November 2002 posts

Previous November 2002  

More November 2002

OT - Interesting profile article in this month's *Scientific American* -- OnM, 07:38:20 11/21/02 Thu

Check it out at: 9597-1DC9-AF71809EC588EEDF

[> Re: OT - Interesting profile article in this month's *Scientific American* -- JM, 08:50:15 11/21/02 Thu

Fred's not seeming so far now. Wonder if ME knew about this. Thanks for the link.

[> [> Re: Great Stuff! - Thanks, OnM -- Brian, 09:37:19 11/21/02 Thu

[> Re: OT - Interesting profile article in this month's *Scientific American* -- aliera, 09:35:14 11/21/02 Thu

"In LCQ, reality is built of loops that interact and..."

I always knew reality was loopy.

Nice article and I never can resist anything that has Einstein in the title!

[> Thanks, OnM. Eagerly awaiting Sang's input now. -- Wisewoman, 09:53:13 11/21/02 Thu

[> Re: OT - No.. don't ask me.. -- Sang, 13:48:50 11/21/02 Thu

I always avoid the topic about Quantum Gravity. Since I don't know much about it, and I suspect there are any physicists who really understand it.

About young (attractive) female theoretical physicists, yes they really exist, though there aren't many of them. Usually very casual and don't wear cosmetics, except one lady I met who came from eastern Europe.

One thing I always wonder was, I never met overweight (male or female) physicist in any part of this globe (especially in theoretical physics). At least Fred fit in that profile. Other than that, she doesn't looks nor sounds like physicists.

Though I cannot tell anything about the Greek lady in above link, you can check out about Dr. Lisa Randall, Prof. of Havard U (who was prof. of MIT when she was in her early 30), one of the most important theoretical physicists in new millenium. She is also very passionate rock-climber, she almost lost her life in mountain, just before she became a star by suggesting a model that our world is actuall 5 dimensional.

If you are interested in her theory, check links below. aug2001_page3.htm http://www.esi-

[> [> Re:Thought about Dr. Randall -- Sang, 16:05:41 11/21/02 Thu

I just thought about the charactors in Buffyverse. I realized that the nerdy or brainy girls in both shows are not even close to real world smart ladies.

The most close one to Dr. Randall is not Willow nor Fred, it's Buffy! Randall, tall and slender blonde, is very strong and athletic person. Something that strikes me about her is that she was always alone. She prefer to hanging on the rocks than hanging out with some guy. She prefer to command than controlled.

Everything should be on her term, which makes many consider her as a b*tch. One of my friend in Japan was trying to organize a workshop about her work. He was really fissed off after facing her indifference to other 'inferior male' physicists.

She is very boyish, but one time in big Superstring conference, she appeared there in stunning black dress and suprised everyone.

She is very hard to understand, my friend who knew her well once told me. She never let others run her life. She is always alone. I don't know, maybe it is something about being on the top of her work and being a woman at the same time.

[> [> [> Re:Thought about Dr. Randall -- aliera, 16:22:44 11/21/02 Thu

Finding a balance without losing effectiveness can be very difficult in certain environments. I obviously can't speak to hers but this is the case in mine. I have a different approach but it took a lot of trial and error and I have to work through quite a bit of criticism on being too soft and/or being too hard. We all have to make the choices we can live with and find our own way in the end. Yes, it's all connected and yet, and also yes, we are in a sense alone in this. Quite buffyesque.

humans and monsters and the BB/villain (minor spoilers from S1-7, I suppose) -- Clen, 09:03:04 11/21/02 Thu

Is there an arc of development in the BBs/villains? S1 we had a vampire, as was only fitting considering the showıs title. Vampires have always been popular as a villain for us because of their ties to being human, they also get to pursue their desire, always remain young, and be rather stylish. There are plenty of other classic monsters out there too that are popular in society because of their ties to being human (appealing because of our perceived ties of humans becoming monsters).
So, in S1, we have the Master. He does not seem terribly easy to connect back to the human aspect, he was always bumpy, we never saw him before his siring, he never became embroiled in any situations that could evoke any sympathy. He is the monster after the human aspects have been long-ago purged.
S2: Who was it? I donıt think Acathla, he was merely a tool. Spike neither, for he teamed up with Buffy. Lessons would have us believe it was Drusilla? Nah, I just think S7 BB used her form because of the effect on Spike. S7 BB was breaking Spike down, and (with the notable exception of Wilkins) Spike had a relationship with all of the forms assumed. Taking Angelıs form would possibly irritate Spike, not to mention offer up an image of a vampire that has made a good go out of getting along with his soul. Beyond all this, I think it more reasonable to make Angel the BB, beyond this the three of them were villains at one point or another. Now we still have vampires as the BB, but ones with a real human side that we got to explore, despite their homicidal behavior. These are humans (Spike, Drusilla, Angel) that have gone over to the dark side, and donıt worry about it, but the human aspect is still there for all to see.
S3: We have humans GOING over to the dark side, becoming monsters: Mayor Wilkins and Faith. They still retain some emotional attachments: Faith experiences a few touches of inner turmoil, Wilkins genuinely laments his wife, offers advice for Buffy and Angel, and parents Faith, as well as continues with his mayoral duties, even when unconnected to his grand plan.
S4: Human and monster working together, exploring the possibilities. Adam of course, the soldiers pumped up with drugs, Spike with the chip. Also of course there is the theory that the BB is the lack of cohesion amongst the SG, but in terms of villains, I think my examples are still accurate.
S5: Human and monster together, but not really working together. Maybe at the end they did, but when they did, they only seemed to enervate each other: Ben lost his charisma and Glory softened up.
S6: Straight-up humans AS the monsters. Not monsters in the sense of having powers beyond humans, like Faith, but humans doing it all on their own. Also, Buffy worried she might be a monster, though she ends up just the same as she ever was (still superpowered of course, but the monster thing was a creation of her own imagination, somewhat similar to the villain thing as a creation of J, W and Aıs imagination).

SoŠis this an arc that helps us to figure out what they might have in mind for a villain/BB this season? Will there be a further permutation of the human/monster relationship?

[> Re: humans and monsters and the BB/villain (minor spoilers from S1-7, I suppose) --
leslie, 10:50:15 11/21/02 Thu

I like your outline of the permutations. It seems to me that if the theme is really "back to the beginning" then the BB this season should be a vampire--or, given the escalation of evil in the series, perhaps the whole concept of "vampire"? Or perhaps, having done the whole vampire thing already, a demon comparable in demondom to the Master in vampiredom? That might actually make more sense--the sequence you've outlined concentrates on the overlap between "demon" and "human" as represented by the demon-possessed human that is the vampire; having ended up with the purely human evil of the Band of Evil Weenies, now it might be time to go to the other extreme, a purely demonic evil (and given what we've seen so far, I'm ready to buy that!).

[> [> Re: humans and monsters and the BB/villain (minor spoilers from S1-7, I suppose) -- Clen, 14:54:12 11/21/02 Thu

or maybe, if S6 were humans with monstrous intentions, maybe this could be a pure monster with human intentions? That would be interesting, but doesn't really jibe all that well with the whole tired of the balancing of the scales statement.

Is Xander... (SPOILERS!) -- Thomas the Skeptic, 10:01:13 11/21/02 Thu

... a "manwitch"? While I was lurking about on the board yesterday I read a post (I'm sorry that I don't remember who wrote it) that mentioned the weird choice of furnishings in Xander's apartment. I went back and watched "Sleeper" last night and, sure enough, there were the votive candles on the table outside Spike's room and the minature skull hanging on the outside of the door. What the hell? Well, it occurs to me that perhaps mr. Harris is dabbling in the black arts again (you'd think he would have learned his lesson after "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered" and "Once More With Feeling" but anyway...). For what purpose? For some time there has been this nagging thought in the back of my mind that his rapid rate of promotion with the construction company has been amazingly compact, almost surreal in fact, even when you factor in that ME plays fast and loose with some real-life details in the Buffyverse. Could it be that his success is being amplified through supernatural means? Most importantly, for me, if so, does that impact on the actions of our elusive Big Bad this year? Could it be that he will inadvertently be drawn into the circle of influence that has already ensnared Spike? I really don't think I want to see the Xan-man go bad but this year it feels like all bets are off so, who knows? Just one more (worrysome) thing to think about...

[> Re: Is Xander... (SPOILERS!) --
leslie, 10:35:31 11/21/02 Thu

Or it could be that, unhappy as he was with the roommate situation, he has been taking protective measures.

[> [> Not all magic is dark magick....... not even in Joss- verse -- Briar Rose, 15:07:43 11/22/02 Fri

[> Re: Is Xander... (SPOILERS!) -- cougar, 10:57:37 11/21/02 Thu

In the first episode this season, when Giles says" in the end we all are what we are, no matter how much we appear to have changed". The next thing we see is Xander in his new car and suit. He has been pretty slick this season. Just how did he skyrocket to sucess at 21?

He still loves Anja but his jokes seem pretty unworried about it. Maybe he wanted to become a "successful adult" so that he could redeem himself for leaving Anja at the altar by making another offer.

He didn't get any visitations either.

I always felt he kind of got short changed in the male role model depaartment. Giles could have taken him under his wing more but the kid kind of had to thrash around on his own while generously helping others. Maybe he just kinda helped himself again

[> I haven't read this thread yet, but I'd like to. Are these future spoilers or past spoilers? -- Rob, 11:38:34 11/21/02 Thu

[> [> Past spoilers. -- Isabel, 11:59:46 11/21/02 Thu

I prefer more specific warnings too, but these are pretty innocuous even if you hadn't seen 'Sleeper.'

[> [> [> Thanks! -- Rob, 12:22:23 11/21/02 Thu

[> [> Re: I haven't read this thread yet, but I'd like to. Are these future spoilers or past spoilers? -- Thomas the Skeptic, 12:45:02 11/21/02 Thu

Sorry about the vague "SPOILERS!" tag; I realized after I posted that I should have been more specific but it was too late and I did'nt want to eat up space fixing it on a new post... which I wound up doing anyway :). Sorry again!

[> [> [> That's okay. :o) -- Rob, 12:57:21 11/21/02 Thu

[> Did anyone else notice? (spoiler 7.8) -- Shiraz, 11:56:31 11/21/02 Thu

While we're on the subject;

Did anyone else notice the white peg-board - complete with white tools hanging from it - in the middle of Xanders' LIVING ROOM?

To me, this seems a little odd. There's no reson to hang tools in your fancy living room, and plenty of reasons not to. So what's the deal?

From the shot it almost looked like the board was emerging from the wall itself. Kind of like Xander's swank place is slowly transforming into the basement he tried so hard to escape from. *shiver*

Anybody else have any ideas about this?


[> [> Re: Did anyone else notice? (spoiler 7.8) -- Vickie, 12:22:34 11/21/02 Thu

It's been there at least since OMWF, I think. So it's nothing new.

Of course, that might make it a just-mature-enough image for ME to whack us with.

I thought it was just "found object art," which, I admit, I don't care for. But not sinister in any way.

Of course, the slasher always surprises me when he jumps out, so I'm not much of a judge of such things.

[> [> [> Re: I noticed, and this too... (spoiler 7.8) -- pr10n, 15:45:04 11/21/02 Thu

Yes, the peg board thing was displayed prominently in that shot, enough to make me think it has more than decor value. And I got the feel of "composition" like it was Art that reminded Xander of his life. I really liked the comment below about being like his basement. Is it a reminder of the past as a warning, or a trophy of what he's overcome, or a foreshadowing of his future?

The other objet d'art I saw was the white and black ball piece in Xander's "hallway" when Buffy and Spike were talking. White and black alternating randomly makes grey eventually, right? Waffling back and forth between good and evil, or stuggling to find balance -- that works for me re: Spike, but is it also about Xander? About Buffy?

[> [> Re: Did anyone else notice? (spoiler 7.8) Yes! -- Deb, 14:22:32 11/21/02 Thu

I noticed. The place looks drab without Anya. And why isn't the TV on all the time? Isn't that what guys do when they're home? Watch TV? I'm glad to see he had a coffee maker.

[> [> I first noticed them in Intervention -- Dyna, 15:17:10 11/21/02 Thu

I think the tools on the wall are just quirky decor for a guy who prides himself on being good with his hands. Though now that we mention it, there's a definite resemblance between Xander's peg-board o' tools and the peg-board o' weapons in the old training room in the Magic Box. Maybe sometime we'll see Xander crack that thing open and put those tools to another use?

[> [> It's a guy thing.*L I've known guys who live alone and see tools as legitimate decor choices -- Briar Rose, 15:13:00 11/22/02 Fri

[> Alternative Explanations.... -- Eye_of_lurking, 12:19:15 11/21/02 Thu

1) Xander has undergone a conversion to Catholicism (they are votive candles after all).
2)Maybe he is once again using alternative lighting tachniques to rustle up some tail: keep in mind that just moments before he first snogged the lovely Anyanka, he was hanging a disco mirror-ball in his basement.
4)Xander is just a really big fan of Scream
5)He's a guy that's spent every other waking hour of the last 7 years of his life locked in mortal combat with the undead; he's had love affairs with mummies; he's served as one of the Count's bugeaters; he's been known to hang out all night for weeks on end in the cemetary. In other words this could be very normal, abnormal, Xander Harris MO.

Then again he could be a raving sociopath gone all power hungry and dark-eyed veiny.

[> Has he redecorated since Anya left? -- Rob, 12:27:05 11/21/02 Thu

Because those items could have been leftovers from her...just some extra stock from the Magic Box, perhaps.


[> This recalls the wonderful lines... -- Tchaikovsky, 14:30:52 11/21/02 Thu

In Bargaining, Part Two

(Psyche is a god. Find her at

So you got a witch in the mix.

More than one.

I happen to be a very powerful
Manwitch myself. Or... male...
is it 'warlock'?

Actually, there must be some improvisation in the episode, because Xander goes more like:


'Is it warlock?'

[Tacit embarassed approval]

XANDER [overconfidently]


Which is yet another disappointment from David Fury. I just find his episodes so boring compared to most of the other writers. Oh well.


[> This would throw the chemistry of the show off-balance for me... -- ZachsMind, 15:01:19 11/21/02 Thu

The thing that makes Xander work in the context of the series is the fact that he is not special in any particular way. He's not a vamp. He's not a witch. He's not a werewolf. He's not a superhero. He doesn't mix up a concoction and drink it thus getting super powers. He's simply a human ordinary male caught up in extraordinary situations. Everyone around him is 'special' in one way or another. There's The Slayer, The Key, The Witch, The thousand year old Ex-Demon. And Spike's the token Gentleman Vampire with a bad reputation but a heart of gold.

Xander's just a guy. Sometimes he dabbles in mystics or other strangeness, but never for more than an episode and always with unsatisfactory results. Being the one completely ordinary guy is the one thing that ironically makes Xander special and makes him stand out. If they were to turn Xander into a 'manwitch' it'd just ruin the chemistry of the group. It'd be like having too much tobasco sauce on a crunchy taco.

I'm not saying it's implausible. It just doesn't seem to jibe with what Whedon & his gang have been doing with Xander since day one. If that's the direction they go, the results would be anticlimactic, disappointing and unfair to their viewers, to say the least.

...Although it would explain why Xander was able to stand up to Dark Willow at the end of last season without getting all burnt to a cinder. Hmmm...

[> [> Reply to Tchaikovsky & ZachsMind ... -- Thomas the Skeptic, 07:09:20 11/22/02 Fri

Tchaikovsky (love that name, by the way; one of my favorite composers!), you're right on target. That's exactly the scene I was thinking of when I used the phrase. It always tickled my fancy because, as soon as Xander said it, my brain instantly flashed on him being suddenly turned into this gigantic sandwhich with sloppy joe like stuff spilling out of the sides. That would have startled the demon he was confronting I'm sure! And ZachsMind, in my eagerness to use that phrase I sort of overstated myself: I don't really think Xander is or will become a warlock. I still think, though, that he may have cast some kind of spell to attain his current prosperity and that we will still see the bill come due on it. One last thing before I abandon this topic: I think (unspoiled speculation) that that brief scene in the opening credits this season where we see Xander's forehead bathed in that ghostly blue light is a short glimpse of a yet unshown episode where he is either hypnotized by the BB or is being initiated into its cause as the cost of that previously mentioned spell. We'll just have to wait and see...

