etc., Willow set out ... now
being influenced by both her emotions [because of adverse
extreme conditions] and the "dark forces."
Killing occurs for various reasons. In the case of Willow,
she murders Warren in vengeance ... to "fill" the gap in her
heart caused by Tara's passing with satisfaction after
dealing with her murderer. However, even with Warren now
gone, she isn't satisfied. Her thirst for vengeance is not
quenched ... the gap remains. She intends to go after the
other members of the Trio, who in some twisted form of logic
formed by Willow's traumatized mind, are just as guilty as
Warren for Tara's murder - "One down ... Two to go." Any
further on that part will result in speculation from me ...
and I think we'll just have to wait and see how Willow's
thirst for vengeance develops into ultimate power
corruption.
Back into the debate, is Willow justified in her actions? If
Warren were simply some vampire who sucked Tara dry; or some
demon who puled some fatal magic mojo, etc. then by the
Buffyverse rules of game, yes, she would be. But in going
with what Osirus [or what I'm assuming to be Osirus, from
"Villains"] said, there are rules to the universe ... Tara
could not get resurrected like Buffy did because she was not
killed by unnatural / supernatural / mystical means, she was
killed by human means ... the gun. As such, the rules that
apply to supernatural villains do not apply here ...
humanity's rules and laws do. Warren should be brought to
justice for his crimes, and if needed, sentenced to death
[or maybe to life as someone's buttmonkey]. We can never say
if Willow would have been satisfied by that ending, she took
it in her own hands to deal with him [she wouldn't even let
Anya, a vengeance demon, help her out].
With Warren dead, Willow has already started onto the dark
path that others have unfortunatly tread before, such as
Faith. Faith was brought back from the brink by Angel & his
group, and has set herself on the path to redemption. Buffy
[justifiably] fears that if Willow starts, now overly
influenced by her magic, she may never stop ... her
murderous rampage may lead to a greater crisis ... which may
lead to a showdown between the two best friends [I believe
we'll be seeing that in "Two to Go" / "Grave"].
So in closing, what makes killing humans different than
demons for the Scooby Gang? The belief that humanity has the
chance to redeem themselves; in one fashion or another
through the justice handed out. Demons have no such sense of
remorse, or chance of redemption ... it is beyond their
understanding, beyond their being. They may mimick it in
their own fashions [such as more recent demons such as Clem]
through living amongst the humans for so long, but they
truly do not have the compacity for it within themselves.
Angel is excluded from this because of his soul, of course.
Buffy and the Scooby Gang are heroes in their own right
because they will take down the demons, but they have limits
to what they do ... they will not take human lives, no
matter how "evil" they may be. Otherwise they might just
turn out to be as bad as the demons they slay every week ...
and hopefully, they can stop Willow from going down this
dark path into the abyss.
Hope that was educational and not too convoluted. :-)
Mike J.
[> [>
dubdub, the evil ellipses have been overcome... by the
evil brackets! -- The Second Evil, 21:02:35 05/14/02
Tue
Seriously, Mike, excellent post - but man, I'm still not
sure if you're quoting yourself with extra passages &
inserted (via square brackets) commentary, or if it's just
your style. Dubdub, one of our board saints, is Queen of the
Evil Ellipse (along with a few other of her minions), but I
think she may've met her match now that we've got a King of
the Evil Brackets. Welcome!
As for your post, I'm still processing myself... Plan to
watch it again tomorrow & see if I get any insight - right
now I'm just digesting. ;-)
[> [> [>
And I am the Dark Lord of the HTML effects! -- RichardX1,
21:05:34 05/14/02 Tue
[> [> [>
Re: I concede! -- dubdub ;o), 10:57:31 05/15/02
Wed
Cordy as Mary Sue
(Spoilers for Benediction) -- Scroll, 19:36:40
05/14/02 Tue
I'm sure the topic of Cordelia as a Mary Sue has been done
to death, but "Benediction" really got me hot under the
collar and I need to vent. Not that I didn't love the
episode, because I did... Holtz was vulnerable even in his
evilness, Angel and Connor sparring in the alley was a
clever and touching scene, Wes pulling Angel-type
disappearing acts, Groo's understated sorrow... Even Gunn
and Fred!
But Cordelia! I don't mind CC as an actor, though she could
use work on emoting with more subtlety; she's terrific as
bitchy Cordy or even gung-ho Cordy. But when the writers try
to make her psychic and empathic and a
healer/nurturer/mother-figure that can apparently *purify*
Connor of all Quortoth-y taint with the mere touch of her
hand, I can't help but gag.
I know ME is trying to convince fans that Cordy is worthy of
cutting the Buffy/Angel ideal. I know that Angel should be
allowed to move on from Buffy. It's perfectly realistic for
two people in the work place to grow closer and fall in
love. But honestly, it feels forced. It's logical for
Angel to gradually realise his brotherly love for Cordy
isn't quite so brotherly, and Cordy to realise that Angel as
her first priority isn't all about work. And with that said,
I realise I'm not as against C/A as I thought I was.
But come on people! What's with the glowy skin and psychic
powers! This isn't "Touched By an Angel" here! I almost
would've preferred Cordy to get horns and a tail! That at
least would've been a true sacrifice, instead of these god-
like powers that just keep making Cordy less human. (And
really, horns and tail wouldn't have made her less human,
not the way her Roma Downey halo is doing).
Anyone else tired of Cordy's Mary Sue-ness? Of course, if
you like her that way, please let me know. (But I still
loved the episode as a whole, this is turning out to be a
fascinating season ender).
[>
I feel the same way -- matching mole, 21:05:19
05/14/02 Tue
I guess, although I don't have the vaguest idea who Mary Sue
is. Lower down the board I basically complained about the
same thing. Cordelia has always been a great character
because she so successfully carried off a group of really
contrary personality traits. Hopefully this Cordelia the
saintly therapist is only a temporary phase.
[> [>
Definition of Mary Sue -- The Last Jack,
22:08:17 05/14/02 Tue
Mary Sue is a term that comes from fan fiction. It is used
to describe a character created by the author who is too
good to be true. For example, they have a genius level
intelligence and are as good a fighter as the slayer And are
a great musician AND extremely handsome/beautiful etc.
Basically, the author makes a Golden age Superhero character
with no flaws who can do almost anything. Cool in a way, but
ultimately very boring. Me, I like my heroes with flaws and
weaknesses. Makes them more human ;)
[> [>
Mary Sue -- DaveW, 22:12:21 05/14/02 Tue
I'm sure others could explain it better, but basically "Mary
Sue" is writer jargon for a type of character who can do
anything. My impression is that the "Mary Sue" character is
typically other than the actual hero of the story; I don't
watch Angel, but it sounds like CC is turning into something
of a Mary Sue. This character type crops up in a lot of B-
grade fanfic as the person who arrives to help the
hero/heroine out of a huge jam and then either leaves town
with the protagonist's everlasting gratitude or gets
martyred. And yes, I've written at least one story with a
Mary Sue character in it. Corrections welcome...
[>
Re: Cordy as Mary Sue (Spoilers for Benediction) --
Robert, 22:16:28 05/14/02 Tue
>> "But come on people! What's with the glowy skin and
psychic powers! This isn't "Touched By an Angel" here!"
Maybe it is! Everyone assumed that Cordelia became a demon,
because she was told that she would become a demon. Since
she was "demonized" by the powers-that-be, she is presumably
working directly for them. How is this different from an
angel?
[> [>
Re: Cordy as Mary Sue (Spoilers for Benediction) --
DEN, 23:05:48 05/14/02 Tue
Can't help adding, as a fanfic consumer with no writing
ability, a Mary-Sue is often the fic author's alter ego.
[> [>
Ouch. Good Point. But Ouch. -- SingedCat,
08:36:41 05/15/02 Wed
[>
Deus Ex Machina ... (potential future spoilers) --
Earl Allison,
02:17:14 05/15/02 Wed
That's all I could think after Cordelia did away with the
slug-creatures from three weeks ago, and again Monday night
when she cave Connor/Stephen a "soul colonic."
I was so worried that she would become a plot device,
something to fix any problem, and it looks that way now.
Which might be why it sounds like Cordelia is being called
away in the Season Finale -- like Willow, she's becoming too
powerful and too convenient to the story.
Take it and run.
[>
Couldn't agree more -- have thought the same thing
myself -- Anne, 07:19:14 05/15/02 Wed
[>
On a brighter/darker note (totally unspoiled
speculation) -- matching mole, 08:49:54 05/15/02
Wed
It seems that Cordelia's new saintliness has come at a cost
of self awareness and perceptiveness of those around her.
She has acted as Angel's confidant and counsel ever since
her return from vacation but how useful has she been. All
I've seen/heard are a few platitudes and sympathetic looks.
Nice to get certainly but probably a lot less helpful to
Angel and the rest of them (including herself) than the
straight to the point Cordy of old. My prediction is that
this is going to blindside her big time. And then all
things Cordelia will become interesting again and I'll be
happy.
Has it occurred to anyone else that Cordelia's mysterious
powers seem ideally suited to stopping Willow in her tracks?
I know it won't happen but that would be a delicious piece
of irony if there was Willow/Cordelia fracas/crossover.