[> [> [> Re: the blue light -- Rob, 09:00:57 11/22/02 Fri

I think the blue light reflection on Xander's face was a clip from "Hell's Bells," when the FakeOld!Xander was about to show him his "future," but I could be wrong.


[> [> [> But the reason for Xander's prosperity has been explained w/o his casting a single spell... -- ZachsMind, 09:25:45 11/22/02 Fri

In the episode "The Replacement" where Xander was split in two, he was given a strong indication why he's been so unsuccessful up until that point, that the fears and weaknesses in his psyche were what was dragging him down. Until then he'd blame everyone and everything around him for his failures, but he saw before him in "The Replacement" how his own weaker self was the thing holding him back. That was back in season five I believe, and since then Xander has improved his overall behavior, even improving his relationship with Anya and almost marrying her. Remember that again it was his own insecurities and fears that held him back from going through with the wedding.

To paraphase The Bard, the fault my dear doubting Thomas lies not in Xander's stars, but in his selves. So to assume Xander's control over his own destiny is mystically enchanted does a disservice to the changes and growth he has made in the past as a character. Granted, in "Once More With Feeling" we learned he is capable of using magic to attempt to create a "happy ending" However, that was using magic to control events outside his own personal sphere of influence. He *may* have used such magicks to control his own destiny, but it's more realistic to assume he's just pulling himself up by his own bootstraps. The M.E. writers have given us no indication he's used magicks specifically to improve his status in the construction business. He's just become a more responsible and hard-working human being. Xander just grew up.

That's the only magick I see working here. YMMV of course.

[> [> [> [> Re: Rob & ZachsMind... -- Thomas the Skeptic, 12:02:42 11/22/02 Fri

Rob, you may be right about that clip being from "Hell's Bells"; I'll have to dig out my copy and doublecheck. As for ZachsMind; I won't say that I'm completely convinced that Xander is magic-free but you have presented some persuasive arguments, my friend, and worn down my resistance to alternative theories considerably. Thanks to everyone who responded to my question. I'll be posting again soon with a new season seven speculation that contradicts all the theories I've already put forward this year!

Doors/portals/passages--first post! -- Ysabel84, 11:01:01 11/21/02 Thu

In another thread, referring to a recurring image in AtS, Alcibiades said:

And Angel has all those window frames showing us who feels isolated and outside of the family at any one moment that show up everywhere. I love the consistency of it on Angel. It is something that Buffy doesn't have, a consistent symbol that reappears. (Well, we had the ascension/descension bit last year -- from the Gift to Grave -- but that seems to have gone away now. That was great when they were using it. Spider webs this year maybe as a symbol of connection to good or evil??? but it seems less clear.)

As I watched "Sleeper," it occurred to me that BtVS actually does have a recurring image or metaphor, and has had for a long time: doors.

I'm probably not the first person to come up with this. Speaking of stairs, hasn't Buffy had those pictures of doors or archways on her stairway at least since season 3?

Some other examples:

Buffy herself, as the Slayer--both human and super-human, stands in and guards a passage between human and non-human worlds.

Dawn as Key both opens a portal and isa Door--"the key is the link" ("Blood Ties"), "The Key is energy. It's a portal. It opens the door..." ("No Place Like Home").

Buffy crashing open crypt doors (usually Spike's)--how often have we seen that?

The closed crypt door between Buffy and Spike in "Dead Things"

Spike behind closed doors in the basement in "Lessons."

Count the number of closed and closing doors in "Sleeper," then notice Giles dashing open Robson's door in the last scene.

Reminiscent of Giles in the open door of the Magic Box at the end of "Two to Go"?

Doors. When are they open? When are they closed? What are they keeping in, what are they keeping out?

I'm sure you can add more examples. I'm late for a meeting, myself, or...

[> Re: Doors/portals/passages--first post! (spoilers to 7.8) -- Slain, 12:00:43 11/21/02 Thu

For a show almost shot all on a set, BtVS definitely uses a lot of doorways, and transitions between places. Joss Whedon has talked about how he likes to have his sets built so they link together, making it possible to go from one set to another (as in 'Restless').

Certainly doors and portals are recurring images on both shows. Dimensional portals can signify both escape to another world, and that other world impinging on this one.

'Sleeper' used the idea of one world impinging on the other in the scene with Anya and Spike. The doorway signifies a barrier between her comfortable world in Xander's living room, and the unknown of Spike. In 'Lessons', Buffy crossing the door to Spike's room is an escape, in the literal way of escaping from the zombies, and it's also the barrier Spike uses between the real world, and his mad internal world.

[> [> Re: Doors/portals/passages--first post! (spoilers to 7.8) -- aliera, 12:23:21 11/21/02 Thu

And also remember the spate of recent posting about this on Angel and the windows...I think that it's been on people's minds since the early ep w/ the stairwell and the framed doorway pics and then the MC Escher mention by Rufus and others and the discussion of labyrinths/mazes (different things because one of them only has one possible exit) and the use of different areas of buildings and their spaces (stairwells) etc...(season 5 Buffy and Spike meeting on the porch) ...actually you are very right, Slain, this goes back and perhaps it's just posts like Ysabel's that function as a much needed reminder and this also reminds me of Omn's link to the SA.

I was trying to remember the last time Buffy was in the basement of a house (not the labyrinth of the Hellmouth) with Spike and that would be Smashed. The last stairwell scene I remember was Flooded. In the hands out of the dirt reminded me of Fear, Itself. Anyone else?

[> Re: Doors/portals/passages... and some masonic weirdness (spoilers 4.8) -- ponygirl, 12:21:17 11/21/02 Thu

Interesting post Ysabel84! And welcome. I liked your take on the many portals. The doors and stairs seem to me to be about transitions, the moving of one state to another which seems to be a big part of the show.

You actually got me thinking about something that struck me about Sleeper. The basement seemed pretty gothic for a suburban home, and I noticed that Spike was positioned by an arch for a lot of the shots. I did a quick Google to see if I could find any symbolic goodies about arches and ended up with a lot Freemason info. Apparently one of the orders of the masons is known as the Royal Arch. These Royal Arch guys have a particular badge that incorporates the seal of Solomon. The picture of the seal had a really strong resemblance to the seal uncovered by Jonathon and Andrew (sans goat head). Not that unusual, except that the discussion of the masonic seal also included a bit on the symbol for fire, the exact same symbol used in AtS 4.7. Again iffy connection. Then I read the translation of words that appear beneath the Royal Arch symbol: "Nothing is wanting but the Key".

Hmm. I have no knowledge of masonic symbols or meanings, but I've definitely got my ponder hat on now. Thanks for posting!

[> [> Re: Doors/portals/passages... and some masonic weirdness (spoilers 4.8) -- Slain, 12:27:45 11/21/02 Thu

Maybe the Big Bad is a Mason - it wouldn't surprise me. They have to be up to something more than playing with trowels.

[> [> [> Re: Doors/portals/passages... and some masonic weirdness (spoilers 4.8) -- ponygirl, 12:34:57 11/21/02 Thu

Could this be added onto the Suspicious Things About Xander pile? He is a glorified bricklayer after all.

[> [> [> [> Re: Doors/portals/passages... and some masonic weirdness (spoilers 4.8) -- aliera, 13:18:57 11/21/02 Thu

Added to the STAX?

Ye gads that's in the Library.

Which is now the Principal's office.

Who has the Power.

It really *IS* all connected. ;-)

[> Re: Doors/portals/passages--first post! -- Rook, 13:09:05 11/21/02 Thu

Another door related note I don't often see mentioned, but as an example of how Buffy's grown in power, in The Harvest, she claims she can't break down the door to the Bronze. However in OMWF she kicks it in with one try.

And of course, the doors play a huge role in her relationships with Angel/Spike...see Passions, Crush or The Gift.

Apologies if this has already been discussed... (Selfless, CWTD and Sleeper spoilers--7.5, 7.7, 7.8) -- Rob, 11:31:29 11/21/02 Thu

...but, I was wondering about the significance of the song that Morphy!Spike sings to snap Spike into killer mode. Did anyone come up with any theories as to why this song was chosen as the one to hypnotically control Spike?

Another thing I found interesting, btw, is the fact that once again we see the BBW lose control of the person he is trying to control. Last week, it was when it went overboard with the suicidal suggestions to Willow. It misjudged Willow's emotions, and thought that the idea of being with Tara would be enough to convince Willow to off herself, never considering that Willow would realize that Tara would never suggest such a thing. This week, we know Spike has been feeding, and turning the girls into vamps. However, when he bites the girl in this episode, the one who calls him a "bad boy," and "Buffy" appears to cheer him on, he stops drinking, and drops the body in horror. Although for a moment, the Buffy illusion did work, and get him to vamp out, when he looked up again at Buffy, he stopped, in revulsion for what he had done. Later, the song gets Spike to vamp out, and he begins to drink the blood from Buffy's wound, but then--boom--he realizes what he's doing and is able to break free from the suggestion. I believe what is happening is that just as the BBW misjudged how Willow would react to such mental manipulation, so it did for Spike. Its weakness is that it can mimic humans, interactions, and emotions, but does not understand them. It thinks, "Spike's in love with Buffy. If I show a version of Buffy to him that encourages him on in the killing, he will want to do it. Because he will do what she wants." What the BBW does not understand is the reason Buffy could never love Spike in the past was because of the fact that he was soulless, and, were he not chipped, would have the potential to maim and kill (ever since she was brought back, he could hurt her). Therefore, even though he was first encouraged by "Buffy," he then looks up at the same face that, in real life, would be horrified and disgusted by his actions. And that's, I believe, why he stops. He's mentally torn between his fantasy of Buffy, the one who starts out kindly consoling him in "Selfless" and then soon convinces him that she wants him to kill again, and the real Buffy, who would, again, be disgusted by this. Spike is smarter than the BBW thinks. I don't think it's any coincidence that each time Morphy appears as Evil!Spike, it convinces Spike to be evil, and each time Morphy appears as Buffy, Spike soon stops his bloody acts.


[> Apoligies accepted -- Deb, 14:42:26 11/21/02 Thu

I like your thoughts on Willow "overcoming" last week, and Spike this week. I agree with pretty much all you have to say here. The song talk is the last thread on the board right now. Interesting, the two closest to evil (most recently) are the first to recognize it as manipulating them. Did you notice in the fight in the basement that the vamp in the red shirt keeps hitting the other vampires?? And where were all the girl vamps? There must be more somewhere. sorry. rambling. have test in hour.

[> Evil and manipulation -- Sara, 16:08:39 11/21/02 Thu

Really good points! I'm noticing a pattern - evil doesn't really have such a great handle on human behavior and emotions. I remember being surprised that after Angel turned to Angelus his conversations with Buffy actually seemed pretty tame. It was obvious he was looking to hurt her as much as possible, and it seemed to me that given how well he grew to know her as Angel, that he could twist the knife far more painfully than he did. Darbs gave me the anwer - that Angelus is not very empathetic and therefore not really going to be as effective with emotional cruelty. Of course any rejection was going to hurt her, but I'll tell you, I know a bunch of people that could have turned her into quivering bowl of jello without even breaking a sweat. (I have a fun selection of family and friends.) Spike was much more dangerous with words and emotions, but then he had that "stench of humanity."

I think that the closer to true evil, the farther you get from any real feelings of any kind, and the less effective you are at manipulating people.

[> [> Interesting... -- Rob, 16:56:43 11/21/02 Thu

...that's the line of thinking I'm currently on. For example, with the BBW, it knows of love as a concept, but having never truly experienced it cannot understand it. Its conception of love in the Willow/Tara situation, for example, seems to be similar to James in the Angel episode "Heartthrob"--that love must consume you completely, which is, of course, unhealthy. The BBW thinks that by throwing around platitudy concepts of love, it can manipulate its victims. But it doesn't understand that someone who truly loves another would never ask them to die to be with them. It doesn't understand that Spike's love of Buffy would not necessarily mean he would unquestioningly do anything she says. Yes, it understands that at first, the idea of Buffy encouraging him on to kill the woman would arouse him, but it doesn't understand that the reason Spike got a soul in the first place was to prove to Buffy that this is something he would not do anymore, and so the image of Buffy ultimately doesn't encourage him, but is the impetus for him remembering all of the awful things he's done and feeling even more beneath her than before. Interestingly, the BBW almost does drive Spike to suicide-by-Slayer, so it did more effectively manipulate him than Willow, but not enough to actually kill Buffy, which is presumably the BBW's motive. After all, it knows that Buffy lets her guard down with Spike, and that he can therefore be used to harm her, especially since, with the soul, it would seem like he couldn't.


[> [> [> It's still early yet -- Dariel, 17:44:09 11/21/02 Thu

Morphy/BBW may not understand emotions like love, but it may be capable of learning. It didn't seem too upset over its failures with Willow and Spike; maybe this is Morphy's version of "research." It could be working out its strategy, figuring out how far it can go with each person.

As for the song, I have two theories. One, it's something Dru sang during a particularly horrible kill, the memory of which has been haunting Spike. Or two, and this is probably a silly one, the song is associated with some childhood trauma of William's. A trauma that had a major impact on his personality; perhaps some repressed memory about his mother.

[> [> [> [> I agree... -- Rob, 20:18:25 11/21/02 Thu

I think the BBW is definitely not something to be trifled with. Whether it succeeded each time or not, it (a) is connected to all of these girls being killed; (b) did succeed in cruelly mentally torturing Spike, and in hurting Willow deeply, and possibly in also doing so to Dawn. I definitely agree that it's honing its skills regarding harming the Scoobies, possibly testing the waters to see what works, what doesn't. If I were in the Buffyverse, I'd definitely be scared about now.


[> [> [> [> Why this song? -- Retread, 06:43:06 11/22/02 Fri

One of the verses not quoted in the show fits Spike's actions perfectly:

Soon you will meet with another pretty maiden
Some pretty maiden, you'll court her for a while;
Thus ever ranging, turning and changing
Always seeking for a girl that is new.

OT:The Pain of a Buffy-less Fan -- Sue, 13:36:18 11/21/02 Thu

Do you guys realize how much it hurts to read (or try not to read) all the great posts about last Tuesday's episode when it wasn't shown here in Phoenix because of a basketball game? Now I'm trying to find out if and when it will air. I've tried calling our UPN station-calls won't go thru. I've looked on their website and can't find any info. Any ideas?

[> Re: OT:The Pain of a Buffy-less Fan --
Egak, 14:10:20 11/21/02 Thu

Buffy was pre-empted here in Philly too.

[> Keep calling and ask for the program director. -- Deb who has been there and back, 14:28:19 11/21/02 Thu

The wait will be well worth it, but pin her/him down. And let her/him know that you didn't appreciate it all. Usually stations try for a weekend showing during the afternoons or at night. Call a radio station, pick carefully, and complain (does the TV station have a sister radio station?). Be pro- active.

[> [> Re: Keep calling and ask for the program director. -- Sue, 15:29:15 11/21/02 Thu

I'd love to keep calling, but just found out that the number for the station (KUTP) has been disconnected. Funny, the station is still on. Hmmmm, could they be trying to avoid angry Buffy fans?

[> [> [> They've got email, don't they? -- Isabel, 15:39:27 11/21/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> Re: Well...hmmmmm -- Sue, 18:03:17 11/21/02 Thu

You'd think so, right? I've looked at the website and can't find a thing! They do have a program guide, and maybe Buffy is being shown at 9pm on Sat. but there are other listings for Buffy, too. (I'm so confused -very small, pitiful, wish I could figure this out- voice)

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Well...hmmmmm, does it matter -- wiscoboy, 08:38:37 11/22/02 Fri

Here in Winston-Salem, the entire show was aired but the UPN feed just happened to pick that time to be at its worst. The picture would catch & go into slo-mo with an accompaning loss of sound. This went on for the entire ep, even when Aimee Mann was singing her tune. Really ticked me off. So you may have missed that action.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Humm. Shifty Station. Why didn't ABC pick Buffy up like it wanted to? -- Deb, 09:34:54 11/22/02 Fri

But then again, who knows what they would have done to it? Is there anything good on ABC anymore?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Why didn't ABC pick Buffy up like it wanted to? - Heck with them -- wiscoboy, 12:00:27 11/22/02 Fri

I was hoping Rupert Murdoch at FOX would pick it up...they seem to be the only ones truly interested in BTVS. They could then air the new eps on the free-air network and then add them to their collection on Fx.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> A&E should pick it up -- Deb, 15:01:46 11/22/02 Fri

Since they lost "Law and Order" I don't make it there very often. And it's "basic" cable here. Show it 4x a day too.

[> Recent Post -- meritaten, 16:03:08 11/21/02 Thu

I recently saw a post by someone else about this. Seems to me that they had found the time it would be shown (Sat at 9????? -Not sure that that is even close, but it just popped into my head). Check the messages from yesterday and see if you can find it. Also try to set up an account at GIST.COM. THe site allows you to set up a personal TV calendar. I use it to keep track of my shows. They are usually pretty good about having accurate show times.

I'll post again if I find the thread I referred to above.

[> Saturday at 9pm in Phoenix -- Cheryl, 13:27:19 11/22/02 Fri

I always check TVGuide online and do a search for Buffy to get the dates and times when preempted.

[> [> Houston, we have lift-off! -- Deb, 15:04:17 11/22/02 Fri

Riley/Buffy in light of CWDP (spoilers from CWDP) -- Shambleau, 18:01:56 11/21/02 Thu

One of the unique glories of BTVS is how episodes change their meaning or reveal unexpected facets as the story progresses. Her early magic forays look much less benevolent and harmless now that kitteny Willow has shown her claws, for example.

Even eps that seemed, and maybe were, clumsily executed now seem perfectly logical. Buffy's immediate conversion to the wild side by Faith in Bad Girls, which I thought far too quick back then, and even out of character, looks inevitable now. Why, of course she'd be drawn to darkness and misusing her power, it's Slayer nature!

Anya's glomming on to Xander and her desire to define the relationship immediately, with her enshrined as "The Girlfriend", and, later, as "The Wife" also seemed, if not inexplicable, at least a little weird. I just accepted it as a comedic convention and a result of Anya's unfamiliarity with human emotions. After Selfless, it all beautifully fit together and I just marveled at how ME could tie up loose ends and deepen a character at the same time.

CWDP does the same thing for me with certain aspects of the Buffy/Riley relationship. In Doomed, one of my least favorite eps from S4, Buffy spends most of the ep spelling out why the relationship can't last. Then, at the end, she completely reverses herself, goes to Riley's room, and they're on their way to couplehood. It was never explicitly stated what changed her mind. Him saving her? His arguments that they were right for each other and she should make a leap of faith? It didn't seem enough, at least for me. I thought it was just the writers pushing them together, as did many others. And it may have been. But even if ME really had plans for Riley to be Buffy's guy from then on, they set up enough flaws in the relationship from the get-go for the later melt-down to work. Buffy's sudden shift, for example. It now looks like their probably doomed future was precisely the attraction for Buffy, or at least a major factor. She can pick 'em with deadly accuracy all right, as she says in CWDP.

Also, Riley's normality, which was assumed to be a selling point for Buffy, now ties in with her superiority complex and her frozen-in-time idealization of her love for Angel. Even in the episodes where their love was supposedly blossoming, she treats him somewhat condescendingly. At the end of NMR, after Riley has given up everything for her and become a fugitive, she never says how much she appreciates what he did. Her comment when they're hiding out is something along the lines of "Quite a day, huh." She then leaves him to go to LA when she hears Angel's in danger. In The Yoko Factor, she leaves the bruised Riley in her room and goes outside to talk to Angel and the chemistry between those two is palpable. The lack of chemistry between SMG and MB play a useful role here too in underlining the down spiral to come, even if it wasn't intentional.

She goes back in and responds to Riley's declaration of love in a way that seems affirming, but without ever saying that she loves him too. In her dream in Restless, he's Government Stooge guy first. So, beneath her, there. Then he abandons her when she puts on the glowy Slayer clay, showing that she doesn't think he can handle her Slayerness.

Then, in S5, there's her simultaneous over-protectiveness and emotional withdrawal, both of which come form her feeling of Slayer separateness and superiority and both of which contribute to Riley's melt-down. Riley does his part in making things worse, too, of course.

All in all, the analysis clarifies for me a lot of the reasons that that couple were doomed from the start. Way to go, ME!

[> Lack of chemistry? -- cougar, 19:32:15 11/21/02 Thu

When you talk of the lack of chemistry between SMG and MB, do you mean the actors or the characters? Were there problems behind the scenes betewen the actors?

[> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- Shambleau, 19:52:04 11/21/02 Thu

Lack of chemistry between them as their characters. I don't know if they were great buds offscreen, but I've never heard that there were problems between them. It's a problem of several ME ships. I see no chemistry between Cordelia and Angel, for example, even though the writers say they're in love. That has something to do with CC, I think, because DB has had more chemistry with some of the one-ep co-stars than with her. And he had it with SMG in spades.

In the case of Riley and Buffy, I like it that SMG and MB didn't have sparks together, because it highlights the flaws in the relationship, although it's more than likely just an accidental bonus. I doubt if that was ME's original intent

[> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- cougar, 20:45:29 11/21/02 Thu

I see your point. Buffy and Riley certainly had respect and comfort and affection and a certain amount of value congruence. Buffy had more of a mature, flexible world veiw. Riley kept her ideas grounded and practical, but other men in Buffy's life that she admired (Angel and Giles) had vastley more sophisticated stores of knowedge and experience than Riley could.

Spike and even Holden Webster she could open up to because they were able to tell her things about her essential self that she had trouble understanding or even seeing.

I felt that Cordy never had any chemistry with Xander either. I always thought her purpose there was to highlight Xanders emotionaly broken background and a self image that let him believe he dserved to be neglected, the mistreatment was just familiar to him. The only time I thought she had any appeal was when he bought her the grad dress and she showed him appreciation and some vulnerability . Before that he was beneath her.

[> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- Tess, 23:29:51 11/21/02 Thu

""I see no chemistry between Cordelia and Angel, for example, even though the writers say they're in love.""

The reason most people don't see the chemistry between Cordy and Angel is because it hasn't been thrown in our faces the way Buffy/Angel was. And it couldn't be.

The first season of Angel was all about Angel getting over Buffy and realizing he had a purpose beyond her. The second season was all about his obsession with Darla. And despite what he refused to tell Darla about the 'L' word, can you imagine the hold a woman would have to have on a vamp like Angelus to keep him interested for 150 years.

It was only after Buffy died and Angel realized he survived her death, that they started to build Angel/Cordy. Their relationship had to be done in a slow way or we would have been crying OOC. I'm not a big Cordy/Angel shipper but I will admit their scenes at the Opera sizzled. Had me on the edge of my seat saying More, More! And than they bought in Groo, and didn't even give us a fleshy love scene there either. Actually for all we know Cordy's lack of enthusiasm with Conner is the way Cordy performs all the time.

ME actually haven't been nice to Cordy in the love scenes department, and I feel like we the viewers were cheated out of seeing her first 'real' sexual relationship. I guess it happened sometime in the summer between Graduation and running into Angel in LA. Or maybe it didn't, maybe it really was with the surrogate demon baby lover guy and that's why she's so screwed up now that she's boinking Angel's son.

[> [> [> [> Cordelia's first time -- Helen, 02:01:18 11/22/02 Fri

Can't agree about the timing of Cordy's first time. I remember way way back when she was still with Xander (can't remember what ep it was but it may have been Phases) and she says something like "My daddy thinks I'm still a ...nice girl." I'd say first sexual experience was yonks ago, probably with some sexually inept jock, but then I don't understand why she and Xander never had sex.

[> [> [> [> [> Surely there are other things 'nice girls' don't do! -- Rahael, 02:10:11 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Or things that nice girls do do! -- Helen, 02:14:38 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> Re: My thought on Cordy and Xander -- Brian, 05:05:42 11/22/02 Fri

I always thought that the reason Cordy and Xander never had sex is that they really loved one another. Neither wanted to be a one night stand.

[> [> [> [> [> [> don't get ya ... -- Helen, 08:23:29 11/22/02 Fri

I agree that Xander and Cordy had a far more meaningful relationship than their friends gave credit, and this can be seen by the how terribly hurt she was at the end of Lover's Walk by Xander's betrayal with Willow.

But why would having a meaningful relationship mean that they wouldn't have sex? Why should it have been a one night stand? Teenage sex isn't necessarily meaningless.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: don't get ya ... -- Brian, 08:35:04 11/22/02 Fri

My understanding of Cordelia was that she was everyone's next one (especially if it involved a rich guy with a fast car). When she and Xander fell in love, she found out that he had respect for her as a person. She didn't want to do what she had done with all those other guys, and since Xander had so much respect for her, they never consumated their relationship. Theirs was a romantic love, not a sexual one.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> good point, but I loved BTVS S1-3 Cordy so much... -- Helen, 08:40:21 11/22/02 Fri

that I never really thought of her as the class tramp. I accept that sleeping with Xander would have different from fooling around with the jocks in the back of daddy's car, I just don't understand why it never happened. Unless that would have led to sex overload in season 3.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Locker Door Material -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:29:45 11/22/02 Fri

In "Lover's Walk" (may be the wrong episode, but it was sometime in Season 3) Xander saw that Cordelia had pictures of him hanging on her locker door. The conversation went like this:

Xander: I didn't realize I was locker door material.

Cordelia: Well, just barely. Besides, I look cute in those pictures.

Granted, we know Cordelia had grown to love him given what she told Buffy in "Homecoming", but it seemed pretty clear that neither was really sure how the other felt about them. If Xander doubted Cordelia would have pictures of him in her locker, it's not unreasonable to assume that they hadn't reached the point of having sex yet.

(Also, can you imagine those two trying to sleep together? Sure they could make out, but that action stops them from using their mouths. The moment their lips part they insult each other, which would probably put the kibosh on sex.)

[> [> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry - TOTAL LACK -- Angelina, 09:29:27 11/22/02 Fri

"I'm not a big Cordy/Angel shipper but I will admit their scenes at the Opera sizzled. Had me on the edge of my seat saying More, More"

Had me screaming "HOW LAME IS THIS" and made me a wee bit nauseous too. Sorry but the reason CC hasnıt had any sexual scenes is because she does not exude abounding sexuality on screen. EVER. And, she is beginning to look a little too "long in the tooth" for her to convincingly portray a woman in her early twenties - let alone have sex with a CHILD, but letıs not start on that!

[> [> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- Shambleau, 09:45:16 11/22/02 Fri

I agree that Cordy and Angel had heat at the opera, but that was Joss in full command. I thought Buffy and Riley had chemistry in Hush, too, and guess whose ep that was. It has to be there when the other writers are in charge for me to buy it overall.

Of course, I'm against Cordy/Angel on principal. The show spent two years developing a brother and sister vibe that I loved. Finally, a series that didn't have all the characters secretly yearning for each other, that showed men and women capable of having actual friendships! All blown to hell now, of course.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- yabyumpan, 10:14:33 11/22/02 Fri

"Finally, a series that didn't have all the characters secretly yearning for each other, that showed men and women capable of having actual friendships!"

For me that's sort of the point of the C/A pairing. That they do have this very deep friendship that has now grown into 'romantic love'. It's not about obsessive passion or high melodrama but mutual respect and understanding. IMO and experience, that's the basis for the best relationships.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Lack of chemistry? -- Shambleau, 10:57:32 11/22/02 Fri

Regardless of whether mutual understanding and respect make for the best relationships (and I agree, they do), my objection is more to how series tv forces all relationships in a romantic direction.

I don't know if you've seen Firefly, but the captain, Mal, and his young engineer, Kaylee, have a wonderful, unforced, older brother/younger sister vibe. If they end up in a romance in a year or two, assuming Firefly survives, I will yak.

It's not that such a development in the confined spaces of a ship (or a hotel) while sharing danger and adventure would be impossible, it's that male/female non-romantic relationships are so rare on television that I'd prefer to see that. Not to mention the incestuous vibe, which I get from Cordy and Angel as much as from Cordy and Connor.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you, Shambleau -- Scroll, 11:14:29 11/22/02 Fri

You've articulated my main point of contention regarding Angel/Cordelia. I realise I've come down hard on A/C before but I'm really trying to be more open minded about it as a 'ship. I've decided that I'm willing to accept A/C and to sit back and let the writers tell the story. However, my initial problem with this plot point was that I loved the brother/sister vibe between Angel and Cordy. It was so fresh and dynamic and unique. Here are two really attractive people whom the writers *could* manipulate into a romantic pairing, but they won't because Joss knows better than to retread old territory... Then - whoops. Well, so much for that.

It's so rare for people to just be friends, I had my hopes up that Angel, Cordy, and Wes could mirror the B/W/X best- friends dynamic on "Buffy". Oh well, gotta live with that loss. And at least the rift between Wes and Angel is being played subtly, ratcheting up my interest and eagerness for more.

[> [> [> [> About Cordy's first time (spoilers for Bag Eggs) -- diamond in the rough, 13:25:45 11/22/02 Fri

I found this interesting piece of dialogue from the Psyche transcript for "Bad Eggs":

Mr. Whitmore: Of course, for teenagers such as yourselves these
feelings are even more overwhelming. With all sorts of hormones

Willow is clearly nervous, and looks back and forth between Xander and
giving her attention to the teacher.

Mr. Whitmore: ...through your bodies, compelling you to action, it's
often difficult to remember that there *are* negative consequences to,
uh, having sex. Would anyone care to offer one such consequence?

Cordelia raises her hand, and Mr. Whitmore indicates to her, giving her
the floor.

Cordelia: Well, that depends. Are you talking about sex *in* the car or
*out* of the car? (Mr. Whitmore looks confused) Because I have a friend,
not me, that was in a Miata at, parked at the top of the hill, and then
she kicked the gearshift, and, and...

Mr. Whitmore: (interrupts) Yeah, I, I was thinking of something a
little more commonplace, Ms. Chase.

[> [> [> Perhaps it was symbiotic? -- Tchaikovsky, 02:30:27 11/22/02 Fri

Joss has admitted that sometimes what he sees on screen, (and even the audience's reaction), informs what to do with characters. Spike, the Season Two Little Bad, was to be killed in 'What's My Line?'. Instead they wounded him, because everyone loved his character's charisma.

In the same way, perhaps, the lack of chemistry between Buffy and Riley informed the decision to have the break-up. Or if that had already been carefully plotted back in Season Four, then maybe the precise reasons for the break-up were crystallised in Sarah and Marc's performances. That dramatic scene at the end of 'The Replacement', with Xander, and then Riley's downward spiral.


My persepctive on Cordy and Conner (spoilers for Angel 4.7). -- Miss Edith, 18:14:16 11/21/02 Thu

Over here in the UK I haven't had a chance to see season 4 of Angel yet. But I notice there have been posts wondering what all the fuss is about and why the suggestion of incest. I thought I would offer my thoughts based on what I perceive the current reaction to be. The main complaints I have picked up on are:

Conner was a child and Cordy treated him that way. Shortly before propositioning Conner she apparently calls him baby in a motherly way and coos to him. He lays his head on her shoulder like a child and the actress did behave maternally towards him. I haven't seen season 4 as I said but I did get a motherly vibe personally in Tomorrow when Cordy holds Conner to her chest and soothes "let it go honey".