[>
My $.02 on Cordy & Angel -- SingedCat, 08:52:31
05/15/02 Wed
"I know ME is trying to convince fans that Cordy is worthy
of cutting the Buffy/Angel ideal. I know that Angel should
be allowed to move on from Buffy. It's perfectly realistic
for two people in the work place to grow closer and fall in
love. But honestly, it feels forced. "
It feels worse than that to me. I'm sorry to not go where
the writers want to, but they're just not right for each
other. I'm *not* holding on to the Buffy/Angel ideal; Joss
is right, moving on is good. But Cordy & Angel have no
chemistry to me, nor do they possess naturally compatible
temperments IMHO.
Frankly, considering who they've grown into --she powerful &
assertive yet compassionate, he compassionate yet confident
& adept -- she would do better with Wesley. This idea is
not based on their former, and rightly ill-fated
infatuation, but on what I feel are their complimentary
qualities. It's been my experience that women capable of
standing up for themselves are often paired with men who are
sensitive and insightful. Or, to put it the way I didn't
want to, women who are in touch with their masculine side
often relate to men in touch with the feminine.
That was more like $0.05-- anybody got change? :)
[> [>
Re: My $.02 on Cordy & Angel -- clg0107,
09:17:04 05/15/02 Wed
I'll take that offer --
Regarding the plausibility of a relationship...how many of
us have been involved in an intense male-female friendship
wherein the issue NEVER arose as to one or both parties
wanting more, or at least thinking about whether their
feelings for the other were more than friendly.
It's pretty common. Even in cases where the personality
types might not seem/be suited to one another or whatever.
Sooner or later, it usually happens that the issue of "more
than friends" arises. In my life, it was always a one-sided
thing or didn't work out and, in one case, the attempt did
destroy the friendship (indirectly). But, there are folks I
know who are now happily married out of a "friendship".
That is not to say that I detect great
romantic/sexual/whatever chemistry between the two of them
on a regular basis (like is generated between Sarah Michelle
Gellar and James Marsters), BUT, the scenes between them in
WitW worked. At least, my temp rose a bit along with
theirs. So, the potential is there, at least.
Give it a chance. Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.
Joss and the writers are cleverer than I am, by far, so I'll
see how they undertake it and judge from there!
Cheers!
~clg0107
My god! I finally
get it? (spoilers) -- The Last Jack, 19:49:02
05/14/02 Tue
"Oh, grow up." That is what Joss has said this season is
about, but I never got it. I kept wondering where the big
bad was, where the story arcs would come into place. Well,
after seeing tonight's episode, I finally got it, it finally
all made sense. Life is the big bad! Or rather, that part of
life we all have to face sometime. After college, after we
move out on our own, after we finally become adults, we
learn just how hard and just how brutal life can be. I can't
speak for everyone, but for myself, the first 23 years of my
life where spent in a world that revolved around school, my
social life, my family, and my carefree attitude. Now,
however, a year after I went out on my own, I realize just
how tough life can be when you don't have the safety nets
that family and school provides you.
So that's it then. Life is what its all about; life after
childhood and and school, and all the hell that can happen
to you when you are finally on your own. Willow, while
scarey and disturbing now, is not the big bad, she is merely
a by product of the big bad, a side effect of a
particularlly rough year given form. She is an agent, not
the master.
Anyway, that is my 2 cents
Jack
[>
Re: My god! I finally get it? (spoilers) -- RichardX1,
20:05:52 05/14/02 Tue
So, I was right in a post I made a long time ago, and
Angelus' attempts to destroy the world would have actually
been a good thing?
Seriously, I begin to fear for any kids that Joss Whedon
has/may have in the future, if he views the world as this
"rewarding".
"Hey, how do you kill a thread on the Buffy/Angel discussion
board?"
"Easy! Get RichardX1 to post to it!"
[> [>
Disclaimer -- RichardX1,
21:02:54 05/14/02 Tue
Statements in the previous post were not meant as an
accusation against Joss Whedon or anyone in his life. I
hope that he is a happy and well-adjusted person who does
well in his endeavors.
(I've kinda been putting my foot in my mouth tonight--
decided I should cover my ascot)
[> [>
Well, thanks for the criticism anyway -- The Last
Jack, 21:52:18 05/14/02 Tue
[>
Re: My god! I finally get it? (spoilers) -- Soph,
07:38:31 05/15/02 Wed
I “grew up” during the year after my parents moved away from
me. I was in college (on their dollars) at the time and my
parents had never been further away than 100 miles. Then
they moved away – as in 1000 miles away! After that, I had
to learn to fend for myself – solve and handle EVERYTHING!
I had not realized how much that I had depended on my
parents for. So, I actually “grew up” prior to college
graduation (probably a good thing).
Anyway, that said, enjoy your 20’s as this is the time for
you to explore the world, try everything (in a responsible
manner, of course), learn about the world, and find your own
path.
Spike's
conversation with the demon (Villians spoilers and infected
spec) -- darrenK, 20:12:28 05/14/02 Tue
First, does anyone have the transcript from that
conversation?
Before I begin my observations I should say that while I
haven't read any confirmed spoilers about what happens to
Spike in that cave I have read all the spec at the Spoiler
Slayer making my opinion on the Demon in the cave tarnished
by other people's potentially accurate speculation. So if
you are worred about being infected by the aura of that
knowledge, don't read on...
Did anyone else hear two ENTIRELY separate conversations
going on?
Spike was talking about having the chip removed and the
demon was talking back to him about making him "what he once
was."
Well, I have a feeling that having the chip removed and
"becoming what he once was" are TWO entirely separate
things.
What sealed the deal for me was the Demon saying something
about Spike's betrayal of his Demon nature.
I think Spike interpreted this as the betrayal he made by
fighting his fellow demons, but I think the demon was
talking about the betrayal of no longer wanting to be a
demon.
Anyone with that piece of transcript? Any other
opinions?
[>
Re: Spike's conversation with the demon (Villians
spoilers and infected spec) -- RichardX1,
20:25:38 05/14/02 Tue
Yeah, I get the feeling that Spike was asking for removal of
the chip, but the demon (in typical trickster wish-granting
fashion) intentionally misinterpreted Spike's expressed-by-
lack-of-argument-or-clarification desire to be "what he once
was" as "what he was before Drusilla met him".
Be careful not only of what you wish for, but how you wish
for it. A wiser Midas would have asked for the ability to
turn all neither-food-nor-living objects into gold.
"And here we have a post from RichardX1's 'Hyphenation'
period..."
[> [>
Re: Spike's conversation with the demon (Villians
spoilers and infected spec) -- alcibiades, 20:39:11
05/14/02 Tue
Btw, it was a nice book end when Spike's Zeppo went out.
The other side of that bookend was when Buffy shot out his
little lamp/light source in AYW, before she blew up his
crypt.
I suppose since we had that image of the Zeppo lodged near
Buffy's crotch, we are also supposed to think that the lust
has disappeared to be translated back into hatred. Yeah
right.
Anyone got a theory on the cave paintings yet? All I saw is
type big masculine type staking or knifing a smaller female.
Not very subtle, but I'm sure something is there.
[> [> [>
Cave Paintings - mild spoiler potential for
Villians -- Lyonors, 09:48:46 05/15/02 Wed
>>Anyone got a theory on the cave paintings yet? All I saw
is type big masculine type staking or knifing a smaller
female. Not very subtle, but I'm sure something is
there.<<
If my VCR had taped it I would go back and look at the cave
paintings again, but what I thought I saw was a slayer
staking a vamp....
Ly
[> [>
wishing -- skeeve, 08:34:24 05/15/02 Wed
RichardX1: "Be careful not only of what you wish for, but
how you wish for it. A wiser Midas would have asked for the
ability to turn all neither-food-nor-living objects into
gold."
A caution followed by another example of why caution is
necessary. Midas was lucky that his clothes, not to mention
the ground he walked on, didn't turn to gold. The wiser,
but not wise enough, Midas would still have been screwed. A
wise enough Midas wishes for the control necessary for him
to enjoy his power.
[>
Re: Spike's conversation with the demon (Villians
spoilers and infected spec) -- alcibiades, 20:27:09
05/14/02 Tue
Demon: You seek me, vampire?
Spike: You do finger paintings? Nice work.
Demon: Answer me!
Spike: Yeah, I seek you.
Demon:Something about a woman... the slayer.
Spike: Ever since I got this bleedin' chip in my head things
ain't been
right. Everything's gone to hell.
Demon: And you want to return to your former self.
Spike: Yeah......What?!
Demon: Look what she's reduced you to.
Spike: It's this chip.
Demon: You were a legendary dark warrior and you let
yourself be castrated.
And you have the
audacity to crawl in here and demand restoration?
Spike: I'm still a warrior.
Demon: You're a pathetic excuse for a demon.
Spike: I'll show you pathetic. Gimme your best shot.
Demon: You'd never endure the trials required to grant your
request.
Spike: Do your worst. But when I win, I want what I came
here for.......That
bitch is gonna see a
change.
[>
Re: Spike's conversation with the demon (Villians
spoilers and infected spec) -- luvthistle1,
21:16:44 05/14/02 Tue
It did sound like two entirely separate conversations going
on.
Spike plan never goes as he plan them. The way the demon
laugh at the end, seal it for me. How did Spike get to
africa? Did he fly? or take a boat? how did he avoid the
sun?
[> [>
Re: Spike's conversation with the demon (Villians
spoilers and infected spec) -- RichardX1,
21:23:34 05/14/02 Tue
How did Spike get to africa? Did he fly? or take a boat?
how did he avoid the sun?
Covered in another thread below. At least it was as of
12:24 am on 5/15/2002.
[>
Spike=Warren -- Doriander, 21:28:45 05/14/02
Tue
In SR, they're the two that got away. Notice the evil duo
that got caught, Andrew wonders aloud whether Warren would
come back for them: "He wouldn't just take off, would he?"
segues to Spike on the motorbike.