Conner is seen as being genuinely in love with Cordy the lady who he saw as being nice to him. He even took the step of going to his father to ask for help for her. And he has reacted badly to her rejecting his clumsy advances. Buffy grew up in our society when sex is all around us in the media. She was not especially naive with Angel. Conner grew up in an entirely different situation and is fairly innocent when it comes to sexual matters. He was clueless when a hooker offered him sex as a thank you and is likely a virgen. Therefore people are crinigng at the thought that he is naively sleeping with Cordy thinking it means something and what his reaction will be when he realises Cordy only slept with him for pity. His first sexual experience was I hear less than memorable with Cordy staring at the ceiling and not kissing Conner. People are seeing that as hurtful of Cordy. Conner is seen as the innocent and Cordy is being seen as the adult leading Conner on and confusing him.

Conner does not look 18 he looks younger. Indeed he was refered to as 16 upon first returning and his age was bumped up to 18 just recently. Not to mention Charisma looks far older than 22 and I believe she is 34 is real life. Well she has claimed to be 33 for the last few years so I assume by now she is at least 34 by now. Buffy and Angel looked right together and their love was tastefully depicted regardless of the age gap. Seeing Conner grinding against Cordy was too much for some viewers.

Also some people are pointing out Cordy has faced many apocolypses and has always chosen to stay and fight. E.g in Graduation Day she is offering desperate suggestions like chasing the mayor with germs and she is not the type to give up and accept her fate. In Lover's Walk she condemns Xander's choice to kiss another women when he felt his death was likely.

The above points pretty much sum up my feelings on Conner/Cordy.

[> Re: My persepctive on Cordy and Conner (spoilers for Angel 4.7). -- Tess, 22:54:42 11/21/02 Thu

""Conner does not look 18 he looks younger. Indeed he was refered to as 16 upon first returning and his age was bumped up to 18 just recently.""

The only one I have heard ever give an age to Conner is Cordy. She was the one who told Angel 'she wasn't going to tell his 16 year old son THAT' back in Benediction I think. And than she changed it too 18 in STB and AN. When she mentioned Conner as being 18, Angel got a real weird look on his face. Too bad he didn't call her on her assumption right than and there. And too bad they can't produce an age- telling demon that can touch Conner's forehead and tell how old he actually is.

I still think Cordy has been possessed. Even if Conner was 25 you don't tell the man you love that you love him and will always love him, even though you can't be with him, than turn around and sleep with his son that very night.

And that brings me to another thought I had earlier. In AN Cordy told Conner that for the first time since she got back she felt like she had a purpose, a reason for being back. It was so strong it got her off her tail and out hunting the beast. And than not 1 minute later the beast rose up right in front of them. What if it wasn't the place Conner was born but that she was misleading Conner into thinking it was that place and all along the beast had been using her to find his way to the surface.

Spike's Connected Too (Spoilers for all aired Buffy episodes) -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:03:09 11/21/02 Thu

"It's like I'm connected to this great evil force that's gonna suck the world into a fiery oblivion" - Holden Webbster.

Along with "it's all about power" and "back to the beginning", the phrase "it's all connected" has been identified as one of the major themes of Buffy the Vampire Slayer's seventh season. The first significant mention of being connected this year came from Willow in "Lessons". There it was presented in a benevolent light, saying that the magic Willow had absorbed connected her to the earth, that she was linked to everything in the world. But there is still an element of foreboding added to all this. Willow, while feeling the earth gets a powerful vision of the Hellmouth being full of teeth and opening to devour the world. So, while connectedness was useful and beneficial, it was still presented as having a dark side, for if everything's connected, then both good and evil must be part of the interlocking web of the world.

Then came "Conversations with Dead People". Here, we got to see more of the darkness in the "it's all connected" theme. Holden Webbster is not an ancient beast like the Master. In fact, he's only outside of his grave for a few hours. Thus, he gives us a pretty good image of what goes on inside a vampire's head in the early stages of their unlife. Holden acts, most of the time, like he's a chummy, while oddly insightful, human being. We can assume that he was like this as a human being. But becoming a vampire has changed him in a fundamental way: he openly admits and isn't ashamed of the fact that he is now evil and talks about killing Buffy and other innocent people without internal conflict or remorse. But the reason isn't the one usually associated with newly-risen vampires. The traditional stance among fans has been that, when a vampire rises from the grave, his thoughts are consumed by a lust for blood and he acts like an animal until he gets his first meal; signalling his first step towards evil. This clearly doesn't apply to Holden.

While biting Buffy is on his mind, he doesn't seem to be hungry so much as desiring the evilness of the act, otherwise he wouldn't lollygag doing his Freud routine. In fact, draining blood isn't the only thing he desires. In what might appear as a throw away line, he says that he feels motivated by an evil force to suck the world into hell (slightly paraphrased, of course). We've seen vampires try to end the world before (the Master, Spike, Drusilla, Angelus, and assorted minions), but each of them seemed to have an individual motivation: the Master had a freaky religion that advocated bring the Ancient Demons back to earth, Drusilla and Angelus were psychotic sadists, and Spike wanted to please Drusilla. Holden is the first sign we've seen that the examples listed above are not isolated, that vampires and general are drawn to aid the evil side of the force in its desire to destroy the world.

How does this long ramble apply to my subject line? Well, we all knew that after gaining his soul Spike would have to deal with the demonic urges still inside him. But Holden's comment suggests that a vampire's evil is not totally based on internal instinct; he refers to his draw towards evil as an external, quasi-spiritual force. He is connected to vampires and other evil creatures everywhere, and we can assume Spike is connected as well. If this is true, than the Shapeshifter's ability to control Spike makes more sense. If the Shapeshifter can tap into the interconnecting force of evil (and there's a chance it is actually that force personified) it is capable of reaching directly into Spike's demon and deciding what he will do. It isn't exploiting Spike's natural instincts so much as it is increasing the the pull to do evil that Spike and all other vampires feel.

Well, this was needlessly long. I think I may try some haiku or tanka essays next time.

[> Re: Spike's Connected Too (Spoilers for all aired Buffy episodes) -- Tess, 22:40:46 11/21/02 Thu

""The traditional stance among fans has been that, when a vampire rises from the grave, his thoughts are consumed by a lust for blood and he acts like an animal until he gets his first meal; signalling his first step towards evil. This clearly doesn't apply to Holden.""

When Angel rose he killed the groundskeeper at Darla's guidance and than went on to kill the entire town. But it seemed more a 'trying the fangs on for size' thing than hunger. The other vamp I remember seeing freshly risen was Darla, and she took a field trip to W&H before going on her 'spree' with Dru. In fact, she seemed (and its been a long time since I watched either of those shows) almost confused about what had happened to her, even though this was her second time rising as a vampire. And I think Angelus had said something about hearing the people above him while he was still buried. That might be why it takes so long for some vamps to decide to dig their way out of the grave. They are trying to make sense of it all. Maybe its just a case of its a very confusing time for a vamp and most of them aren't as fortunate as to have a sire as considerate as Darla was. Actually I can't remember ever seeing another vamp wait at the graveside for her newest minion (or should that be boy-toy in this case) to rise up.

The Philosophy of Toe Goblins - Safety Tips for Chat -- Dedalus, 20:23:59 11/21/02 Thu

So there you are, enjoying a late night chat with some of your most beloved Existential Scooby friends. Food and drink are being passed about freely. The conversation is moving along at an interesting clip. All is right with the world. And then ... toe goblins.

For those of you who are unaware of the existence of such creatures, it is sufficient to point out they seem to exist solely in chat rooms on the internet. They are, as it were, cyber creatures. And they like nothing better than to creep around chat rooms late at night, find a nice ripe toe of an unsuspecting chatter, and then pull for all theyıre worth. Thatıs what they do. Thatıs how they get their kicks.

While there is precious little data on this type of phenomenon, experts agree that toe goblins are about eight inches high, and are greenish-brown in color. They have no known speech patterns. They seem to communicate by virtue of a strange behavior. They will lean down and tap against the chat room floor with either long fingernails or toenails, making a kind of strange rhythmic clicking noise. Only another toe goblin can interpret it, and it is thought that that is how they coordinate their attack patterns. They are nocturnal, and so they only begin to show themselves very late at night. Despite their small size, they can pull toes like nobodyıs business, and they usually do so when it is very dark and everyone is about half asleep. They are quite shy, and do not respond very well to light at all.

When I posted about the philosophy of toe goblins, I lied. They have no philosophy. They have only one desire rolling about their dirty little goblin heads, and that is to find a toe, grab it, and never let go. They are just nasty little buggers and would never think about developing a philosophy.

At any rate, there are some tips that can be offered in dealing with them, especially for you first timers taking your maiden voyages into late night chat.

1. Wear socks at all times. Shoes are better, but socks are more comfortable. Toe goblins tend to confuse easily anyway.

2. Never feed a toe goblin. They will take this as a sign you are easy prey. And besides, they might confuse your fingers with your toes, and they donıt need any more targets.

3. Listen out for clicking noises. While it can be difficult to tell late at night, the nefarious clicking of toe goblin clans is distinguishable from the punching of computer keys to an aware chatter. This can make all the difference in the world.

4. Do not attempt to catch a toe goblin. They are extremely quick and agile, and will run for the nearest exit the moment someone sees them, but they can be caught. However, this is a bad idea. They will emit a strange and unpleasant odor as a defense mechanism when they are grabbed by human hands.

5. Have a flashlight with you at all times. Toe goblins hate light, and to shine a beam right into their eyes in the middle of a dark chat room is as good as stomping them. It paralyzes them, and they can only escape if they are carried off by their respective toe goblin clan. Toe goblins are ferociously loyal to their own kind, and so one paralyzed toe goblin can act as a lure to a whole bunch of them if used correctly.

6. Chat with a buddy. Four eyes and ears are better than two. And besides, chatting alone is no fun anyway! Believe me I know!

See you in chat!

[> Hee! --
Earl Allison, 02:10:09 11/22/02 Fri

Hilarious! Simply hilarious.

And I am NOT a Toe Goblin :) I merely play one on TV.

Take it and run.

[> Raises hand tentatively... -- Darby, 07:50:42 11/22/02 Fri

For we the uninitiated, would it be just too lame to explain what the imagery is actually representing here? Just from the sound and rhythm I can tell that many knowing heads are nodding and smiling, but I rarely venture into chat and I'm dufus enough to ask, "What's the joke?"

Buffy and Angel as a couple - Their future? (where does Cordelia, or should I say Buffy fit in?) --
Jules, 21:44:59 11/21/02 Thu

Hi I'm new to this message board, so I'm not sure if I'm repeating a previously discussed topic. Apologies if I am.

Anyway I don't know how anyone else feels, but despite all the network changes and both Angel and Buffy being two separate shows, I'm stilling hanging out for an Angel and Buffy happy ending. Highly unlikely I know, but while I can deal with this whole Buffy, Spike thing, knowing that the love dynamic is one sided helps, I'm having real trouble adjusting to Angel and Cordie being in love.

Living where I do I have only just seen the end of series three of Angel, so I am not up on the whole Connor/Cordelia angle that is emerging, so I won't go down that track. That aside and all the complications that dynamic appears to be creating, I want to focus on what has been going on between Angel and Cordelia, from season three on. Whether these new storylines will kill that loving feeling,I don't know, but if it doesn't ???.

Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems to me that all the reasons why Angel decided to move to LA and end his relationship with Buffy in the first place, are the exact same reasons that would stand between Angel and Cordelia now. Don't get me wrong she's a nice lady and all that, but come on. The entire you have your whole life ahead of you, we can never hang out in the light, never have sex, never have a child together (Connor/Stephen aside I assume), I want you to have a normal life, whatever that means, scenario remains unchanged.

Angel could have stayed in Sunnyvale fighting alongside Buffy, doing important work, just as easily as doing what he does in LA. It seems just a tad inconsistent. The writers seem to be ignoring these facts and so does everyone else in the series. It's like they have had a Buffy byepass. If I were Cordie, infact any women, would want to know, what the deal is with him and Buffy now. So they live in separate cities, so what, How does he feel about her? should she feel insecure?, If Buffy returned and fought for their relationship, would he have to think about it? Also has Cordelia grown up so much that she can overlook the same stuff that Buffy did? It seems to me that Angel has lost it's way a little.

It is great that the characters are three dimensional and have grown across the series, but I so miss the interchanges between Cordie and the team, that played on her vanity, and self absorbedness at times. She seems to have evolved on every level, personality wise, as a warrior, and moved to a higher level literally. I'm not sure how I feel about her dramatic change in character, though even in BTVS she had moments of depth. I just don't want her to have that depth with Angel.

So now what? Seems to me that everyone is just acting as if Buffy nolonger exists. I know they have been split up for 3 + years? now, but give me a break, are we expected to believe that Angel has fallen out of love with Buffy and into love with Cordelia? Maybe he loves them both. Who would he choose if he could pick between them? I know that people move on with their lives, of course they do, but their relationship was held up as the greatest love either of them has ever known. Are we meant to believe that his love for Cordie is a deeper more adult love? Both women, like Angel have gone through enormous changes and made profound sacrifices for eachother.

Before he and Cordelia started discovering eachother, he and Buffy had a very Wuthering Heights feeling going on at times. Anyone who knows that story, also knows obsessive love can be a tad unhealthy. Nevertheless the whole breakup demonstrated a very loving, though incredibly painful (and convenient for the Angel series)sacrifice. But from what is going on in Series four of Angel, there appears to be some pretty ickyish relationship developments, that are not so healthy themselves. So this love doesn't appear to be any more noble, or healthy that what Buffy and Angel had at times.

The truth is, no more network cross overs, at least for now, mean a very lonely Angel and for the romantics out there who love David, we want to see him having a bit of chemistry going on. I just never thought it would be with Cordelia. I know that some people might call their relationship an unpredictable twist, I call it very predictable and the easy way out. Especially when you consider the whole office romance scenario that was and is going on between Fred and Gunn and at one point nearly Wesley. It's all too incestous. I miss the friendships without the heavy emphasis on office romances and the complications that brings.

In conclusion I am not ashamed to admit that the best ending for me would include Angel and Buffy walking off into the metaphorical sunset together. Maybe when both series say the final harrah, it maybe a real sunset. There I have had my rant. I would love to see what other people think. Am I the only one who can't get over it. I would love you to e-mail me as well if you wish to continue any discussion.

[> Good point. -- oboemaboe, 00:34:32 11/22/02 Fri

"The entire you have your whole life ahead of you, we can never hang out in the light, never have sex, never have a child together ... I want you to have a normal life."

I can't believe I forgot about that. I guess that applies to any relationship Angel has.

One of my favorite Angel scenes is the fight in Sanctuary: "That's great. - It's nice - you moved on. - I can't. You found someone new. - I'm not allowed to, remember? I see you again it cuts me up inside and the person I share that with is me!"

This strikes me as the much more appropriate attitude than to fall for Cordy just 'cause she's convenient. I miss the old-school Angel suffering in solitude. Something noble and epic about it, you know.

[> [> Life is about Change -- Rufus, 04:03:46 11/22/02 Fri

I miss the old-school Angel suffering in solitude. Something noble and epic about it, you know.

The thing that interests me about Angel is that he has slowly done a little less suffering and a little more getting on with the business of redemption which is interacting with others and attempting to make the world a bit of a better place. The Angel suffering in solitude makes me think of our fear of change because it is unfamiliar. If Angel continued to suffer in solitude then his show would be pointless as he learns nothing while alone.

As for the ship thing....why should we have any more control over who Angel ends up with than Angel (writers) have. Life happens and things happen in life that don't always go along with what we want. If Angel ended up back with Buffy, I'd be okay with it....same as if he ends up with Cordy. I leave that choice up to the writers.

[> [> [> I don't want Angel suffering in solitutde, but... - - Scroll, 07:56:08 11/22/02 Fri

...I think it's definite ball-dropping on the part of the writers that they don't address the fact that Angel, in his own words, "That's great. - It's nice - you moved on. - I can't. You found someone new. - I'm not allowed to, remember? I see you again it cuts me up inside and the person I share that with is me!"