So I was actually more intrigued with Willow's "talk" with
Warren. Because it might as well apply to Spike.
Willow:"She wasn't your first.[...]She wasn't the first girl
you killed."
Katrina[Buffy]:"I should've strangled you in your sleep.
Back when we shared a bed. I should've done the world a
favor. Why Warren[Spike]? You could've just let me go. It
didn't have to be like that. How could you say you love me
and do that to me."(re: Buffy's dream in dead things and AR
in SR)
Willow:"Cause you liked it. You never felt you had the power
with her. Not until you killed her."(Could refer to Buffy.
Or if we could infer from FFL that Spike murdered everyone
in that party William last attended, could refer to
Cecily.)
Warren[Spike]:"Huh, Women! You know you're just like the
rest of them. Mind games."
Willow:"You get off on it. That's why you had a mad on for
the slayer. She was you big O, wasn't she Warren[Spike]?
Willow:"Something isn't it? One tiny piece of metal destroys
everything."(re: Spike chip?)
Willow:"Bored now."(skins Warren)=Spike shedding his
duster?
[> [>
Re: Spike=Warren -- lele, 22:22:04 05/14/02
Tue
Awesome post. I think MN drew a similar parallel in Beauty
and the Beasts(S3) b/n Angel and the guy who was beating his
girlfriend. She was obviously alluding to how easily
buffy's relationship with angel could be construed as
abusive but we don't see buffy as the victim in this episode
b/c of her superhero status and inherent strength. The
moral of not being "love's bitch" is still with us this
season.
I don't think Spike is coming back now. I think whatever
comes back from africa will be fundamentally changed- not
ambiguous and it's not going to please everyone. In other
words I think the final "neuterization" of the "BB" is going
to occur.
[> [> [>
Yes, but it seems way to neat, too easy for ME --
Dariel, 08:13:37 05/15/02 Wed
I don't think Spike is coming back now. I think whatever
comes back from africa will be fundamentally changed- not
ambiguous and it's not going to please everyone. In other
words I think the final "neuterization" of the "BB" is going
to occur.
Maybe. On the other hand, what we're seeing could be a bit
of a fakeout. Meaning, Spike does get the chip out, perhaps
with an extra kick from the shaman/demon (remember, the
"kooky shaman" made Clem's friend/cousin/whatever crazy when
he resurrected him). Spike comes back all grr, gunning for
Buffy, glories in his Big Bad status. And that's when
he gets taken down, humanized.
Maximum pain for Buffy, maximum humiliation for Spike.
Sounds like an ME plan to me!
[>
Re: YES --- Spike's conversation with the demon
(Villians spoilers and infected spec) -- clg0107,
09:33:55 05/15/02 Wed
Okay, darrenK -- I am unspoiled, and even unspec'd. But I
had the same reaction as you:
>>Spike was talking about having the chip removed and the
demon was talking back to him about making him "what he
>>once was."
>>Well, I have a feeling that having the chip removed and
"becoming what he once was" are TWO entirely separate
>>things.
The word "restoration" was also used. I don't remember the
precise context of the conversation, however. But I know
that's not a word that works it's way into too many
conversations in the Buffyverse....
My thoughts -- ME is bound to feed us red herrings. Which
tidbits are those, versus what's really going to happen? I
can't even guess.
The only thing of which I am confident is that what Spike
gets will not be what he expects. That's typical deal-with-
the-devil stuff anyway, and also typical Spike-has-a-nifty-
plan stuff.
But what will it be that he gets but doesn't expect? To be
human again? Then he's Riley, or souled Angel -- a human
who can just get in the way and get hurt. But then, the
other scoobies are human. And one presumes that a human-
again Spike would still carry all of the knowledge and
experiences of his human and vamp existences. Which would
make him not just "some guy". AND, it occurs to me as I
write this, it would be a fascinating book-end to Cordy's
receipt of demon powers.
To get his soul back? Again, handy, but already done. I
think they are talented enough to make it work, but I also
think they are talented enough that they wouldn't want to
repeat themselves so closely.
As usual, though, I can't wait to see what happens. Which
means that, yet again, the storytelling is just what it
should be!!
~clg0107
Willow in
"Villains" (with spoilers, obviously) -- Can I
be Anne?, 20:39:34 05/14/02 Tue
Perhaps, indeed, ME came up with the totally contrived the-
price of-magic-is-it-turns-you-into-a-crackwhore theme for
Willow because A.H. wanted the writers to not make Will so
unlikable. I remember at the beginning of this season when
they were building up to adressing Willow's actual problems:
her profound hubris and increasingly slippery morals. She
supplanted self esteem with magical power because it made
her powerful and she became corrupted by power. Then, all
of a sudden we were faced with "A Very Special BTVS" and the
problem of Willow's corruption was superseded by her
becoming a hapless victim and we hear things for the rest of
the season like the infamous "No spells for 30 days!
In "Villains" she cleverly avoided risking our rejections by
wandering around in a junkie haze as she maimed and killed,
irrespective of the damage she would do. She constantly
postured as Drusilla/VampWillow just so we wouldnever ever
confuse her with pre-junkie, non-evil Willow. The villain
we saw can be shipped off to magic-rehab and when she comes
back, we can love her just the same.
*sigh* for back when I used to plan my nights around this
show. I think ME is seriously jeopordizing their fan base
this season.
[>
Re: Willow in "Villains" (with spoilers,
obviously) -- RichardX1,
20:47:47 05/14/02 Tue
Don't kid yourselves. Willow's not coming back from
this.
[>
I can make some Country Time ("Villians"
spoilers) -- JBone, 20:51:20 05/14/02 Tue
Some very quick initial thoughts. Willow taking on some
power sources without "all" the black magic knowledge when
Tara was dying was very cool. And once she realizes that
Tara is lost, her single mindedness is almost refreshing.
I like the callback to "The Body" with the ambulance showing
up, and following it from their and Xanders POV. It was
kind of nice to see Xander at Buffy's side all throughout
the episode, except for the scene with Clem. And it was
nice to see Buffy remembering the "rules". I thought the
scene with the incarcerated nerds was a waste. I didn't
learn anything new. And Dawn walking in on finding Tara's
body and having the scene "white out" was almost a homage to
"Six Feet Under". I'd give Dawn a break for freaking out or
almost anything except for walking into the house with the
front door wide open, finding Tara dead, and sitting there
for hours. If I was Buffy, after that, I'd be pretty
protective also. But Spike? Buffy seemed relieved that
Clem was there. I wonder why.
I suspected that Anya's status as a vengeance demon would
come into play, but I was a little surprised how. Vengeance
tracking isn't something we've seen before. I saw in the
previews that the Warlock dude was going to be back, and I
was impressed on how they used him. And the stuff about
Spike, well, that doesn't seem to be the least bit important
right now.
Finally, Warren, what a fucking creep. He did a credible
job of keeping alive until the final scene. But man, did
Willow do a job on him or what? He deserved everything,
except maybe the skinning alive and burning into nothing.
But damn, who's the new evil in town? That's right! Big
Bad Willow!
Great Episode!
[>
Re: Willow in "Villains" (with spoilers,
obviously) -- Dead Soul, 01:13:28 05/15/02 Wed
I too felt a little intellectually insulted by the
Willow/Osiris scene. I felt it was a very unsubtle attempt
to a.) drive home the fact that this is the price for
raising Buffy and b.) tell the viewers why Willow can't just
raise Tara like she did Buffy. It's the kind of exposition
that Giles would do if he were there and boy would I have
preferred it from a tweedy stuttering Englishman rather than
from something that looked like a special effect from "The
Mummy." Although I seriously freaked the cat when I
shrieked at Warren's sudden flaying. She's still hiding
under the bed.
Dead Soul
[> [>
The irreversible effect of S6 to this fan
(rambling)*spoilers up to Villains* -- Doriander,
02:12:04 05/15/02 Wed
Although I seriously freaked the cat when I shrieked at
Warren's sudden flaying. She's still hiding under the
bed.
I'm scarred for life. Not that I haven't seen more gruesome
images, I've seen worse. It's just, man, it's Willow.
No coming back from S6, which is why I'm really intrigued at
next year's "Buffy...Year One" theme. How will they pull it
off? Because by no coming back, I mean I'll never see the
characters in the same light again. This season, BtVS became
a different show, it should be on cable. The impact is such
that I can't go back and watch "Classic Buffy" with as much
enjoyment. I tried. I just couldn't laugh at Buffy beating
up Willy the snitch anymore. "Lovers' Walk" which has always
been a laugh riot, just feels wrong at this point. And after
"Villains," f***, I'll be haunted with the image of a
skinned Warren, and wouldn't find humour in "Go Fish" and
"Earshot" where Willow affects a menacing tone as she
interrogates Jonathan. I just feel like ME conditioned us to
enjoy certain situations, then this season, shoved our heads
into a drum of freezing water, declaring HEY! It's not
funny! Whether it's a good thing or not, this season's dark
theme sucked me in.
Anybody as affected as I am?
[> [> [>
Re: The irreversible effect of S6 to this fan
(rambling)*spoilers up to Villains* -- MaeveRigan,
08:13:07 05/15/02 Wed
Irreversible? Hmm. Must admit, "Villains" really shook me
up. Much more than "Seeing Red." I've known it was coming--
couldn't help getting somewhat spoiled--but Willow's always
been my favorite and this was just terrible.
At the same time, you know, we've really seen it coming. I
mean, *way* back, even in seasons 2 and 3, sweet little
Willow's drawn to power, to vengeance. EvilWillow,
VampWillow have always been part of her (as of course, the
shadow is always part of each of us).
I don't know if the effect is irreversible. It really
depends on how the season ends, which I don't know yet. And
on how season 7 goes. I compare it to a harrowing event or
chapter or novel in a series of novels. If the whole series
turns out well, you can still enjoy the earlier books, when
the characters are just starting out, more carefree. And you
dread that chapter or book when you know your hero or
heroine is going to have to go through *that thing*, but you
read it anyway, because of the catharsis, and because,
having been through it once, you know (thankfully!) how it
works out--that they all survive, that there's a happy
ending, that the suffering will be redeemed, that good will
triumph, evil will be punished--whatever you're hoping for
(Giles's speech in "Lie to Me," of course, or WTTE!).
Even if you know exactly what's coming next Tuesday (and I
don't), we still don't know what's in store for B7, and
until the series ends, everything's still up for grabs. I'm
not closing the book (or turning off the TV) until Joss
and/or Marti say it's over.
[> [> [>
Re: The irreversible effect of S6 to this fan --
Robert, 15:40:38 05/15/02 Wed
>> "Anybody as affected as I am?"
Oh yes, and that's why I like this season the best.
[>
"My thoughts are all a case of knives" -
killing off our inner demons. Spoilers, S6 up to
Villains -- How evil ME broke down Rah's resistance to
posting., 03:39:25 05/15/02 Wed
The dark places of the soul
Reading posts this morning, it feels like there is a sense
in which people regard there being a definite idea of a
‘good’ person and a ‘bad’ person. Willow used to be ‘good’,
Warren ‘bad’. Now Willow is ‘bad’.
If we construct our self image around the idea that we are
‘sweet’ and ‘good’, as Willow used to - ‘I’m very seldom
naughty’ – we will forever confuse actions as a substitute
for who we are. Yes, we should be judged by our actions. But
we all contain the volatile possibility within ourselves
both for greater, and baser actions. That has been the
consistent theme this year. When Buffy beat up on Spike,
shouting things at him really directed at herself (Evil,
dead thing!) she tries to excuse herself – she came back
wrong.
Willow’s anger at Warren is all the more cutting because she
treated Tara badly. She comes face to face with someone else
who tried to use magic to control their partner. She comes
face to face with someone else who thinks they ought to have
untrammelled agency in this world. We hate most in other
people, what we fear we ourselves contain within.
And her anger grows all the more because of her guilt.
Because she’s sweet Willow, kind Willow. If she can’t be
good, then she’ll be evil, thoroughly evil. If she has one
evil thought, one awful action, what does it say about her?
She might be no better than anyone else! Her self -
identity, (her weakest point) shatters. She traverses the
moral spectrum because * she * has such a strong investment
in the construction of her identity.
Dichotomies break down. Doppelganger showed that there were
‘two’ Willows. One all fuzzy and sweet, the other all skanky
and evil. But they are the same! Buffy in the Gift and Buffy-
who-beats-up-on-her-boyfriend-and-who-nearly-kills-her-
sister – she’s the same person!!
No more altar egos. No more dichotomies between good and
evil. If forgiveness was available for Angel, is available
for Spike, it’s available for all, for Willow, for Warren,
for Xander, for Anya, for Buffy.
Will Buffy forgive Spike? Willow? Yes she will. Because the
Spike who tried to force himself on her is the same Spike
who comforted her. The Willow who tortured another human
being is the same Willow who was so loyal and supportive and
sweet to her for years and years.
If we can’t accept that human beings can contain such
volatility, that even the best of us could descend the
lowest depths, than we are living in a delusion. Human
beings behave unexpectedly in stressful conditions. We might
surprise ourselves with our courage, our heroism, from a
deep down strength we never knew was there (timid, meek
Tara) or we can surprise ourselves by our cowardice, our
cruelty, our maliciousness. I’ve found that the people who
have the most moral integrity, are the people who understand
this, and who are ever-vigilant.
The Buffy-coming-back-wrong plot arc is just as much of a
red herring as the Willow as magic addict plot line. We will
see that Buffy’s moral centre, her capacity for compassion
and generosity, precisely toward the very people who have
wronged her most (that’s the most meaningful test) like the
willow tree, bent with the storm, but resiliently rose up
again. Whereas Willow, who has never been bad, cracked at
the very first real test she has undergone.
My thoughts are all a case of knives,
Wounding my heart
With scatter’d smart,
As watring pots give flowers their lives.
Nothing their furie can controll,
While they do wound and prick my soul.
All my attendants are at strife,
Quitting their place
Unto my face:Nothing performs the task of life:
The elements are let loose to fight,
And while I live, trie out their right.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<
BR>
Damn you Villains! for being good
Damn you work! for being boring
and damn myself, for I have no will power at all. Let's not
mention this. please. really.
well, embarrassing yourself in public is probably good for
the soul.
Blame Mundus. He's too clever and subtle for his own
good!
[> [>
and requoting myself from February. No Spoilers --
Rahael, 03:46:28 05/15/02 Wed
I read a very thought provoking article about evil this
morning. It seems tie into our current discussion (and not
only in this thread) on several levels. It is about the
nature of evil, and actually made me think and reassess some
of my own beliefs. That is pretty rare most days.
I read it in the New Statesman, and its actually an article
by an American journalist, Jennifer Szalai
‘Ordinary people do extraordinarily horrible things when
their constitution compels them to do so; and while the
moralists and relativists may differ in the terms they use,
they share an unwillingness to address the role of
individual choice; no matter how constrained or limited that
choice might be. Evil – if applied to that dark space
between necessity and excess, can - only reside within the
boundaries of the self. Its source lies in the very thing
that makes us human: the impulse to transcend the reality
that surrounds us, to abstract from our concrete experience
and to free ourselves from necessity. As such, the human
capacity for good is inevitably tied to the human capacity
for evil: both account for those actions that lie beyond the
necessary requirements of everyday survival.’
She refers to Conrad’s Heart of Darkness: (which Apocalypse
Now was based on)
‘Marlow detects what lies behind the horror of Kurtz: “There
was nothing either above or below him, and I knew it. He had
kicked himself loose of the earth. Confound the man! He had
kicked the very earth to pieces….I saw the inconceivable
mystery of a soul that knew no restraint, no faith, and no
fear, yet struggling blindly with itself.” Here is evil
stripped bare of all attempts to justify itself. Tearing
himself away from the reality that surrounds him, Kurtz
lives entirely within that dark space of the soul, a void
limited only by its infinite aspirations toward
transcendence. ‘
Szalai argues that we should “recognize that evil exists;
that it is part of what constitutes human reality; that its
realisation lies at that final moment of choice: all of that
is necessary if we are to live in a world where the
technological capacity to annihilate each other requires us
to make a conscious decision not to.”
I find that she picks up on something that I’ve often
thought about. Being a liberal it’s very hard for me to say
that ‘people are evil’. But I do want to say that evil
choices exist. And all sorts of people can make them.
Ordinary people. Your neighbours, ourselves.
And BtVS this season seems to be exploring choices. We all
have that moment of choice that Szalai talks about. And I
find that point she makes, that the attempt to transcend our
surroundings and our realities particularly thought
provoking with relation to Willow That great goodness and
great evil can have a common root, especially after reading
CJL’s essay. We’ve had a foretaste of this re Warren’s
choices, Andrew’s choices and Jonathan’s choices. I think at
the latter end of the season, the White hats will have to
start making choices.
I don’t think of evil/good in terms of damnation or
repentence. I think of it in terms of being ever vigilant;
considering your choices, and never thinking that somehow
out there in the world, there are ‘bad’ ‘evil’ people, and
that you could never belong in that category, or that you
would never do anything bad.
[> [> [>
No spells for 30 days -- Can I be Anne?,
09:40:28 05/15/02 Wed
Great, enlightening post, Rahael. Choices and the inner Big
Bads is what this season has been largely about and I have
really enjoyed the exploration of that theme. However, I
feel like in Willow's case, making her an addict with black
contacts was a device to absolve her of culpability
somewhat. It's in line with the rumor about AH wanting
Willow to not be unlikable(I'm not saying this is certainly
true because I wasn't there, but it makes sense)
Willow is being controlled by something else, thus it isn't
neccesarily her own capacity for evil. This seems like a
cop out to me because I've come to expect so much from this
show.
[> [> [> [>
Re: No spells for 30 days -- Ronia, 09:58:49
05/15/02 Wed
Something akin to the decision to have Angel kill Jenny in
vamp face, although he only broke her neck and walked away.
It wasn't me, it was my demon, you see.
[> [> [> [> [>
Cop outs.... -- Rahael, 10:42:11 05/15/02
Wed
You see, I'm not quite sure whether the drug addict
storyline isn't a red herring.
I haven't really had a chance to see Season 6 until up to
Tabula Rasa. I haven't seen Villains. This will all be
rectified this weekend, so I'll have more of a chance to
make my mind up.
If Buffy deceived herself over 'I came back wrong', and
Spike deceived/is deceiving himself over what he wants to
do, if Anya can deceive herself into thinking she wants
vengeance, and if Xander can deceive himself into thinking
he doesn't want to marry Anya, if Dawn deceives herself that
no one understands, why is Willow an exception in self
deception? Buffy has her 'I came back wrong'. Spike has his
'chip'. Willow has her 'I'm addicted to magic' - emotional
crutches and self pity, to my mind.