I'm not saying Angel needs to be alone forever. Quite the contrary, I think the "family" feel of Angel Investigations is essential to his redemption. But it seems silly to think that Angel being with Cordelia will be all fine-and-dandy when Angel being with Buffy was not. Perhaps Angel *thinking* everything would be fine-and-dandy helps rack up the angst when he finds out otherwise, but it seems odd (to me at least) that the rest of the Fang Gang, Cordy included, don't seem to see the inherent flaw in the "Angel + (insert name here) = Happy = Evil Angelus" formula. Instead, we have willful blindness, even from Lorne who is usually Insight Guy.

[> [> [> [> Re: I don't want Angel suffering in solitutde, but... -- B, 08:43:59 11/22/02 Fri

I agree that this issue should be addressed on the show. However, I think there's probably an answer: Cordy is now part demon, so she can never be with a "normal" guy anyway. Not saying I buy it, but I think that's probably how they would justify it, if they bothered to do so.

[> [> [> [> [> It can end anyway to want it to end, but the show will end as the writers determine -- Deb, 09:09:47 11/22/02 Fri

Personally, I like (not sure after Sunday) the Cordie and Angel thing. She's part demon and "higher thing" so I don't think it would be quite the same. Of course, one could agrue that Buffy is no longer all human. I like the idea of moving on and learning to love again. That's life. That's real. Perhaps everyone will end up moving on and learning to love again. I must admit that my heart felt for Angel when Cordie told him she felt him as Angelus and could'nt get past that, which might explain on reason for being with Connor (Yuck!). Angel has changed so much, and Cordie is rather confused and will be pregnant??

One time apology -- a "covering" apology. I have keyboarding dylexia and two words that I constantly mess up, not in mind but in print, are "angle" and "angel." So is you read "Angle" when I'm taking about "Angel" please correct in your mind. Thank you.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: I don't want Angel suffering in solitutde, but... -- Jules, 21:26:13 11/22/02 Fri

You're right Cordelia could never be with a so called "normal guy", but that guy doesn't have to be Angel. Remember Buffy can never be with a "normal guy" either, how could she?, not only is she slayer, a concept that most guys would have major problems with, but she has died more than than the average gal. This alone has got to play with your psyche.

When you throw in the unsocial hours she works, preference for sex with vampires (generally very cute to give her credit), an extremely questionable life expectancy and high tolerance to unsightly other beings, she's not your typical date.

God when I read back over what I have written, I wonder how she and Angel ever thought she had a shot at a "normal existence"?????

So if Cordie can't make it with a "normal Goe", Angel and apparently now Connor qualify as the most convenient love interest.

Sure Angel is extremely beautiful, but the analogy kind or reminds of one of those small back water towns (no offence meant, to anyone identifying themselves as living in said place), where there is a local population of 32, with only two eligible love interests under the age of 40) Yes I know Angel is 200+ but I hope you get my point.

I'm all for mature love, and did anyone see the article, I think way back earlier this year on slayer news, where David B said he thought maybe Buffy was only a crush for Angel. Apparently the Angel character loses interest easily and needs to move on and yada yada yada. Sounds like a nice post analysis rationalisation for falling for Cordelia.

OK I may have to accept that there is a death noll for Buffy and Angel, but by God I won't go down without a fight. If Angel and Buffy end, it's apparently the writers call, but please don't make his now "new greatest love Cordie". Too predictable.

Final point, I note that as a general rule the Angel and Buffy verse, well maybe not so much of late the Angel verse (see series 3 and Wesley for this point), seems to be reasonably good on forgiveness.

Before everyone begins to pull out examples of the opposite position, there are definitely plenty,... I'm talking about, most people forgiving Angel, Xander and Giles aside, for slaughtering countless victims, especially Jenny Calendar over the last 200 years plus. Buffy being forgiven, if that is the right word for bonking Spike, not to mention almost killing the Scoobies, when she thought she was living in a mental asylmn, Angel becoming Angelus in series two and attempting to lay waste to the Angel Investigations and so on and so forth.

My very long point here is, I believe in web etiquette this is known as shouting, so I hope the breach is forgivable .... IS ANGEL GOING TO BE ABLE TO FORGIVE CORDELIA FOR HAVING SEX WITH CONNOR? OR IS IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND? ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CONSIDER HE WILL NEVER GET TO DO THE TWO BACKED BEAST WITH HER HIMSELF... Enough already, I nearly lost my voice there.

Again if it turns out not to be her fault (controlled by uncontrollable forces) can the act be forgiven, especially when for example, it is not Angel's fault generally when he becomes Angelus..... I leave you with that deep philosophical question.

Remember Buffy may have slept with Spike, there once upon a time arch nehmisis, but then Angel did the deed with Dahla, also known for her penchant for attempting to kill both of them. I don't know if the slates wiped clean, though I imagine his two or three times doesn't quite compare with the 100+??? she and Spike managed. But hey whatever her sins, she never, never, never, slept with his son. That's got to be a serious plus in an ongoing relationship.

[> [> [> I've been a secret A/C shipper -- Rahael, 09:07:04 11/22/02 Fri

Ever since "no assembly required".

Hope it might be more successful than my other ship, Giles and Anya.

I think that one is doomed.

[> [> [> [> Me too. -- Deb, 09:38:44 11/22/02 Fri

And I'm a Giles and Anya shipper too! I've had some terrible thoughts pop into my mind though: Buffy and Xander! Now that I have confessed, I still don't feel any better.

[> [> [> [> AI'm a not so secret A/C shipper -- yabyumpan, 09:57:37 11/22/02 Fri

I pretty much always had problems with A/B and 'Enemies' killed it for me. I look at that final scene and get flashes of 'Death in Venice'. This powerful,wise, way older man being reduced and emasculated by a 17 year old school girl just made my skin crawl.

The quote about Angel not being able to 'move on' was over 2 years ago. A lot has happened to every one since then. To condem Angel to a life of solitude not only is unfair to the character personally but also takes away areas of growth for the character. I agree that the whole curse thing needs to be sorted and I've a feeling It will be this season. But even if it isn't, I very much doubt the 'perfect happiness' is an option now, even before sunday's gouging our eyes out fest. For me, Cordy and Angel are perfect for one another because of the closeness they have come have as friends and the understanding they have of one another. Friendship turning into 'romantic love' is far more realistic and healthy than 'wuthering hights'.

[> [> [> [> [> I agree...I love A/C; C/C not so much. ;o) -- Rob, 11:44:14 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> Re: Thanks for your comments -- Jules, 21:32:40 11/22/02 Fri

I'm glad you feel the same way, it's good to know that I'm not alone in my frustration. I hope that the script writers will put some real thought in where they are going with Angel, Cordelia and Buffy.

[> SPOILER - Buffy and Angel as a couple - REPLY TO JULES -- Angelina, 06:46:36 11/22/02 Fri

You are a girl after my own heart! I agree with you more than totally! I could NEVER see Angel with Cordy. It is so WRONG. I could accept him falling in love with a new woman, but for me his true love will ALWAYS be Buffy. In fact, when you say:

..."The best ending for me would include Angel and Buffy walking off into .... maybe the real sunset..."

I almost cried, cause I wrote the same exact thing on this board months ago. Nope, you are NOT the only one who feels Buffy and Angel belong together - I think, and have written as such further down the board, that a Buffy/Angel Crossover is about to happen at the end of this season. Maybe we will get some resolution, one way or the other, at that time.

[> [> I'm not so optimistic, I'm afraid (spoilers for Apoc, Nowish) -- Scroll, 08:08:48 11/22/02 Fri

While I am a B/A shipper, I have no expectations of a reunion outside of fanfic. Whether Angel will end up with Cordelia is debatable, especially after the controversial C/C scene at the end of "Apoc, Nowish". Personally, I don't see much chemistry between Cordy and Angel. Some people saw lots of chemistry between A/C in "Waiting in the Wings", but I have to admit I was mostly cringing. It's the eyes, I think. I heard the words and saw the body movements, but the eyes told a different story.

On the other hand, the look in Angel's eyes when Cordy was saying how she could feel how much Angelus enjoyed killing and torturing was quite eloquent. David B convinced me with his eyes in *that* scene. It's too bad he can't convince me that Angel really loves Cordy. Though -- and I hate saying this about any actress -- Charisma actually sells me on A/C even less than DB does. Sorry, A/C shippers, maybe I'm just being wilfully blind myself.

[> [> [> JMO: B/A is doomed; C/A is a non-starter -- cjl, 10:31:40 11/22/02 Fri

B/A 'shippers, I empathize. But there's no happy ending waiting for Buffy and Angel at the end of the series. Their destinies have taken them to separate places, and the near- operatic, "first love" teenage love affair of S1-3 will remain a sweet memory.

I think it's Buffy's destiny to be alone. She's always been on the knife's edge, on the borderland between human and demon, and it's almost impossible for her to find a lover who can truly understand her day-to-day existence. Angel tore through her life like a whirlwind, but I don't think they connected on a number of deeper levels. Riley certainly didn't. Xander hero worships her, and turns a blind eye to the darkness--he's not the one, either. Spike? Maybe. But considering what we've seen in Sleeper, we've got a long way to go for a B/S relationship that won't end up killing them both.

C/A? I agree 100% with posters who saw nothing in "Waiting in the Wings." I was astonished by how badly the C/A scenes came off, how INERT. Yes, Cordy and Angel were supposed to be awkward because of their mutual possession, but beyond the awkwardness, we should've seen an underlying passion bubbling to the surface. DB and CC didn't convey it. The script didn't convey it. I thought it was a total loss--an amazing statement for a Joss Whedon episode. I've never been able to climb on board since, and the recent Connor/Cordy hijinks have just given my stomach another twist...

C/A as brother/sister? Yes. C/A as lovers? No.

Bring on electrogirl. She and Angel--ahem--crackle.

[> [> [> [> I can get behind that, Gwen is cool -- Scroll, 10:45:57 11/22/02 Fri

Yeah, I saw more sparkage, literal and figurative, between Angel and Gwen in that one episode than I've ever seen between Angel and Cordelia. I realise that "sparks" alone don't make a relationship, but you can't sell a "grand passionate kye-rumptioning love" if there aren't any sparks. Sorry, Cordy. Time to move over for Gwen, the Amazing Electro Girl!

[> [> [> [> [> Re: I can get behind that, Gwen is cool -- Tess, 11:32:31 11/22/02 Fri

I don't like throwing in behind any relationship because ME is just going to screw it up eventually. But I'll agree Angel and Gwen had high voltage. Hmmm, Gwen can get his heart to beat, wonder if she can get any other non functioning parts of him to work?

[> [> [> [> Re: JMO: B/A is doomed; C/A is a non-starter - Reply from Jules -- Jules, 22:29:13 11/22/02 Fri

Hey I so agree, I knew that this episode was coming up and when it happened I so cringed. I'm probably projecting here, but it felt yuch. My first response was "how could they", I know they were possessed, but at the same time it was supposed to be a reflection of their growing attraction for oneanther, especially Angel at that point.

It was like Angel was betraying Buffy on some level. I know that they have been split up, practically speaking and both have moved on, particularily Buffy, but I can't get over my initial response.

Despite the sexual relationships that both have had(considerably less for Angel obviously) and half hearted attempts at love, see Riley for this, psychologically it's like the end of something profound for me.

It's one thing for two people to try out new relationships and sleep with different people, but it enters a whole new plane when people talk about love. This is where I am having the problem big time.

To be fair I know that Angel and Buffy started off full throttle, a lust, followed by a love fest. Their friendhip, if they genuinely had one, now there is a debatable topic, came second. I don't know how deeply they really got to know eachother. For Cordie and Angel the reverse is true. Though no sex. So who has a greater foundation for their relationship????

I'm fascinated by the metamorphosis of who Cordie was, to who she became. Who is Angel in love with? The old slightly vacuous Cordie?, or the new and improved version?, or a combination of both? Afterall are't they all part of a three dimensional person? I haven't seen so much of the old Cordie of late.

As for passion, think uncomfortable. There was certainly lust there, but love. I think back on the love scenes between Angel and Buffy (never enough for me) and it's not the same.

Anyone else think incestous, strong word I know, but they are like family to oneanother. Five minutes ago they where friends, colleagues and yes like I said family, now it's not so brotherly and sisterly love.

I just had another thought, considering the whole Connor/Cordie, father son, mother, son? dynamic and the controversy that has created, and that is that the script writers are certainly keeping that theme consistent. It's good to see that they can be consistenta about somethings??

[> [> [> Re: I'm not so optimistic, I'm afraid (spoilers for Apoc, Nowish) -- Angelina, 12:25:25 11/22/02 Fri

Oh Scroll, so happy you said you "cringed" too. I started to feel bad when I posted that the scene in WITW made me slightly Nauseous. Makes me feel better to know I am not the only one.

[> [> I will always believe in true love triumphing in the end: B/A are destined. -- Briar Rose (who also tends to have typing dyslexia), 14:41:18 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> Re: SPOILER - Buffy and Angel as a couple - REPLY TO ANGELINA -- Jules, 22:02:23 11/22/02 Fri

I already tried posting this once, so forgive me if I end up on the board again. I lost my previous response, somewhere between review and send.

Anyway it is great to know that there are other people who feel the same way as I do. I consider myself both a romantic as well as someone who has their feet planted firmly on the ground.

This means that while I do not have a lot of time for martyred love, I do believe in consistency. It seems to me that the script writers are couching convenience, that Angel needs a bit of close bye sexual chemistry in the storylines (remember no more sexy crossovers with Buffy)with Angel moving onto a "more adult noble" and higher love with Cordie. I think not.

What's this about crossovers????

[> I wish they'd get over it! (Spoilers? for everything) BUT is it the same BB? -- luna, 11:25:44 11/22/02 Fri

I am one of those who doesn't much care for the Buffy-Angel ship--I thnk the real chemistry for Buffy is Spike. Buffy is supposedly changing as she grows older, and getting over a teenaged love is one of those things that does happen, so I hope that's the way it will go for the B/A connection. Cordy and Angel don't work for me either--I completely agree that the old Cordy was much more interesting. Maybe a new character can appear for Angel.

Meanwhile, is there any connection between the BB's on the two shows? Obviously the most recent version on AtS was not the same one as on BtVS, but both series seem to be dealing with a new major force...

[> Well if you believe ME, -- diamond in the rough, 13:34:16 11/22/02 Fri

the B/A relationship is over and is not going to be resurrected. You can find a bunch of stories about B/A at, or you can just follow this link:
Slaye rNews

[> B/A Their Past... -- MinionsOfXendor, 20:19:19 11/22/02 Fri

Been lurking, thought I'd put my 2 cents in. :) You guys are all awesome!

I loved Buffy and Angel while it was happening. They were great. I am really horribly tired, though, of shows that latch onto this "one love in a lifetime" theory. I did not marry my first love, and I am glad. Part of me will always love him for what he once was to me, as I am sure part of Buffy will always love Angel, but that does not mean they need to be together now or ever again. My husband is the right one for me. We work. The fact that he was not my first love, and I was not his doesn't bother either of us. Puppy love to real love to soulmates-once-in-a-lifetime- whateverness is neat and romantic in an abstract not very realistic way, but I would not be anywhere near as happy now if I ascribed to it. And I guess I'm tired of televsion and movies saying that that can't happen, that first love is true love. It's just not true to life.

[> [> Re: B/A Their Past...REPLY FROM JULES -- Jules, 22:41:18 11/22/02 Fri

I agree with you, but my point is not so much that Angel and Buffy should be together always (well actually it is), but rather that the scriptwriters should be more consistent.

Also let's not pretend that Buffy no longer exists. Like I said before it's like everyone has had a Buffy byepass. Get real talk about her and what the so callend new relationship, means to Cordelia and Angel and of course Buffy.

I know that everything has changed with series Four, but it still doesn't alter the basic premise that now they have unrequited and very angst driven love. Where have we seen that before???.

Cordie is simply too high and mighty and unable to forgive Angel his past, something by the way Buffy was always able to do, while Angel now has the image of her and Connor having sex seared into his brain. What's that going to do to everyone's psyches?, who knows. A great basis for a relationship don't think so.


Noticed a couple more things (Sleeper spoilers) -- Tess, 23:42:35 11/21/02 Thu

These are little things, but after the third viewing they kept popping out at me.

1) "It's me."
Three different people said this throughout the eposide. Buffy to Xander. Anya to Buffy? Spike to Buffy. Three times makes it a little to much for cpincidence IMO. Any ideas?

2)I'd be a happy camper if they had JM singing in every episode. There is nothing that actor can't do. The confusion and pain Spike showed in comparison to the cold calculated evil of the BBW. He can put so much expression into his face that at times it almost seems like its got to be two actors. So if Buffy really ends this year, anyone else out there think we could handle two vampire with a soul shows?

3) It was Great hearing Giles say 'Oh dear god' again.

[> Re: Noticed a couple more things (Sleeper spoilers) -- Angelina, 04:09:06 11/22/02 Fri

I was just talking about this last night! James Marsters most def can handle his own show! In fact, if SMG leaves at the end of the season, as I think she will, Spike can take over as far as I am concerned! Justs need a little fine tuning on his chip and we have Spike the Vampire Who Helps The Scoobies Slay. Works for me!

[> the first thing you said (Sleeper spoilers) -- spaceclown, 07:03:43 11/22/02 Fri

Xander to Buffy: "It's me. M-E." ME? It made me think of the ME that is referenced on this board. I don't know, but weird.
Then we have the scarynice whitebuffy of a couple of episodes ago telling Spike in the basement, "It's me. It's you and it's me," a few weeks ago.
With the multiple buffys and spikes running around in sleepers, maybe it is going to be increasingly difficult and/or important to know who is what as morphing continues. When can we know someone is really who they appear to be? We can't trust them just because they tell us or know our secrets.

[> [> What BBW-Cassie said (CwDP spoilers, speculations) -- Scroll, 08:17:29 11/22/02 Fri

Willow: "From beneath you, it devours."
Cassie: "Oh, not 'it'. Me."

So maybe this declaration of self is indicative of the BBW. The evil isn't something outside the self, but part of each individual. Buffy devours. Spike devours. Willow devours. The balance between good and evil is being destroyed by the very people who seek to maintain it.

Take it and run.

[> [> [> I like it, I like it, I like it -- Deb, 08:57:19 11/22/02 Fri

I think it is a declaration of self also, or a declaration of what the BB is. Insightful.

As for JM. I already have developed a show where Spike is the headmaster at "The Slayer Academy"

[> [> [> [> "It's me" -- Finn Mac Cool, 10:06:51 11/22/02 Fri

Those were Willow's words to Tara's grave in "Same Time, Same Place".

Suppressing the dark side -- Sophist, timidly testing the metaphorical depths, 10:30:12 11/22/02 Fri

Ok, I have a question for all the Jungians and those better attuned to metaphor than I am (which is roughly the same level of attunement as the average brick).

We have all commented on the various metaphorical aspects of the vampires and demons. Vampires serve as metaphors for arrested development, but the vamps and demons also seem to be metaphors for the darker impulses of our subconscious. This was particularly true in the first season, but even now they serve that purpose at least some of the time.

The Slayer, of course, slays the vamps and demons. Is the Slayer herself then a metaphor for suppressing the dark side? It seems clear to me that this metaphor surely is there. In that case, what is the lesson about our darker impulses and what are the consequences of the Slayer's role?

I hope the relevance of the last part of that question to S7 is obvious.....

[> Another approach to the metaphor... -- ZachsMind, 11:06:06 11/22/02 Fri

I often see vampires in "Buffy" as metaphorical for the many problems and obstacles which appear in every day lives, particularly for a young adult in today's society. Yes one can see Jungian and even Freudian connections between the war against evil in Buffy's world and any human being's war with their own psyche. However, I believe (or perhaps foolishly assume) that Whedon is going for something broader in scope and more practical, that deals with The Human Condition.

From a Freudian standpoint, vampires & demons are like the ID of our subconscious. Giles & the Watchers Council represent the Superego, and Buffy & her Slayerettes are for all intents and purpose the Ego of the psyche -- the line of defense between the two extremes, hoping to keep the balance. However it's plain to me that this approach to life problems is faulty. It's a constant battle and inevitably a losing one for the ego. It's like making a dyke out of sponges. There's too many holes to plug.

Vampires are but a symptom of a greater problem; the infestation of evil in human society. Since humans are neither good nor evil but a combination of both, the influence of demonic entities in Buffy's World compounds a greater dilemma, that people like Warren or Ethan Rayne who are just born bad humans are perhaps the real threat. The evil within is more dangerous than the evil without.

Were Buffy able to close the Hellmouth once & for all, and remove any and all demons from the face of the Earth, there'd still be the evil within mankind to deal with. This isn't something we can blame on the demons. Ethan Rayne can't say the D'Hoffryns of the world made him do all those evil things. He's just a bad boy.

Since Buffy can't kill human beings, or somehow steal the evil out of them, the real threat to humanity's productive future is outside her jurisdiction. She's like a doctor who only cures the surface symptoms of a disease but is powerless against the actual disease itself. In other words, for all her effort, Buffy is like a handful of Tylenol capsules up against a cancerous tumor. Maybe she can dull the pain, but she can't stop the disease alone.

She's fighting a losing battle.

[> [> Re: Another approach to the metaphor... - - Finn Mac Cool, 14:10:14 11/22/02 Fri

Of course, in Buffy's world, we have to assume that there are just as many evil humans as there are in our world. However, her world also has demons and monsters to contend with. While human evil may be creepier, it has been made pretty clear that the demonic variety is more dangerous. I wouldn't call Buffy a handful of Tylenol, I'd call her a cure for a brain tumor that doesn't really work for lung cancer.

[> Re: Suppressing the dark side -- alcibiades, 11:38:45 11/22/02 Fri

The Slayer, of course, slays the vamps and demons. Is the Slayer herself then a metaphor for suppressing the dark side? It seems clear to me that this metaphor surely is there.

It's interesting, isn't it. Using one's darkness to slay the dark, yet all the while refusing to come to terms with one's own darkness. That it is one's darkness itself which allows one to be so effective.

The point has to be a kind of stalemate. Fighting the darkside with the demonic power of the dark while standing for the light. It really is all about balance. Because if the dark were ever vanquished, so too would be the slayer -- it would fall into obsolescence, since it no longer had a purpose in the world.

Or, having fought the final battle at the end of days, and won, what would the Slayer then do with her own darkness when she had no direction into which she could sublimate it. What it then not turn internal and defeat her?

I keep thinking something like this might happen this year on the show, once Buffy vanquishes IT.

If Buffy loses her own external raison d'etre, her own empowerment, might her darkness not turn internal and consume her? Unless she has faced it already.

Hearkening back to Haecceity's thread last week, I think Spike just had a rude awakening that though he has buried his darkness deep down in the underworld, it can still be tweaked for evil. He's going to have to figure out a way, not to suppress it entirely, but to sublimate it into his activities to create a unified identity.

But it seems clear that Buffy has not realized the same about herself, despite numerous hints along her journey that this would one day be important.

Anyway, it is interesting to see how Spike and Buffy's journey's this year are mirroring. It is all about coming to terms with the darkside.

In that case, what is the lesson about our darker impulses and what are the consequences of the Slayer's role?

The point seems to be keeping the knife point balance between the dark and the light.

You know, it is really is all about Plato's metaphor of the soul in the Phaedrus.

There is a dark horse and a white horse and the charioteer who keeps the balance between them which allows the chariot to go forward with passion and drive, yet directed towards Being, instead of worldliness or self destruction.

[> [> Re: Suppressing the dark side -- luna, 12:15:13 11/22/02 Fri

Jung I think warns of the danger of suppressing the Shadow self...

[> [> [> Re: Suppressing the dark side -- Rufus, 04:59:40 11/23/02 Sat

Yes, what you resist persists......and with Buffy she has been beating the shit out of her Shadow/Spike. She is drawn and repulsed by him because she sees herself in him, and as he is a "monster" he frightens her. It will be when she stops hitting and running that she may take the time to explore (not thinking sex here guys) her fears about herself, then Spike will be less fear inducing.

[> Re: Suppressing the dark side (spoilers up to S7.8 Sleepless) -- Caroline, 12:18:43 11/22/02 Fri

Sunnydale and all the happenings there are (to me) the external manifestation of an internal psychological process that appears to begins with birth and end with death and does not seem to have an endpoint before that. The mind is a fascinating mystery - witness all the models, constructs and theories we have built to try to explain our behaviour. Joss Whedon has created a temporal space to explore the that behaviour.

Buffy spends her time fighting her own demons made manifest in the temporal space occupied by Sunnydale. The fact that there is a hellmouth in Sunnydale is a honking clue that even the space that has been constructed for the internal battle mirrors the internal one - the good/bad dichotomies in Sunnydale (suburban paradise and entrance to hell) and the good/bad dichotomies in the psyche.

There are essentially three ways of dealing with the darker impulses on one's psyche - repress, allow full expression or contain/transmute. I would argue that Buffy and most of the Scooby gang are familiar with the first two processes, Faith definitely has a hold on the second method and only Tara had fully gone through the last (although I think that Spike and Anya are working through this now and there are some small signs of hope for Buffy in Sleepless).

Joss Whedon is exploring the psychological dimension of dealing with one's dark impulses through the perspective of indentity creation and formation, with a particular perspective on female psychology. I am extremely doubtful that this process has an end. As maturation occurs, there are new dimenions of the unconscious mind that bring up new areas and potentials to explore. So while there are polarities and oppositions within onself that can be transmuted, there remain almost infinite possibilities for further further repression, conflicts, denial etc that would allow for the external manifestation of this internal process. Additionally, this process is not linear and may often be circular and can stagnate, as we have witnesses over several seasons of Buffy.

Ever since we have seen all these hints dropped in previous seasons about the source of Buffy's power, we have been prepared for some kind of revelation or disclosure about Buffy's source of slayer power. I am assuming that there is some kind of darkness attached to it. The exploration that seems important to me as a result of this is does Buffy have the necessary psychological preparation to deal with this knowledge? How will she react in terms of whatever illusions and beliefs that she holds about her slayer power and the ethical implications of her choices of action? Additionally, how will she deal with it as a woman, a guardian for her sister, a friend and a lover? Will she deal with all of these things equally well or badly? What mechanisms will she use to deal with it - repression, full expression or containment?

I'm on tenterhooks to find out.

[> [> Excellent thoughts, Caroline! Nicely put. -- Dyna, 15:29:10 11/22/02 Fri

[> The Strength -- Etrangere, 14:16:57 11/22/02 Fri

I'm not sure I qualify as a Jungian or anything :) but I'll try to answer that question.
If the Slayer was a Tarot card, it would be the Strength. The card represents a young woman dominating a lion (or another kind of beast)
The Slayer is not about suppressing the Shadow, the dark impulse, because, as alcibiade (or was it luna ?) said, it's about bringing balance : Buffy knows she'll never be able to kill every vampires, to chase every demons. All she does is protect people from them.
And she's not about suppressing the Shadow because she's herself surnatural, her powers are often described as being similar to vampires', the source of the Slayer is said in Tales of the Slayers to be demoniac. This is the Strenght, because, to borrow Caroline's vocabulary, she transmute this darkness into something else. The young girl dominating the beast draws power from it for her own end.
The Slayer is both of them, she is the Lamb and the Tyger (to refer to one of Rahael's favorite poem) the predatory and the prey. That's what makes her strong. The moral of it is that the Lamb/young girl is in control of the Tyger/monster's power, she channels it instead of being prey to it.
And we see that Buffy does that ! She redeems monsters !

[> Does ME intend for us to see the Slayer as part of the problem or as part of the solution? -- Sophist, 16:40:23 11/22/02 Fri

Now that I've thought about this more, and had the opportunity to read Caroline's and Ete's excellent posts,* I want to add a more provocative twist to my original suggested metaphor.

The presence of the Slayer in Sunnydale allows the inhabitants to conceal from each other and from themselves the existence of demons (though the town is swarming with them). If my suggested metaphor has any validity, then this is akin to an individual repressing his/her dark side, refusing to confront it. Buffy is the agent of that repression.

I'm wondering if ME intends this to be a good thing. Numerous posts here have argued that denial of the existence of one's dark side is a failed strategy -- those unacknowledged dark impulses will cause more problems in the long run than they would if they were honestly confronted. In this analysis, Buffy actually does a disservice to the residents of Sunnydale.

OTOH, there is what I might call the Happy Hobbit view of Buffy's role. In LOTR, Aragorn and others guard The Shire, keeping away the evil which would destroy it. Clearly, it's much more positive to see Buffy as Aragorn. This suggests that ME is telling us that suppression of one's darker impulses is, in fact, a good thing altogether.

I particularly liked Ete's post (surprise!) because it offered a third path. If Buffy can convert demons into useful members of society -- a feat she has accomplished twice now -- then she can satisfy both possibilities. She protected the community by facing the demons and "converting" them to good.

I would not hesitate to suggest this third way as ME's, except for one major problem: all the demons Buffy has "repressed" over the last 6+ years. Are they about to return with a vengeance, consistent with the "repression is bad" school? Or has Buffy saved Sunnydale from even worse by her guardianship?

*Don't mean to knock ZM's post by omission; it just goes in a different direction than the other responses.

[> [> Re: Does ME intend for us to see the Slayer as part of the problem or as part of the solution? -- Arethusa, 18:02:57 11/22/02 Fri

Sure, Buffy helps Sunnydale avoid dealing with its vampire problems, but she also keeps most of them alive. Before Buffy arrived, there was nothing to stop them from overthrowing the mayor and replacing the chief of police when they (deliberately) failed to solve Sunnydale's mysterious deaths and disappearances. In "Graduation" we finally saw some inhabitants of Sunnydale confront its demons en mass-and the result was death for about 40 students and insanity for at least one other, probably more. As long as the people of the Buffyverse refuse to face their fears, Buffy is necessary.

People have an infinite capacity to ignore or repress what they don't want to deal with. If the police were to refuse to fight crime to force people to solve the roots of crime, a lot of people would suffer and the solution would still not be found, since the reason for crime is human nature, which is something we'll never be able to change.

Elliot S. Maggin wrote an excellent book about Superman, in which Lex Luthor tells Superman that if the superhuman hero didn't exist, Lex Luthor the Supercriminal wouldn't exist, since Luthor had to become superevil to be a suitable foil for the Man of Steel. But that's not the case with Buffy. She came into existance because of the vampires, not the other way around. If it weren't for that first spiteful demon, Buffy as we know her wouldn't exist.

[> [> Re: Solution or not? Spoilers for S3, 7 to Sleeper. Speculation. -- Age, 12:07:33 11/23/02 Sat

Because remaining human seems to be so hard, there needs to be a different type of superhero, one that patrols the night, either metaphorically, at the frontier of the subconscious as a marginalized feminine principle trying its best to deal with the emotional results of repression; or literally, as an actual woman sporting a superhero exageration of the aggressive power women used to have to repress in a male dominated society, creating thus a deconstruction of male/female opposition. The slayer patrols to maintain the balance between creative and destructive forces in order that the mind/citizens aren't overwhelmed by the latter, losing the opportunity to remain human. This is as we know the key to Whedon's work: how to remain human when it seems to be the hardest thing to do especially when growing up. In this sense the slayer's role of keeping balance is positive because it maintains the human world, maintains the opportunity for people and future generations to remain human.