All the Scoobies are letting a kind of emotional cowardice
stopping them from growing up. They can't seem to face who
they really are, and the sad thing is, they are much, much
better human beings than they perceive themselves to be.
It's their very fears which make them at times cruel,
thoughtless and selfish. Spike doesn't know what he wants to
be, good or bad. Buffy doesn't know who to trust, who she
wants to be with, who she is. Willow is desperately trying
to shore up her self esteem any old way. Isn't 'I'm
addicted to magic' a great way to get Buffy's sympathy? a
way of getting Tara back when she kicks the habit? of making
Willow the centre of sympathy, help and concern?
On the other hand this might be fanwanking. The only thing
is, Willow's forte this season has been deception. She
deceived Tara again and again. Interesting counterpoint is
back in Season 3, when everyone else is down on Buffy for
lying about Angel, Willow is the only one who says 'No,
secrets can be good!" because, she too is lying to Oz and
Cordelia about her affair with Xander.
Were the allusions to Rack as a 'dealer' and Willow's shakes
meant to be a light allusion or a heavy allusion by ME? if
it were the latter, I think they've misplayed their hand,
and muddied the waters too much.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Well said, Rahael. Yet again, I completely agree with
you. -- Ixchel, 11:24:50 05/15/02 Wed
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Interesting thought and might explain
something...speculation -- Anne, 13:01:40 05/15/02
Wed
Actually, that interpretation might explain a recent comment
of Joss's that really bothered me.
When he was talking about next season being about "back to
the beginning" he said "Buffy won't be dead, and Willow
won't be a junkie. . .".
Now I'm sure that Joss knows as well as anyone that once a
junkie, always a junkie. And although I might be
nitpicking, I don't think it's a good idea to have a plot
line that has somebody be just suddenly "cured" of an
addiction. But if the addiction wasn't the problem in the
first place, that would be a way around it.
Unfortunately, that would also mean that Willow could "not
be a junkie" next year, but still be in a power-mad Big Bad
mode. So Joss could be doing one of his cute misdirection
things, making everybody think things will be better with
Willow next season when really they may not be.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Joss's comments (speculation on S7) -- Debbie,
13:56:15 05/15/02 Wed
I think you can interpret Joss's comment about "Willow not
being a junky anymore" in two ways. It seems as though S6 is
about choices, albeit bad choice, and since he referred to
"going back to the beginning", I'm assuming that if Willow
comes back from the magic, it will gone for good. While I
"spoiled myself" up to Villians, I haven't heard anything on
the season finale so this is all speculation. The other
option is that Willow will be the Big Bad next season. It
can't be Spike becasue even if he gets the chip out, Buffy
wouldn't hesitate to kill him after that bathroom scene.
Wouldn't make for a season-long Bid Bad by any means.
Based on the history of this show (which I watched S1-S5 in
a matter of a two months), it seems to me that Willow will
go back to being "some girl" next season, reflecting on her
life and choices she's made. Again speculation, but I see
them making her to be the Giles of the group dynamic. Guess
we have to wait and see.
A comment to those who referred to A.H.'s request that
Willow still be likable. I believe she made a comment that,
paraphrased, said something like "I don't know if I'd like
Willow to be the Bid Bad. I'm afraid that the fans would
like Willow anymore." I highly doubt that reason that no on
wanted to blame Willow in "Villians" was becasue of that
comment. I think it was becasue she will be coming back from
the magic and Joss probably doesn't want the fans to hate
her and not accept her next season.
Debbie
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Wicked Willow -- Rahael, 02:20:57 05/16/02
Thu
Interesting Anne, I hadn't read that comment before.
I guess Willow next season will settle forever the question
drug/power addiction. I think Joss is acknowledging it was a
metaphor that got handled far too heavily.
I also think that Willow's going to take a long, long time
to recover from this.
As for fans disliking evil Willow, well this fan infinitely
prefers strong, powerful, wicked Willow to cutesy, lispy,
ooh, I'm a little girl, puppies and kittens Willow. Thank
God Villains makes this incarnation of Willow completely
uncredible in the future.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Wicked Willow -- Anne, 05:39:53 05/16/02
Thu
I have to agree that I'm fascinated by this Willow. And
also (a completely shallow comment): I think Alyson looks
much more striking, beautiful even, with the black hair.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Wicked Willow -- MaeveRigan, 06:28:01
05/16/02 Thu
"As for fans disliking evil Willow, well this fan infinitely
prefers strong, powerful, wicked Willow to cutesy, lispy,
ooh, I'm a little girl, puppies and kittens Willow. Thank
God Villains makes this incarnation of Willow completely
uncredible in the future."
I'm sort of hoping we can reach a compromise with a
powerful, confident, yet ultimately GOOD Willow in the
future--somehow. Agree that the drug-addiction metaphor
tilted; power corrupts was what we really should have been
seeing. Now we are. It's not pretty, and shouldn't be.
Fine.
Willow's "Restless" dream indicates that "puppies and
kittens" Willow has always been something of a role for her,
a costume. To grow up, she's going to have to take it off,
and if I had my way, she'll still be able to "love, give,
forgive"--much more effectively without the cutesiness. But
of course, I'm not Joss/Marti/ME.
Can't wait to see how it all turns out.
[> [> [> [> [>
the partition of pastel clad vs. black wearing
Willow. -- Can I be Anne?, 11:46:21 05/15/02 Wed
"Something akin to the decision to have Angel kill Jenny in
vamp face, although he only broke her neck and walked away.
It wasn't me, it was my demon, you see."
I totally agree here. Joss has said that about the vamp
face being created to partition monster and man, to
emphasize their difference. Thus, I reiterate, Willow
becomes forgivably hapless.
[> [> [> [>
Culpability -- Malandanza, 10:43:59 05/15/02
Wed
"However, I feel like in Willow's case, making her an
addict with black contacts was a device to absolve her of
culpability somewhat."
Xander tries to rape Buffy when he is possessed by the hyena
spirits.
Angel runs amok during his Angelus period.
Oz kills Veruca while in wolf form.
Buffy tries to kill her friends while under the effects of
the hallucinogenic poison.
Extenuating circumstances in each case: Xander, Angel, Oz
and Buffy really weren't in control. In each case, the
characters had little or no control over their
conditions.
Willow's case is different. She made a choice to follow her
present path. Maybe she's not fully in control now, but she
is responsible for her own actions. I question how little
control she really has -- she healed Buffy, after all.
Whatever dark powers are working with her would not have
wanted the slayer (the girl most likely to stop Evil Willow)
back on her feet so quickly.
If Willow continues down her present course, I might agree
that at some point she has lost control and become a
plaything for the dark powers she has been supplicating, but
right now, I don't think anyone should absolve Willow of
torture and murder she has committed.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Culpability and Forgiveness -- Rahael,
11:14:05 05/15/02 Wed
I think it's quite possible that Willow will be forgiven by
Buffy and her friends. Not absolved of culpability, but
forgiven nonetheless. There's been a reason why all the
Scooby gang have been mired in the mud recently - they've
all done pretty crappy things. They'll give forgiveness
because they still love her, and because they need forgiving
themselves.
Do I think Willow should ever forgive herself? no. That scar
will/should, never be erased from her soul.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Culpability and Forgiveness -- Ronia,
13:39:07 05/15/02 Wed
Willow's friends don't need to forgive her (yet), she hasn't
harmed them, merely rejected their advice. Now can they
move on and treat her as though she had Not committed a
horrible murder? That would be my question. Why did Willow
do it? Because she wanted to. Because she felt like it.
Will she ever forgive herself? Who can say, she in no way
can justify her actions. Harder still is the obvious
pleasure she took in them. Our little Willow has gone to a
very dark place...willingly. Some people choose to be
damned and stay that way. She might be one of them. (for
example Ford in Lie to me)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
"I'll always find you" (spoilers for
Villains) -- Rahael, 02:13:06 05/16/02 Thu
I think I saw Ford slightly differently from you. In my
view, the whole point of 'Lie To Me' lay in the last
conversation between Giles and Buffy, and underlined the
fact that you can't easily say "bad person" "good person".
Did Ford willingly damn himself? or was he just very very
desperate? I think Buffy understood and sympathised, and she
pitied him.
As for Willow not having harmed her friends, I'd disagree.
She has harmed them. She's gone past the boundary of human
decency. She's made a mockery, and a travesty of everything
they've worked for, what Tara represented. That seems to me
a huge betrayal, of principle, trust and friendship. Plus
the whole evil torture thing. Buffy was repulsed by Faith's
accidental slaying of a human being. This, compared to the
manslaugther of Finch is just off the scale.
As for forgiving herself, I don't think Willow has abandoned
who she is quite yet. I also don't think she's made a very
conscious, clear headed decision. Lindsay made a conscious
and clear decision in AtS; Lilah did; Warren did; I think
Jonathan is more muddled, I think Willow is hopelessly
lost.
This is the irony of Willow's words to Tara - "I'll always
find you". But when she lost her again, she's had another
loss; she has wandered far, far away from the person that
Tara loved, far from everything she loved about herself and
Tara. Is it a case of irony? that Tara will be the one to
find her, in some metaphorical way? Will it be love and
compassion which restores Willow to herself? She at least
deserves it, karmically speaking, since she has given out
enough love and compassion to the world, in the past.
I still think Tara would recognise the person Willow has now
become. I think she would be saddened, but still loving.
[> [> [> [> [>
Completely agree! -- Caroline, 07:45:39 05/17/02
Fri
[> [>
Nice to see you back, Rah - great posts! And thanks
for the transcripts, also. -- Marie, 03:58:21
05/15/02 Wed
I think, despite what some posters are saying, that Willow
will be back, and that the means to bring her back are
already in place. By that I mean the love of her friends.
I don't know how ME are going to do it, but I'm certain
they'll find a way.
M
[> [>
Yay!! Rah!!! =) -- neaux, 04:35:26 05/15/02
Wed
[> [>
Re: "My thoughts are all a case of knives"
(etc.) [Spoilers for "Villains"] --
Rattletrap, 05:56:38 05/15/02 Wed
WB Rah. As ever, a thoughtful, insightful, and articulate
post.
I think you hit the nail on the head for this season--our
heroes have to come to terms with the darkness within. It
seems to me that the sins we are most likely to condemn
others for are our own. Willow's torture, flaying, and
immolation of Warren certainly seems to support this
point.
Just my $.02, still processing, more later
'trap
[> [>
What lies underneath (spoilers for Villians) --
ponygirl, 06:27:05 05/15/02 Wed
First of all a big yay Rah for such a lovely post and for
being back. My initial thoughts this morning, a bit foggy
from the Buffy bash last night, was that ME has finally
given us an answer. Where does the darkness come from? The
demons come, they take our memories, but it's not us doing
evil. Right? Willow in speaking the words of her vamp
persona, before brutally killing Warren shows us that that
was never true. Her method of killing was very telling -
she shows us what was inside. And she shows us finally that
the darkness was within all along.
[> [> [>
Exactly!! -- Rahael, 06:46:08 05/15/02 Wed
[> [> [>
Huh? -- clg0107, 09:52:22 05/15/02 Wed
>>Willow in speaking the words of her vamp persona, before
brutally killing Warren shows us that that was never true.
WHAT???
Which words??
Help!
[> [> [> [>
clg: She says, "Bored now" - VampWillow's
(in)famous tag line. -- Dyna, 10:01:36 05/15/02
Wed
[> [> [>
Well said, ponygirl. I agree completely. --
Ixchel, 18:55:32 05/15/02 Wed
[> [>
Beautiful, Rahael. I couldn't agree more. Thank you
for expressing this idea so well. -- Ixchel, 08:19:31
05/15/02 Wed
[> [>
Very well said! Welcome back! -- agent156,
10:25:10 05/15/02 Wed
[> [>
Exacerbating my ambivalence -- matching mole,
11:45:55 05/15/02 Wed
This excellent and inspiring post and a number of others
have served to increase my own internal conflict about
season 6. I see much in it that is admirable and
interesting and my perception of same is only increased by
the perceptive essays posted here. However there is also
much that is incredibly disappointing to me. Just goes to
show that we all really do have the capacity for good and
evil within us but in my case I'm not sure which is which.
Should I love season 6 or hate it?
What choice will turn me to a mole of darkness and what
choice to a mole of light? Will I spend my days mentally
flaying earthworms and then barbecuing them without benefit
of charcoal or lighter fluid? Or will I counsel the fox
that comes to eat me and envelope him in white light so that
he repents of his evil ways and goes off to eat salad?
I guess the point of the above paragraph is to indicate that
I think that the storyline of season 6 for all its
magnifence is also somewhat ridiculous. And unlike the many
other things in BtVS that are ridiculous there is no sense
of any awareness of that fact. In a season that is about
the subjective nature of reality the story itself seems
wrapped up in itself.
For a brief example of what I mean I'll use Willow both
because I think she is the most egregious example of this
and because after 'Villains' she is on everyone's mind. I
would certainly agree that Willow has always had the seeds
of darkness in her as do we all. In fact I would argue that
flaws of Willow (and Xander and Buffy) are part of what have
made them so effective both as engrossing fictional
characters and as opponents of evil over the history of the
show. Sure Willow has always been manipulative and often
willing to do morally questionable things. The way that
these qualities sometimes help and sometimes hinder the
Scoobies' struggle against evil in earlier seasons strikes
me as an interesting and very true observation about human
nature. I would also agree that Willow turning towards
darkness seems quite probable.
However I would argue that the sequence of events in S5 and
S6 leading to the Willow we see in Villains are melodramatic
and contrived hingeing as they do on Willow's assumption of
enormous magical power under highly stressful circumstances
and a decidedly one sided take on the complex motivations
leading to Willow's great work: the resurrection of Buffy.
But I'm not complaining about this. Events throughout all
seasons of BtVS and AtS have hinged on contrived and
melodramatic events. What seems to be missing in BtVS S5
and S6 is the awareness within the story itself that the
events are melodramatic and contrived and the perspective
that awareness brings to the story.
I'm going to ponder this some more and wait to watch the end
of the season next week.
[> [> [>
Re: Exacerbating my ambivalence -- Rahael,
11:59:10 05/15/02 Wed
LOL, re the mole of darkness vs mole of light.
Interesting points about the melodrama, I think I not only
understand, but agree. Also about the ridiculousness of it.
Buffy has always managed to contain both pathos and humour,
both complimenting each other so perfectly that the sadness
is enhanced the more.
Perhaps we should earmark Season 6 as an interesting
experiment that might gain in vintage over the years, and in
the context of the end of the whole thing?
Britain has now caught up with America re Season 6, though I
still don't have access to cable, so still on the wildfeeds.
A friend commented to me that she didn't like Season 6
because it was too 'plotted'. She didn't understand why
Buffy had to take a bullet, why it was so dreary, and why
not escapist and entertaining.
Of course, she then kind of undercut her credibility re
these arguments by saying she had the same problems with
Shakespeare. My response was, well, Shakespeare's tragedies
are both escapist and entertaining to me!
But a little voice inside of me (I am reading King Lear at
the moment) is saying "well, 100 retainers are a bit
much!!"
and is it really necessary to ask for the world to be
covered in water, and all life to be flooded out cos your
daughters are rude to you? And you've been a silly fool?
I hasten to add that I really am loving King Lear (it's got
a saintly Cordelia who is called 'unnatural' and monstrous
too). Especially Kent, Gloucester and Poor Tom. And Edmund
is marvellously evil - let God stand up for bastards
indeed!
[> [> [> [>
King Lear -- matching mole, 12:31:23 05/15/02
Wed
What a great example. I think that a lot of the power in
Lear is that it is ridiculously melodramatic and escapist
and entertaining. The characters' complexities derive out
of these extreme and not very realistic scenarios. This
allows the audience/reader to see them from a perspective of
immediacy and a perspective of distance.
One of my favourite examples of this in the Jossverse is the
reenactment of Buffy and Angel's love by Wesley and
Cordelia. Viewed through the perspective of realism, being
close to the characters and the action this is a very
insensitive thing to do. The affair wounded Buffy and Angel
terribly. But Cordelia's and Wesley's actions emphasized to
us how utterly over the top the whole thing was. Which as
you say, just enhances our feeling about the whole
thing.
[> [> [> [> [>
And how about Buffy's touche in Tabula Rasa when...
-- A8, 17:40:10 05/15/02 Wed
stripped back down to her more Cordelia-esque early Slayer
self, she responds to Spike's over the top speech about his
possibly being a "noble vampire" with:"A vampire without a
soul...how lame is that?"
[> [> [> [> [> [>
That scene is my favourite in all of season 6 --
matching mole, 09:47:00 05/16/02 Thu
I feel somewhat guilty for posting for the 5th or 6th time
in a sub-thread that I started myself but I could't
resist.
[> [> [> [> [>
I thought you'd like this quote, Mole -- Rahael,
03:40:36 05/16/02 Thu
Someone quoted it on a discussion board re books and
reading:
“For we dream in narrative, daydream in narrative, remember,
anticipate, hope, despair, believe, doubt, plan, revise,
criticize, construct, gossip, learn, hate, and love by
narrative. In order really to live, we make up stories about
ourselves and others, about the personal as well as the
social past and future.
“I set out this long, incomplete, and highly obvious list
not simply to point to the narrative structure of acts of
mind but to suggest the deficiency of our commonly posited
antagonism between dream and realistic vision.
Educationalists still suggest that the process of maturation
involves movement out of the fantasy-life into a vision of
life ‘as it is’. Teachers have even constructed syllabuses
on the assumption that we begin with fairy tales and
daydreams and work gradually into realistic modes….. There
is a widespread and, I suggest, dubious but understandable
assumption on the part of wishful believers in life-
enhancement that human beings begin by telling themselves
fairy tales and end by telling truths.” ~ Barbara Hardy
Do you think that this is where Buffy has lost its way in
Season 6? because it believed that they must move from fairy
tale into truth? Buffy's greatest strength, to my mind was
never seeing any antagonism between dream and real life. Or
are they still telling us fairy tales about real life in
Season 6?
I'll be able to judge soon enough. Can't wait.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
That's a really good question (spoilers for pretty much
all of BtVS) -- matching mole, 08:54:33 05/16/02
Thu
Like you I'll hold judgement on whether season 6 has 'lost
its way' until I see the last two episodes next week.
It does seem to me that the Oh Grow Up theme seems an
attempt to make the progression you mentioned - to move from
fantasy into real life. But like you I find that it is the
juxtaposition of fantasy and reality and the refusal to
distinguish between the two is what makes BtVS and AtS so
compelling. Hence my ambiguity and confusion.
I think that there have been several trends over time in
BtVS that don't seem to be running parallel to one another.