In this sense also the slayer maintains the natural world, keeping it from becoming wholly demonic: she is a parody of the traditional conception of women in a male dominated society, ie the bringers of death to men through the woman's intimate role as bringer of new life. She stakes the undead, mostly males, who believe they can escape the natural world, returning them to the earth or figuratively freeing those who have become overwhelmed by their psychological conditions and gotten stuck in destructive patterns.

Maintaining balance then is a positive thing because it allows human beings to exist. However, if Sunnydale's hellmouth is a metaphor for the subconscious construct into which the darker emotions and impulses that don't fit into the lifestyle concept of Sunnydale citizens have been repressed(and which, unnaturally strong through not being managed want to burst out and take over) then the slayer could be seen as an enabler, maintaining the status quo while nothing is done about the strategy of repression creating the psychological split represented by the sunny day/night metaphor and the seething hellmouth itself. It's not as if the hellmouth is ever going to go away: repression as a strategy will always be used. But, it's repression used primarily as the only strategy that is the problem.

The Slayer as enabler may have indeed been her role in the past: the slayer has been a foot soldier in the war against the demons, trained by a patriarchal agency, the Council of Watchers, to serve the community. One could even go as far as to say that the slayers of the past have been representations not of female empowerment, but of power being employed through them, with their lives meaning nothing but that which is used and disposed of to make way for another slayer. They represented the marginalized feminine in a masculinized society whose only recourse was to act as instruments or vessels. The Council of Watchers would probably never have set about upsetting society itself, but simply used the slayers to maintain a balance. Although marginalized the slayers as female still represented the existence of the feminine, and the association with management of emotions, but just as the slayers never lived for very long, so too the emotional management was never fully brought into play, but was simply adulterated into this maintenance of balance, ie the slayer clearing up the end results of repression.

However, the story of the slayer really begins with Buffy. I really do think that the story and meaning begin with her; she is the literary product of an educated generation that grew up in a male dominated society, but which witnessed the societal upheaval of the women's movement. It is not just a coincidence that this series began by presenting the male dominated stereotype of the powerful woman as demonized in Darla, the eve-il woman, and then presented the literal and figurative movement of women in Joyce's coming to Sunnydale with Buffy. I do think we have to situate this story within the context of the changes in our society over the past thirty years. We also have to see the story as a presentation of one man's view of the psychology of growing up, one which has been influenced by the society he has grown up in. In both these cases, the story hasn't finished yet: our society is still evolving, still becoming more open and feminized; and Buffy hasn't grown up yet.(One could interpret the light/dark metaphor representing a psychological split both as a product of repression and as an expression of an adolescent point of view.) The answer to whether the slayer is part of the problem or part of the solution may be found not only in the set metaphor, but in the plot of the series as it presents the evolution of that metaphor.

And Buffy has changed what a slayer is. The other slayers were not like her. They worked alone and never acted as an example, but simply as a soldier. Buffy on the other hand, as a reflection of a societal change, not only was recognized by her graduating class for her involvement and example, but inspired her class to fight against what was really a symbol of male dominated tyranny, the mayor as snake demon.

The slayer itself may indeed be part of the problem, but Buffy as Vampire Slayer comes from the present; her story may be the one that makes the slayer part of the solution. At the beginning of 'Conversations with Dead People' we were reminded that this story is happening now with the title and date and time on the screen. Also in 'Sleeper' we witnessed a growing awareness of the supernatural when the singer announces quite matter of factly that she hates playing vampire towns(and growing consciousness tends to undermine denial). And what is happening now is we are seeing an arc in which the balance between good and evil has been threatened with the hellmouth opening. It seems as if this particular level of upheaval hasn't happened before; and I'm thinking that it relates both to Buffy becoming more adult and our society becoming more open. In my opinion, and this is of course the story still evolving, either Buffy alone or Buffy and Sunnydale society faced with this type of apocalypse will have to take responsibility for the hellmouth that is beneath them. This entity will force Buffy and perhaps Sunnydale society to face that which they've denied or ignored in order to have their belief either in their good lifestyle or, in Buffy's case, her denial of the dark source of her slayer power. This will be both a representation of further personal growth into adulthood as part of Buffy's story, internalizing the balance between constructive and destructive impulses; and a reflection of our more open and feminized society, as that entity which maintains the balance between good and evil as an external force, as the slayers do, no longer keeps doing that job; no longer allows the luxury of the strategy of denial.

Will there be a need for a slayer after this? Yes, but she won't be as marginalized; and she won't simply take on those who are too far gone for anything but staking. Buffy's role as councillor shows the evolution of the slayer role into one that literalizes the psychological dimension of the mythology by staking problems and repressed emotions before they become too entrenched. She does this by releasing their power through simple listening. If Buffy the vampire slayer is the woman attached to a superhero exagerated aggression and power that women have had to repress in the past in order not to be masculine, then Buffy the councillor highlights and validates the feminine approach. This is yet another difference between the slayers of old who died young and Buffy as slayer and adult.

One last thing, I tend to focus on repression and male domination to interpret this series; and while I'm sure they are part of the series' themes, I'm sure also that other interpretations can be made.


[> [> [> Re: Solution or not? Spoilers for S3, 7 to Sleeper. Speculation. -- Arethusa, 15:13:15 11/23/02 Sat

My view of BtVS is this: it's not the "feminine" in a masculine society being denied, it's the "masculine" in the female being denied. (By males originally, of course, since they never get off scot-free these days.) Women repress their strength to fit in with what they are told by men and women is the natural way for women to behave. The emotion Buffy is repressing is fear that because of her "unfeminine" strength, both of body and mind, she will lose contact with the rest of humanity, and be unable to love or be loved. It's not about emotional repression: it's all about power. Who has it, who uses it, who abdicates it to retain the staus quo. Buffy asserts her power by refusing to live by the CoW's rules, Spike gained it by obtaining the soul that lets him consciously control his own actions (sans IT), Willow gained it when she learned to control her need for control, Xander achieved it when he recognized it lay dorment in him all along. They had to learn to let themselves feel pain to gain their power, as the First Slayer said, but the freeing of their emotions led to their gaining power. I think the slayer as female represents the latent power in women, not the existence of the feminine within the power structure. Likewise, Sunnydale must recognize that it has the power to rid itself of its demon menance, if it accept the responsibility for that power.

Hope I didn't misinterpret anything; apologies in advance.

[> [> [> [> Re: Solution or not? Spoilers for S3, 7 to Sleeper. Speculation. -- Age, 18:35:06 11/23/02 Sat

I see what you are saying. In a series that focuses on a female character the emphasis would be on the trouble she has accepting something she's been taught she shouldn't have and the consequences of that.

I think that there is also a culture of denial presented on the series that's a hold over from the society we've just emerged from in which not only were women taught not to have power, something deemed masculine, but men were taught to deny and devalue the feminine in themselves. Denial/repression is ultimately disempowering because one fails to integrate aspects that are needed; or one gets stuck in emotional states that dictate ones actions.


[> [> [> [> [> Re: Solution or not? Spoilers for S3, 7 to Sleeper. Speculation. -- aliera, 21:40:38 11/23/02 Sat

I'd like to see Joss step beyond this, Age...that would be a true crossover.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Solution or not? Spoilers for S3, 7 to Sleeper. Speculation. -- Arethusa, 07:59:51 11/24/02 Sun

I agree with you, despite my slightly different perspective. It's great that BtVs showed two of its males leads, Giles and Xander, in less traditional roles, supporting the heroine and following her orders, another thing that made Xander, especially, an outsider in society.

[> [> [> Great points. Thanks. -- Sophist, 20:28:50 11/23/02 Sat

[> Re: Suppressing the dark side -- frisby, 07:52:49 11/23/02 Sat

Excellent post and very intersting replies. Here's my Jungian take (with a dash of Nietzsche). Buffy fights the forces of darkness, mostly vampires and demons, which I read as sex and violence to the degree they are outside human control or enculturation, that is, to the degree they are aspects of darkness or loosely the unconscious. But Buffy fights or uses her power (commands and controls) and the source of that power (5.1) is again darkness (or her own unconscious mechanisms and motives). Sex (according to Schopenhauer who taught Nietzsche well who passed much to Jung) is the kernel of the will to live, the reverse side of which is the fear of death, whose kernel is violence. When faced with attack Buffy either evades, deflects, or counters (as witnessed in OMWF with her workout with Giles). These correspond in a sense to the psychic defenses of selective perception (a skill common to the Sunnydale denizens), sublimation, or repression. But all of this is only one level of Buffy's overall fight, or quest for individuation (I think Jung called it) or search of the soul for completion (more in Nietzsche's line). According to Plato's tripart construction of the soul the middle level faces a dilemma between honor and victory (compare not whether win or loose but how play vs. winning is everything) which ultimately reduces to understanding acts according to consequences or in themselves: this translates to whether Buffy fights to protect humanity or for the sport of the hunt (using Dracula's approach) or the love of the good kill (so to speak). Buffy faces this internal fight within her soul often and in many other ways, such as the battles with her friends. I'm tiring (ideally I should write this elsewhere and then just paste it in, but it's just off the top of my head for now, maybe some other time), and want to get to Buffy's highest fight, the fight to truly become the slayer (what she is, what she can become, she has no idea) - - and the language here needs to move to Nietzsche, becoming the superman or superheroic human who defeats the master of the world (the spirit of gravity), saves humanity from the preaching of madness (or the teachings of justice manifested through the spirit of revenge), and ushers in the advent of the completion of the greatest event, the great noon of the earth and humanity, all under a new theology (the nerve of which is the marriage of Ariadne to Dionysos, the god of darkness. Buffy this year must fight the big first evil as it rises from the depths below, but to do so she must first find the source of her own power, deep deep down in the darkness of her own soul, because only if the roots of a tree are firmly connected to the earth can it compete with the others including the vines to rise to the height and drink of the sun. Pardon my waxing poetic. Need to close. In a word it's all about darkness, dark energy in the lexicon of recent cosmologists, or the will to power (to speak Nietzschean). Comments? Questions?

Tracking the Big Bad Whatever (kinda spoilery & very specularific!) -- ZachsMind, 10:34:02 11/22/02 Fri

Okay. What do we know about this thing? We know IT can't directly affect reality, but can influence people's minds, particularly the weak-willed. We know IT used to bother with the balance of good & evil, but that IT's tired of that whole game. It's like whatever battle IT's been fighting, IT knows IT's already lost, so IT's just going for a big finish. IT's nihilistic. IT's heartless. IT's treating the Scoobies much like a cat bats around a dead mouse before eating it.

From Beneath You IT Devours - what the heck is that supposed to mean? Is this entity from the Hellmouth? Is IT the essence of the Hellmouth? Perhaps IT's nothing to do with the Hellmouth. IS IT The First Evil? Is IT the same entity that tortured Angel in the third season episode "Amends" or is IT a wholly different entity? Is IT the ghost of something from the past? We have more questions than answers and it doesn't appear the people behind Mutant Enemy will clarify things any time soon. All we can do is wait, and in the meantime, speculate.

IT has posed as all the past big bads of previous seasons. Warren, Glory, Adam, The Mayor, Drusilla and The Master. However, there's no indication IT's necessarily any of those other entities. IT merely poses as the dead. IT can't seem to pose as anything living but IT can pose as Buffy, possibly because Buffy has died twice, and on a cellular level came back 'wrong.'

IT has shown itself NOT to Buffy, but to Willow and Spike. Buffy can't seem to see IT at all. So far to the best of our knowledge Anya & Xander have also not been visited.

In relation to The Trio of last season, IT has become Warren, and Andrew could see IT although Jonathan could not. So perhaps there is something that Jonathan and Buffy have in common which makes them impervious to IT's psychological influence. Rather than directly killing Buffy or Jonathan, or trying to get these characters to kill themselves through psychic coercion, IT had to convince those closest to these two to kill them. In Jonathan's case it was Andrew. In Buffy's case most recently it was Spike. IT was successful in getting Andrew to sacrifice Jonathan, but failed to convince Spike to kill Buffy. So this may be an influencial beast, but IT's not omnipotent. IT has ITs limits and love appears to be a powerful defense against IT.

It's interesting to see
all this dialogue in one place, but it ultimately just proves we've got far too little information so far to go on. And how is this related to the demon which came from beneath the ground in the Angel series? Will there be a scene in a future episode of Buffy where the Scoobies are looking at a report from CNN on cable about how L.A.'s been hit with raining fire? Or would the networks find that upsetting?

Fun being left in the dark, eh? Your thoughts?

[> Re: Tracking the Big Bad Whatever (kinda spoilery & very specularific!) -- luna, 11:49:52 11/22/02 Fri

Interesting, but I have some questions:

"It's like whatever battle IT's been fighting, IT knows IT's already lost" How do we know that? I mean, it might well be, but I don't see the evidence right now?

"IT has shown itself NOT to Buffy..." I thought it posed as Holden, but I am guessing now that the general assumption is that Holden was a real vamp, the first evidence of Spike's problems?

"And how is this related to the demon which came from beneath the ground in the Angel series?" I expected them to be connected, but the Angel demon seemed cheesy compared to the BB on Buffy.

But aside from those points, I like what you said. I would say too that the BB seems to me to have a goal--to divide and conquer. Thus it undercuts loyalities as well as perceptions of reality.

[> one comment for now, more later if the thread stays here! -- anom, 13:29:40 11/22/02 Fri

"In relation to The Trio of last season, IT has become Warren, and Andrew could see IT although Jonathan could not."

It looked to me as though Jonathan could see It just before Andrew stabbed him. I think It can appear to or conceal itself from whoever It wants to.

[> [> Yes, I noticed that too upon re-viewing CwtD...(7.7 spoilers) -- Rob, 14:31:27 11/22/02 Fri

...Jonathan turned to Warren, and had a shocked look on his face, as he was dying.


[> [> There's room for interpretation there... -- ZachsMind, 14:45:45 11/22/02 Fri

Johnathan may have responded to seeing Warren in the proverbial flesh, or he may have seen the knife and looked up at Andrew in shock. It's hard to say. It's difficult to ascertain what triggers the ability to see the BBW. If it's at the moment of dying, or death or afterlife that does it, then Willow shouldn't be able to see BBW, and Buffy should. Willow hasn't died so far as we know, but Buffy has twice. If it's being tainted evil, that wouldn't explain why Buffy can't see it but Willow can, because technically they both have been tainted.

If there's a consistency here, I haven't found the pattern. OR as you said the beast could just be choosing selectively based on its own criteria.

I find it interesting that the three Scoobies it went after simultaneously (allegedly) in CWDP were Spike, Willow (as an emissary for Tara) and Dawn. In season five, Glory thought SPIKE was The Key and got tricked. Then she thought TARA was the key and Willow , and finally after much trial and error she started hunting down Dawnie. So Glory has a bit of unfinished business with Spike, Willow & Dawnie, doesn't she? Interesting that This Beast is turning its attentions to the three of them. This may mean absolutely nothing. Again, I'm just tracking patterns amidst the chaos.

[> [> [> Re: There's room for interpretation there... -- Freki, 15:18:02 11/22/02 Fri

I don't remember Glory ever thinking Willow was the key. She thought it was Spike in Intervention, and Tara in TL, then in Spiral crazy Tara inadvertently lets her know that it's Dawn. Though there is Willow brain-sucking Glory to give her a reason for a vendetta.

The other thing Spike, Willow and Dawn have in common, though, is having something of the supernatural about them. Dawn has been treated as an ordinary girl for quite a while now, but she is still the Key. Xander and Anya are the only completely ordinary humans. I think the BBW may be trying to eliminate Buffy's most potentially powerful allies first.

Now I wonder if the BBW may have been successful with Dawn, and if Joyce telling Dawn that Buffy would be against her was the BBW telling a self-fulfilling truth. If you want to go for maximum angst, turning Buffy and Dawn against each other would certainly do it.

[> [> [> [> I don't mean to be misunderstood... -- ZachsMind, 15:30:24 11/22/02 Fri

I didn't mean to insinuate Glory thought Willow was the key. Glory thought TARA was the key, and turned Tara's brain into swiss cheese in order to attempt to find out who really was the key. Willow wasn't pleased by that so she freaked out and attempted to beat the ever lovin' crap outta Glory. When I composed my original post, I got distracted and neglected to finish a sentence somewhere.

[> [> [> [> [> Sorry if I sounded snarky, just a bit confused about what you meant. :) -- Freki, 19:20:58 11/22/02 Fri

[> A Xander connection (kinda spoilery & very specularific!) -- Alvin, 03:16:24 11/23/02 Sat

When Him was first discussed here, someone (I think Shadowcat, but I'm not positive) pointed out that Xander is introduced into a scene in ominous ways. When Dawn is crying in her room, he suddenly shows up around the corner and seems to surprise Buffy; when Dawn is upset at the school we first see his shoes and then pan up to his face; and when Willow is doing her gender changing spell, we first see Xander as a hand that graps her mouth. It's odd that the three who have conversations with the BBW (or the two plus Buffy who had a vamp "connected to a great evil") all had these scenes with Xander. But he doesn't have a scene like that with Anya. Another point about Him is that while the four women are acting strangely, so are Xander and Spike. Spike is quiet (and Sleeper has shown us that while under the BBW's thrall, Spike is quiet) and Xander is inciteful and mature.
At the beginning of CWDP we're given a specific time that implies all the events are happening concurrently. Spike was already under the thrall of the BBW because Holden had been turned a day earlier and Spike had no knowledge of it in Sleeper. My take on Jonathon's death is that the BBW showed itself to him just to make his death more painful, making him realize when it's too late that instead of doing good, he was following the BBW's script. As I see it, we have the following timeline:

1) Spike is in the basement being tormented (programmed?) by the BBW.
2) Buffy moves Spike out of the basement, and on the trip to Xander's, Spike has a conversation with someone no else in the car can see.
3) Xander invites Spike in and calls him Nimrod. Note that Xander is still willing to insult Spike and Spike is still protesting about being with Xander.
4) Xander and Spike spend some time together as roommates since Xander complains about the towels. Since Spike is getting cleaned up, I guess and say that this is when he starts going out and making other vamps.
5) Spike and Xander solve the jacket problem, but Spike is now quiet and following Xander's lead, and Xander has stopped insulting Spike.
6) The three women who had odd scenes with Xander in Him have conversations at the same time Jonathon and Andrew return to SD.
7) The events of Sleeper occur and we also have some odd Xander moments:
a)) He knew Holden and called him "Webs".
b)) He takes the news that Spike may be killing rather calmly. Compare how he acted in Passions when Angel killed Jenny to now. Willow seemed to be the lead in the "kill Spike" posse. I would have expected Xander to be jumping up and down yelling "I told you so".
c)) He's willing to leave Anya, a woman he still cares about, alone with a possible crazed serial killer.
d)) He seems to have redecorated his apartment with candles and a skull by his door.

I think the BBW was invited in by Xander along with Spike, and Xander fell under its thrall after being in contact with Spike. I keep getting the feeling that the writers are wanting us to concentrate on Spike, while the real action with the BBW is going on with Xander.

Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? -- Masq, 14:58:04 11/22/02 Fri

OK, we all know that the character of Cordelia has been through a lot and has changed and learned and grown. We'll never get BtVS Cordelia, back, that's a given.

And it's not really the issue for most people. Late Season 3/early Season 4 AtS Cordy is a far cry even from early season 3 AtS Cordy. We'd settle for her, long dark hair, sympathy and snark together, and looks good in an evening gown.

But that's not what we're getting. So everyone complains, they don't like where her character's going; she's flat, uninteresting, given to impulsive actions that show bad judgment (I won't mention what, specifically, I'm tired of talking and reading about it). The big complaint: ME is writing her out of character.

But I think they're doing that deliberately. I certainly don't think they've forgotten what makes Cordelia so appealing. I think they know. But right now the story line demands that she be so far not herself that we squirm in our seats. I mean, it was pretty obvious to me that Cordelia, since she's come back from the shinyglowly land, isn't herself, and has said as much. She's frightened, nervous, on edge, depressed, fatalistic, confused. She hasn't done the glowy thing once since she got back. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. And there's a lot about her time as the alleged "higher being" she can't remember.

Oh, and we did see glimpses of the great old Cordy in that heavenly place, didn't we? We all hoped she'd bring it back with her. And when she didn't, we all felt let down.

I don't think the Cordelia we're seeing is any indication of "where her character's going". I think it's an aberration, one written quite consciously and deliberately by ME, and it crawls under all our skins, but I don't think the old Cordelia's gone.

Masq, ever the optimist

[> I second that optimism. -- neaux yesman., 15:13:23 11/22/02 Fri

[> Re: Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? -- Arethusa, 15:19:52 11/22/02 Fri

I think you're right that the story line is driving Cordy's behavior. Look at Spike's oddly quiet behavior in Him and Conversations-he was quiet because he was being controlled by IT. After seven years of excellent tv, we can trust ME's character development and ability to plan far ahead. Very few other shows have such consistancy in characterization and honest portrayal of emotional development.

[> That's what I took from Spin The Bottle... -- ZachsMind, 15:20:39 11/22/02 Fri

I felt that from a writer's standpoint, Joss Whedon was saying goodbye to the Cordy that HE created. Now, granted he's had a hand in where Cordy's gone, but "Spin the Bottle" to me was a sorta last fond kiss farewell to what I believe is to him one of his most fond 'babies.' It was like watching a father saying goodbye to the little girl he once knew and saying hello to a blushing bride (who put him in the hole with VISA by the way).

Spin the Bottle was his gift to those of us who remember Cordy back when she had no idea the difference between bicuspids & incisors and could have cared less, because he knew he'd never be able to get innocent Cordy back like that ever again. So. In short? Yes. She's gone forever. But hey. There's always reruns, where it'll be good to know Willow's seen the softer side of Sears.

[> I agree. (spin the bottle spoilers) -- Rob, 15:23:17 11/22/02 Fri

And I think that there was no clearer indication than in Joss' deliberate use of the old Cordy in "Spin the Bottle" that ME is well aware of the difference in her character. I agree with your assessment that she's depressed, and I think it's deliberate. Why? Because in most cases where something seemed off about a Buffy or Angel storyline, it turned out to make sense after viewed in the context of later episodes. I don't think it's time to judge Cordy, especially of being out of character, since her character has never had to face a situation such as the one she's currently in before. How are we (or she, for that matter) to know how she would react? Would any of us react any differently? I'm not so sure. There are times I'm sure I could be accused of behaving out of character, but the same goes for anyone. Also, why else would Joss have taken us back to the old "evil high school bitch" and then introduced the new, somber, depressed Cordy in the same episode? I think there's definitely something afoot, and I expect that some time soon, we'll get back to the snarky but compassionate Cordy from AtS Season 1-early season 3.

Just a quick question, btw, I just finished "Birthday," and I thought it was great. Cordy still there has the mix of her snappy self, and her compassionate side. But I read some posts that said that's around the time she starts losing her sarcasm. Is that true? Maybe it's just the fact that I'm watching the episodes in a compressed amount of time, but I really feel like the progression and evolution of all the characters is quite remarkable, and so far I haven't noticed anything off about Cordy, although I do admit to definitely being taken aback by current Cordy. I almost wish that old Cordy could come in a time machine, and slap new Cordy in the face!

I definitely think ME has a masterplan here. I just hope that the Cordy we love returns to us soon.


[> [> Also... -- Rob, 15:35:45 11/22/02 Fri the scenes of Cordy, where we saw her still in the "heavenly" dimension, she seemed like her old self, complaining of boredom. It's only since she's been plopped back, memory-less, on this plane that's she's seemed off.

This might tie in very well to your theory that the PTB had hijacked Cordy and placed her not in a real heavenly dimension but a prison, to keep her away from Angel. It all adds up that they whisked her off to deny Angel a possible moment of happiness, and then returned her memoryless so they wouldn't be together, like your theory. Working with this theory, this is probably also why Cordy was shown and experienced Angelus in his glory that even if her memory were somehow restored, she would still not be romantic with Angel...and perhaps also be driven to Connor.


[> [> Re: I agree. (spin the bottle spoilers) - - yabyumpan, 15:52:40 11/22/02 Fri

Yes, of course there's something off about Cordy and there's suppossed to be. I agree she's depressed but I don't think it's just that. I think there's a reason why the PTSY haven't given her back all her memories and why the Beast seemed to recognise her or at least to acknowledge that she had some importance in what ever is afoot in his devious plans. I think she's being played, not to sure by who but I'm looking forward to finding out. There's still another 15 episodes for the story to unfold and I think it's going to be a rollacoaster ride for everyone (esp us).

We're not going to get 'old Cordelia' back anymore than we're going to get back 'old Willow' and I for one, am happy about that. Heaven forbid that we should have had 6+ seasons of bitchy, cruel, mostly clueless Cordelia. I love the progression her character has taken and yes, what's happenig now makes me squirm but as Masq said, I think we're supposed to.

Rob, in answer to your question re: Birthday. We do get a less sarky Cordy but I think with good reason. She's given up part of her humanity for the cause and I think she really feels that. She doesn't know how her demoness is going to come out or what it will mean to her in the long run and I think that makes her all the more focused on the mission and more serious in her outlook. I know many people don't like that but I do think it's a realistic reaction to what happened to her in 'Birthday'; she had to face her own death head on and made a conscious choice to walk away from her dream and in doing so effectivly gave up her humanity. That's a huge deal. We saw how she changed after getting the vision flurry in TSILA and this is the same as that and then some. Her becoming a demon is somewhat underplayed on the show (one of my grips about S3) but that doesn't mean it's not vitally important to the character and her evolution.

[> [> [> I need help with some unfamiliar acronyms -- Robert, 16:52:07 11/22/02 Fri



[> [> [> [> TSILA--To Shanshu in LA, season 1 finale -- Masq, 16:58:31 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> PTSY=Powers That Screw You -- Dead Soul, 18:48:31 11/22/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> Sorry Robert, my bad ;o) -- yabyumpan, 18:57:49 11/22/02 Fri

[> I agree,however it still doesn't change my mind about the show. -- AurraSing, 16:16:44 11/22/02 Fri

I'm dropping it for a while and will keep in touch with recaps once the new eps start up again.
I've found this season to be very lacklustre and while I got plenty angry at ME during parts of season 6 BTVS,I never stopped watching."Angel" has been getting taped and watched around my household but with far less enthusiasm noted than I've seen in previous seasons.
But this thing with Cordy? While I'm not a shipper,I could at least understand B/S happening but the C/C incident is so out of left field as to have been written by a Martian....and coming in sweeps week as it did,it reeked more of a circus stunt than solid writing,IMHO.

This won't be the first nor the last time I drop a show thanks to a profound disagreement with the writers/producers over where a character has begun heading.It's just a shame it had to happen with AtS.

[> [> Just a suggestion... -- Rob, 19:29:34 11/22/02 Fri

Since there is such a huge break until the next batch of episodes, why don't you allow that time to simmer, and then check it out when it comes back? Ya never know. Sometimes when you're away from something for a while, you come back with a new perspective.

Personally, I'm loving this season. I just started watching this year, and the first three episodes inspired me to go back and watch all the earlier ones. Everybody's different, though. ;o)


[> [> [> Once burned,twice shy. -- AurraSing, 19:38:39 11/22/02 Fri

Maybe time will change my mind but based on other shows I have dropped in the past (ER,Frasier,etc) I really won't miss not watching AtS..the most telling fact about it is that when I told my husband (a fellow Buffy/Angel fan) that I was not going to bother taping it for watching any more,he agreed with me without a second's hesitation.

I'll probably read a good book instead of getting upset or frustrated by the path ME has chosen for AtS for the season. I'll learn something and *not* raise my blood pressure at the same time!

[> Very good points. -- Caroline, 19:48:57 11/22/02 Fri

Even thought Cordy wanted to come back down from the higher being place she was in, we couldn't expect her to came back exactly as before. This was another experience that has led to further developments in her character. Some people may not like it but it doesn't mean that it isn't a valid development. Maybe the point right now is that she is lost in some way, doesn't know where to turn. The most poised people can behave very strangely under different circumstances and I'm glad to know that Cordy can still be human enough to get confused and make mistakes and learn from them. Go Cordy!

[> Re: Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? -- hellraiser, 12:43:53 11/23/02 Sat

Not to be crude, but the Cordelia(and therefore Charisma) I grew to love is gone until she loses all the extra weight she's carrying. Anybody know if she's pregnant? If not somebody at ME should drop the hint that she needs to start caring a little more about her mid-section.

[> [> I don't honestly know how to respond to that... -- Rob, 13:03:54 11/23/02 Sat

...except to say that that was possibly one of the most offensive things I've ever read here.


[> [> If that's what you're after... -- Rook, 13:33:09 11/23/02 Sat

You should try to find some reruns of Baywatch...they'd probably be much more suited to your tastes...not to mention maturity level.

[> [> Re: Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? REPLY TO HELLRAISER -- Jules, 15:29:49 11/23/02 Sat

To answer your question, yes the actress is pregnant, but that aside your comments are crass. It's particularily nice, that the other people who sent replies are I assume guys. Apologies if that assumption is wrong.

[> [> [> Last time I checked, I'm a guy. ;o) -- Rob, 15:47:30 11/23/02 Sat

[> [> [> [> Re: Last time I checked, I'm a guy. ;o) - GOOD TO KNOW -- Jules, 20:00:15 11/23/02 Sat

Good to know Rob, helps form a mental picture when I respond to your postings.

[> [> [> Re: Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? REPLY TO HELLRAISER -- hellraiser, 06:49:02 11/24/02 Sun

What I find more crass is the fact that ME has Conor(16 or 18 years old..whatever suits the writers at the time) having sex with a woman(Cordy) who obviously is almost twice his age. Where is the outrage here when there were so many comments on the subject when it involved Angel & Buffy(playing a 16yr old)? I guess now we'll see the storyline take the path(since Charisma really is pregnant) that the original prophecy of the father killing the son is actually Conor killing his & Cordy's son.

[> [> [> [> You've got the ages wrong. -- Finn Mac Cool, 07:38:18 11/24/02 Sun

Connor is either 16 or 18 (no one really knows since I doubt there are calenders in Quortoth) and Cordelia is either 21 or 22. Therefore, it's possible there's only a three year age difference between the characters (admittedly, it is larger between actor and actress). Also, from what I've heard, the complaints about C/C seem more about the fact that Cordelia used to be Connor's surrogate mother than about the age difference.

[> [> [> [> Re: Is the Cordelia we love gone forever? REPLY TO HELLRAISER -- Jules, 11:31:35 11/24/02 Sun

You have every right to feel the way you do about this particular storyline, but I believe people's feedback to you, related to your comments about the actresses physical appearance i.e. putting on weight, which they found objectionable.

Also it is worth noting that the actress that plays Cordelia is around 32, but the role she is playing is that of a 21 year old. This would make her around 3 years older than Connor, if he is meant to be 18.

You may be right that if he was meant to be 16, in series 3, though I never heard any allusion to age, unless it was in series 4, that his new slighly more mature age is due to convenience on the script writers behalf.

Also remember that Angel, was in reality around his mid to late twenties and within the series 200 years plus, when he slept with Buffy, then barely 17. My point is that within the context of the series the former are certainly closer in age, than Buffy and Angel were when they slept together for the first time.

Also am I wrong when I think back to series 3 of Angel and recollect, that the so called original prophecy, that the father shall kill the son, was infact a lie, altered by the Sahjhan to prevent the son (Connor) from killing him (Sahjhan) in the future???

[> The Cordy of the past is gone as she is evolving into the person she will become. -- Rufus, 19:02:22 11/23/02 Sat

Who would want to be exactly the person they were at 17-18? Everyone changes and so is seems we are just suffering from the growing pains of watching the process....and we didn't even get to be higher beings...;)

Current board | More November 2002