I find it convenient to think of the six seasons as forming
three periods with the end of season 2 and the end of season
4 as transition points. In the first two seasons you have a
very strong emphasis on the high school setting, a heavy
emphasis on vampires, other demons and creatures have a very
obvious metaphorical slant, and with the exception of the
Willow/Xander/Buffy romantic triangle there is relatively
little internal conflict within the Scoobies. Also the
level of supernatural activity is restrained and it remains
within the bounds of credulity that the general populace
remains ignorant. The end of season 2 sees Willow perform
her first major spell, without the advice of either Buffy or
Giles, and Xander takes his matters into his own hands by
not telling Buffy about the attempt to resoul Angelus.
Joyce finds out that Buffy is the slayer.
Seasons 3 and 4 present things in a very different way.
Internal conflict within the Scoobies becomes an important
part of the story. This period is marked by a large influx
of new characters. Cordelia and Oz, although they were
around earlier, really only becme heavily involved in Scooby
activities in S3. And Anya, Tara, Faith, Wesley, and Riley
are introduced in this period. Spike also becomes a regular
and no longer a villain. Many of these characters become
complex making the social world of the Scoobies more
complex. The external setting becomes less important but it
remains. Despite all the high school themed titles of
season 3 episodes I would argue that high school life is
much less a part of S3 than it is for S1 and S2. The Mayor
and the Initiative reveal that the supernatural is
widespread and known to at least some other humans. The
demon world becomes more elaborate and less metaphorical.
Vampires become much less important. The general ignorance
of the population becomes completely unbeleivable.
Like the end of season 2 the end of season 4 marks a major
turning point. The expanded world of S3 and S4 is clearly
refocused on the original four core characters: Buffy,
Giles, Willow, and Xander. Sunnydale becomes more of a
metaphor than a real place - there is no longer even the
slightest attempt to explain how the fantastic events shown
fit into the ordinary world. The individual demons become
less and less of inherent interest on their own. S5 is
focused on Buffy alone to an extent not seen in any other
season. S6 continues the focus on Buffy and expands it to
include Xander, Willow, and Spike (Spike having replaced
Giles in some sense as the fourth core member of the show).
These characters are explored in much greater psychological
depth than we've seen before. A consequence of this is that
the secondary Scoobies become more defined by their
relationships to the main characters than by any issues they
might have on their own. This happens to Riley pretty much
immediately at the start of S5 - Buffy doesn't love him as
much as he thinks she should so he falls apart. Dawn who is
the only new regular character to be added post-Restless
has pretty much always been defined as Buffy's sister and
has never really taken on a life of her own. Tara did
retain somewhat of an independent existence for a while but
it seems to me by the end of S5 that Tara, nice and
appealing as she was, was a character whose purpose in the
show was to have an effect on Willow. Only Anya remains an
anachronism, a throwback to her origins in S3. Although
certainly not as fully developed as Xander she has retained
her own agenda to a limited extent. Perhaps it is no
surprise that I have generally found her scenes in the past
few episodes the most satisfying.
So we see some trends towards greater realism - particularly
with regards to the psychological state of the major
characters. On the other hand we see an increasing tendency
away from realism in the presentation of the world of those
characters. And I think the relationships of the core
characters to others (the secondary Scoobies, Joyce, etc.)
has been distinctly non-linear. In the beginning these
relationships were simple - the excitement of teen love, the
exasperation with one's parents. Later these relationships
became more complex as the 'others' grow in number and
complexity. We see Joyce's side of the story. We see
Cordelia and Oz as having their own stories and not just
being Xander and Willow's partners. But then there is this
step sideways. The core characters retake center stage and
the secondaries have to step back.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: That's a really good question (spoilers for pretty
much all of BtVS) -- Rahael, 09:59:49 05/16/02
Thu
Thank you for that detailed and insightful analysis. Much
food for thought.
I'm wondering if 'Normal Again' is a kind of paradigm for
Season 6. That is the most self concious ep of Season 6,
right? hand in hand with OMWF (I can't wait to see NA).
In NA, we see a totally split world. The magic and reality
cannot coexist together, presenting Buffy with earth
shattering dilemmas. I wonder if there is a correlation in
the theme of dreams, imagination as being incompatible in
the harshness of today's world. And that this is actually a
satiric point by ME. Buffy dies in a fantasy world, but
wakes up in a 'real' one, where she has to worry about bills
and mundane things, work in the harsh flourescent world of
DMP. The imaginative, magical side of her is
institutionalised, problematised and locked up in 'NA'.
I'm just wandering how Willow and magic, and Spike and his
chip fit into all of this. Perhaps Willow's magic has been
problematised? Spike's badness has been compromised, and our
least broody character has turned into one of our most
careworn?
Are we just seeing mirrorverse Sunnydale? Buffy through the
looking glass?
Lots to think about while I go back to packing.........
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Before it got archived, I wanted to say that I really
got a lot from this little subthread. Thanks. -- yuri,
00:00:30 05/17/02 Fri
It was great all the way back to unexacerbating Kind Lear.
This is not so unusual here (the enjoying and the learning)
but when it is extra thought provoking and when it makes me
actually go and research things things that are discussed, I
like to say my little thank yous. Thank you.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
seconded. Lots of nice stuff to read here. -- Ete,
04:56:24 05/17/02 Fri
[> [> [> [>
"an interesting experiment that might gain in
vintage over the years" -- yez, 13:18:12
05/15/02 Wed
Nice way of phrasing that, and I've been wondering about it,
too, particularly after listening to Stephen DeKnight's
(sp?) interview on thesuccubusclub.com where he mentions a
couple of times, I think, that ME didn't want to resurrect
Buffy and in 2 eps. have everything be back to normal. They
wanted it to be trying and dark.
My concern from the first ep. of the season was that it was
trying -- not just for Buffy, but for me to watch, even
while I felt like I appreciated what they were trying to do.
I think it's very interesting to explore Buffy's coming back
to life as a long emotional process, not just a discreet
physical event. However, it was a little on the boring side
for me. I got it, I GOT IT, and wanted to move on. And
perhaps that frustration of not being able to move on was
what they wanted their viewers to feel. But that's not
really something you can appreciate until after the
fact.
So now that we're getting to a point where we can experience
the "experiment" through the fast-forward of our memories,
it's much more palattable, at least for me.
yez
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: "an interesting experiment that might gain in
vintage over the years" -- matching mole,
17:16:41 05/15/02 Wed
That is kind of the way I think of season 6 - an interesting
experiment. In fact I might have used those very words if
pressed had not Rah beat me too it. And I am definitely not
coming down with any sort of final opinion until next week.
Yez also describes my own feeling of impatience very well.
Someone a week or so ago mentioned Buffy spinning in
circles. I guess I felt that I got the point, I understood
Buffy's problem. It was an interesting problem but watching
Buffy mope about for weeks on end as the focal point was not
very interesting. But in hindsight it may seem very
different.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Well, if past is prologue... -- OnM, 16:49:10
05/16/02 Thu
... that may very well be the case, since I seem to be
seeing more and more complimentary posts regarding S4, which
at the time it was airing was garnering many of the same
general 'the show has lost it's way!' types of criticism
that S6 has been this year.
Certainly in the film industry, there have been numerous
cases of work that didn't go over that well on initial
release that later somehow turned into 'classics'. (Blade
Runner and Apocalypse Now spring to mind as
examples).
Ever since BtVS evolved the serial/episodic format in S2,
I've always treated it as if the entire series is one
(veeeerry!) long movie. So, perhaps one of the reasons for
my being so 'up' on S6 is that to me it is only a 'part' of
the epic-- I expect the compositional textures to
vary over time. I put myself in the moment, and tend to go
with it, expecting to only form a final judgement when the
'true' ending occurs, which may be next year, or may not be
for many years if Joss elects to extend the show's run or
make the transition to film, something he has stated he
would like to do.
[> [>
Wonderfully eloquent and compelling, thanks. --
yez, 12:44:07 05/15/02 Wed
Vampy Willow
(spoilers for Villians) -- jb, 21:43:55 05/14/02
Tue
Willow's whole "Bored now" remark before ripping Warren's
skin off (btw, did that disturb anyone else as much as it
did me?) obviously harkened back to vampy, evil Willow as
seen in the false reality that Anya created via Cordy's wish
back in whatever season that was. I thought it was
interesting that just as Anya "gets her vengeance on again,"
part of that alternate reality returns in Willow. It also
seems to me (and possibly this has been mentioned before on
this board) that ME is returning the Scoobies to their
Season One structure. Anya and Spike are attempting to
revert to their old ways, and Tara is now gone. As for
Willow, in my gut I really believe that she is going to come
back from this, even though I think she's a lot more
interesting as the big bad.
[>
At that point, it stopped being about Tara
(spoilers) -- cjl, 22:04:10 05/14/02 Tue
This is what's so frightening, and sad.
Willow's rampage and torture session violates every
principle Tara stood for in her short, unhappily-ended life.
If Tara is hovering around in spirit form somewhere, she
must be rending her ectoplasm in agony and despair.
Willow gets a "taste" of ultimate power, power without moral
restrictions, and she likes it. A lot. All the resentment
and isolation and pain she's been holding in since childhood
can now be expressed without fear of social penalty. She's
given herself a free pass to wreak havoc, and she's using
Tara's memory as an excuse. But once she says those two
awful words at the end of the episode, her rampage stops
being about Tara.
I think, on some level, Buffy knows this and can see what's
coming, because she's had to fight the same dark desires in
herself. She almost HAS to lecture to Xander and Dawn
because Warren's pure, unadulterated scumminess clouds the
issue. It's not about him, either; it's about Willow
destroying herself.
[> [>
And not only that... -- Solitude1056, 22:23:13
05/14/02 Tue
Didn't someone mention at some point that if Willow does
what she intends, Warren wins, she's the same as him? I
wouldn't say he wins - he won't, and hasn't - but Willow
does become his equal, his peer down at the lowest of the
low in human society: the sociopath without conscience. If
she'd picked up a gun and shot back, standing over her
lover's body, that's one thing. But tracking someone down in
cold blood, that's ... not good.
All of my housemate's commentary about the "california namby-
pamby 'let the law take care of it'" Buffy-tude can be
countered on several levels, and is, with Willow's example.
First (and foremost at least in my mind, after my last
evening this semester surrounded by under-21-yr-olds) is
that you couldn't pay me a world of anything to
convince me to be judge-jury-and-executioner, except
in the pure heat of the moment - and that could even be
argued as just defensive-executioner, and not judge&jury. No
decision is being made, in that case, other than "I will
protect myself and those I love." There's a subtle but
important difference between saying "I/we deserve to live"
and "you deserve to die." Willow crossed the line from one
to the other, and again, that's not good.
After all, the american legal system has 12 folks on the
jury, a judge, at least two lawyers, one or more police
officers, appeal courts, and then finally an executioner (if
the state has the death penalty). Like Buffy said, it
doesn't always work... but at least no one person carries
the entire emotional burden for the final decision. And that
emotional decision is a world o' burden for adults, let
alone Scoobies on the brink of true adulthood. Add to that,
I've been around legal systems that keep things hush-hush.
"What happened? No idea. The person's gone." Or, "no idea,
they're still here, and we don't know why or how it was
decided." Does this serve society's purpose, to have someone
simply disappear or be returned without comment? I dunno,
but I do know - in that position (assuming I hadn't been
able to fire back while in the immediate aftermath), I'd
want Warren to go through the system. I'd want
everyone to know what he'd done. I'd want him to have
to go through the long, arduous process, to truly suffer as
the moments pass. I'd want him to see the community, and the
world, turn its back on him. Simple death is too quick -
it's the long grueling journey to get there, that may be the
only vengeance to assuage the pain. In Willow's place - at
that point, 12 hrs or so later - I would've turned Warren
in, because I'd want him to suffer for a lot longer.
I agree about the reasons behind Buffy's lecture, even if
she did sound a bit like she was convincing herself, too
(and SMG/Joss probably intended it to sound that way). I
just can't see how Willow could come back from this by next
season - after all, it took Faith nearly three seasons to
finally begin to recover from her acts, and she didn't have
nearly the emotional punch behind her act as Willow does. By
that I mean, Faith didn't kill out of self-defense or
revenge so she lacked the self-bolstering element of
vengeance.
And lastly: anyone wonder just how much longer Anya is going
to want to stay vengeance demony? This is twice now she's
seen how badly it can wreck things...
Rambling, but it's late... ;-)
[> [> [>
Re: And not only that... -- DEN, 22:43:19
05/14/02 Tue
The fact that Warren has no chance at all in his
confrontation with Willow is even more disturbing. In most
"vengeance stories" the moral ambbiguites are blurred by
making the avenger fight against heavy odds, or by creating
a showdown with at least the structure of a fair fight. But
Dark Willow uses her power to torture Warren in a fashion
our culture reserves for the worst villains. I 'm still sick
to my stomach--almost ashamed to have watched a scene I
consider pornographic, and furious at ME for reducing a
great show to the level of an imitation snuff film. And for
what? On the other side or in the next incarnation, will not
Tara shrink from what Willow has become? It has been well
said: "if you seek revenge, first dig two graves."
And a final irony: in order for ME to "justify" warren's
fate, the script allows him a certain kind of dignity at the
end. Jeering at his tormentor, spitting in her face
metaphorically, he almost harks back to Willow's first
confrontation with Glory. Talk about an unintended
consequence! Better to burn him on first sight!
[> [> [> [>
Jeering & begging (spoilers for Villians) --
Solitude1056, 22:54:31 05/14/02 Tue
And a final irony: in order for ME to "justify"
warren's fate, the script allows him a certain kind of
dignity at the end. Jeering at his tormentor, spitting in
her face metaphorically, he almost harks back to Willow's
first confrontation with Glory. Talk about an unintended
consequence! Better to burn him on first sight!
But after he's done doing that, did you notice what Warren
said - I'll need to rewatch tomorrow to get it down better -
he not only said her actions would damage her, but also
her friends. That struck me as somewhat odd, or perhaps
it was supposed to be a moment of clarity from someone who
knew his number was up, anyway. But why would someone like
Warren - who's clearly considered his "friends" to be
expendable as needed - realize that one's actions have
impact not only on one's self but also on one's chosen
community?
And if I recall correctly, it's at that point that Willow
reverted to VampWillow - and in that moment she
became Warren, the souled-but-soul-less creature who
could've cared less what sort of damage his (her) actions
would have on anyone other than himself (herself).
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Jeering & begging (spoilers for Villians) --
DEN, 23:13:08 05/14/02 Tue
Sol--I think you're right; Warren's warning forces Willow to
a final point of choice. Nietzsche's phrase about looking
into the abyss and having the abyss look back at you comes
to mind.
As for how he comes up with it, I suggest it's less a
fundanemtal insight in his final moments than the work of
that Exposition Fairy who stands at MN's right hand.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Jeering & begging (spoilers for Villians) --
mmm, 06:15:52 05/15/02 Wed
My impression of warren's "insight" was that he was trying
to do anything to stop Willow from hurting him, and he knows
how other people view friendships and relationships. He was
attempting to use her love for her friends to save his own
skin - any positive consequences for willow would be purely
unintentional from his point of view.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Jeering & begging (spoilers for Villians) --
C.C. Green, 13:32:39 05/15/02 Wed
New poster.
What I found most interesting about the "transformation" of
Willow in "Villians" was the way that Alyson played the
character throughout the episode. Driven by fury at first
and slowly, getting more confident, letting the dark side of
her (VampWillow) take over. It was like watching the
character of six years develop all in one episode. You could
almost expect the "bored now" comment.
While I agree that the skinning of Warren was gruesome and
unexpected, I think it was a clear indication of just how
far Willow would go. At that point, she didn't want to hear
just how much pain she was in . . . from Warren or her
friends. She's numb now. Like death affects us, she has
taken the pain inside her and is self-destructing. Unlike
us, she has the power to lash out in worse ways. We all
react to death in different ways. What started out as Tara
has turned Willow into her alter ego. After all, VampWillow
was just "Willow without any inhibitions". She's been on
this path, slowly but surely, since "Doppleganged".
All in all, excellent episode and many kudos to Alyson and
the writers for an incredible job. Awesome special
effects.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Jeering & begging (spoilers for Villians) --
Malandanza, 07:09:54 05/15/02 Wed
"in that moment she became Warren, the souled-but-soul-
less creature who could've cared less what sort of damage
his (her) actions would have on anyone other than himself
(herself).
I don't think anything Warren said or didn't say mattered --
Willow wasn't listening. But I do think that you make a
mistake when you say Willow became Warren -- there has been
a tendency to see Warren as the embodiment of all that is
evil. Worse than Angelus -- because he has a soul but no
conscience. This episode showed otherwise.
Warren does have a conscience. The Katrina apparition
proved that he had been suffering from guilt to some degree
-- much as Faith suffered for killing the Mayor's assistant.
In fact, Warren seems to have followed the same path as
Faith, trying to run from his conscience by embracing evil.
There were hints before that he was troubled: a couple of
times Jonathan has muttered something about dead girlfriends
and Warren has overreacted. Also, keep in mind that
Katrina's death was an accident -- as was Tara's.
The attempted murder of Buffy was the act of a moment -- not
a premeditated attempt on her life. That Warren's murder
was premeditated is beyond question -- Willow tried to kill
him at the bus (snapping the robot's neck -- does that count
as murder? Some people claim that April was sentient, why
wouldn't robot Warren be as well?). Had he been on the bus,
he would have been dead then. Willow had a second chance to
think about what she was doing -- and she made the same
decision: to kill Warren. I doubt that Warren would have
killed either Tara or Katrina if he had had a second
chance.
Willow has gone far beyond anything that Warren has done.
She hunted him down for the purpose of killing him -- but
death wasn't enough, first there was torture. And so,
Willow has joined a select group of the most heinous or out
of control villains -- Angelus, Glory (although she used
torture to gain information, not for pleasure), Marcus (the
child killing vampire) and Faith (on her rampage) who use
torture. Is torture worse than murder? The consensus seems
to be yes -- based on defenses of Spike over the years as
being somehow more moral because he kills cleanly. And,
certainly, murder preceded by torture is worse than either
murder or torture alone.
Then there were her final words -- "One down..." What will
she do to Jonathan and Andrew, who, after all, were in jail
at the time of the killing?
While we don't know how much of her behavior is controlled
by the dark forces raging through her body, we cannot excuse
Willow on the basis of demonic possession. She knew the
dangers of dark magic better than anyone else on the show
and chose to use these forces anyway. Furthermore, Willow's
thirst for vengeance seems to have come from within, before
she sucked all the knowledge from those evil books, based on
Anya's knowledge before Willow ever set foot in the Magic
Box.
What Warren did was awful, but he didn't deserve what Willow
did to him. No one deserves that. Willow is so far beyond
Warren in evil that it is difficult to imagine how