ME vs The Fans (Storyteller spoilers)
DarkMagic
Goats Gruff in her school play. My husband and I pulled Goat Mask duty from
the roster. I traced a fair approximation of some one-dimensional goat
faces onto some cardboard, cut them out, painted them goat-like, and my
husband cut up a mop and glued on the beards. Imagine our horror when we
realized we had created an exact replica of the goat's head on the Seal of
Danthalzar. Seriously, it's creepy. He said "I hope none of the other
parents at school watch Buffy." Me too. If you think possessed high school
students are scary, imagine a school full of diabolical first graders.
Spoilers
The Fans: Knock, knock "ME, what the hell are you guys doing in there?"
ME: "Enlightening and Entertaining."
The Fans: "Why can't you fanwank just like the rest of us?"
Slam! Nice shot, ME. You have to admit, though, that it gets under your
skin a little bit when the fanwanks are better than the storyline. For
example, the Seal needs tears of atonement. Why make an example out of
just poor Andrew? Get Willow, Spike, and Anya in there to sob and regret all
of the merciless slaughter they've indulged in. The Seal will disintegrate
and they can sink into a quicksand of wah.
"Storyteller" was a good episode. It had the potential to be an amazing
episode, but it fell short of that and I'm not sure why, exactly. Andrew,
clearly, represented the Buffyverse obsessed fanboy in all of us. His
monologues on the burden and tragedy of being the Slayer were lifted right
off of countless newsgroup postings. He's obviously a S/B and X/A shipper.
Possibly, a S/W shipper, too. He romanticizes Buffy, her calling, her
attraction to danger, and her feelings for Spike. Like so many
fans/shippers who shall remain nameless.
I loved the way he memorized Anya's words to Xander and kept rewinding the
tape. Just as so many hopeless shippers among us watch and rewatch "Fool
for Love", "The Prom", "OMWF". It's sad that we are, and pathetic. ME
taunts us with it and flings it Andrew like into our fan person faces.
Andrew speaks as a one man universal fan person voice. "Why do Vampyres
appear on video?" "I know that Dawn used to be the Key, but I don't know
what that means." "Buffy's inspirational speeches are dull." "There's a
lot of heat between Buffy and Spike. Although, technically he's always at
room temperature."
As a metaphor, I think "Storyteller" speaks to photo journalists everywhere
that chronicle war as though it were a sporting event. Buffy tells Andrew
in so many words "This isn't story material. These aren't characters in a
script. This isn't entertainment for people safe at home sitting in their
easy chairs. This is war and real people are going to die." Also, it might
be interpreted as ME's slam on reality t.v. shows.
We learned a few things from "Storyteller". Wood's feelings about Spike
became crystal clear. Xander and Anya are over. Andrew, again like so
many fans, doesn't give a rat's patootie about Willow/Kennedy. He's more
enthralled with Xander's carpentry skills. The Seal of Danthalzar can be
closed by atonement and the first step to atonement is accepting
responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally. Unfortunately,
it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
Last season I would have gladly dropped Andrew off of a bridge alongside his
compadre in crime Warren. He's come along way since then. Tom Lenk has
impeccable comic timing. He can do serious, he can do sad, he can do funny.
My vote is "don't kill off Andrew."
--
Shannon
Cordelia: "Angel is only happy when he's fighting evil. Let's drum up a
little!"
Doyle: "I don't know why we're looking for evil when we got you here."
EGK
wrote:
>First, I must share. My daughter is going to be one of the three Billy
>Goats Gruff in her school play. My husband and I pulled Goat Mask duty from
>the roster. I traced a fair approximation of some one-dimensional goat
>faces onto some cardboard, cut them out, painted them goat-like, and my
>husband cut up a mop and glued on the beards. Imagine our horror when we
>realized we had created an exact replica of the goat's head on the Seal of
>Danthalzar. Seriously, it's creepy. He said "I hope none of the other
>parents at school watch Buffy." Me too. If you think possessed high school
>students are scary, imagine a school full of diabolical first graders.
That's a very funny story. Thanks for sharing that.
>Last season I would have gladly dropped Andrew off of a bridge alongside his
>compadre in crime Warren. He's come along way since then. Tom Lenk has
>impeccable comic timing. He can do serious, he can do sad, he can do funny.
>My vote is "don't kill off Andrew."
I couldnt agree more. I really disliked the nerds last season as the big
bads. I felt they were good for occasional episodes as comic relief but not
to center a seasonal arc around them. This season I've felt Tom Lenk as
Andrew has been one of the highlights.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
- (Calvin and Hobbes)
email: egk-n...@hotmail.com
William George Ferguson
<slnosp...@comcast.net> wrote:
Strangely, I can't disagree with any of the above, except I would rate
the episode a little higher than you seem to, and you should have siad
S/W slasher.
>I loved the way he memorized Anya's words to Xander and kept rewinding the
>tape. Just as so many hopeless shippers among us watch and rewatch "Fool
>for Love", "The Prom", "OMWF". It's sad that we are, and pathetic. ME
>taunts us with it and flings it Andrew like into our fan person faces.
The one saving grace, if you will, is that ME very clearly loves Andrew.
>We learned a few things from "Storyteller". Wood's feelings about Spike
>became crystal clear. Xander and Anya are over. Andrew, again like so
>many fans, doesn't give a rat's patootie about Willow/Kennedy. He's more
>enthralled with Xander's carpentry skills.
To be fair, the bit with the window sash wasn't about the lack of hotness
of W/K, it (like his memorizing Anya's lines in the recorded dialogue
between Xander and Anya) was about Andrew's crush on Xander. In the
early bit while filling time during Buffy's morning speech (I loved
'Buffy's stopped talking, that usually means she had to go to work'), he
romanticised W/K every bit as much as he had B/S.
>The Seal of Danthalzar can be
>closed by atonement and the first step to atonement is accepting
>responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally. Unfortunately,
>it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
I don't think it was atonement (or redemption, or any other closure type
thing). I think it was remorse, and it seemed to clearly have to be
remorse by the one who initially opened it, just like it had to be
Angel's blood to close the portal in Becoming.
>Last season I would have gladly dropped Andrew off of a bridge alongside his
>compadre in crime Warren. He's come along way since then. Tom Lenk has
>impeccable comic timing. He can do serious, he can do sad, he can do funny.
>My vote is "don't kill off Andrew."
Last year, Andrew didn't really bother me, but he wasn't the member of
the trio I was interested in, until, looking back, I realized he had been
getting/delivering the most memorable lines of the trio, starting all the
way back with wanting Timothy Dalton to win the Oscar and hit Sean
Connery over the head with it.
Oh, and you left out 'he can do gay' :)
--
"Oh Buffy, you really do need to have
every square inch of your ass kicked."
- Willow Rosenberg
Rose
>Anya's words to Xander and kept rewinding the
>tape. Just as so many hopeless shippers among us watch and rewatch "Fool
>for Love", "The Prom", "OMWF". It's sad that we are, and pathetic. ME
>taunts us with it and flings it Andrew like >into our fan person faces.
Shannon, I get some Fan Self-Hate from your post.
I don't think it's pathetic to rewatch eps that we love if they destress us.
And anyway, I think you miss the point of Andrew rewinding the B/A scene and
saying Anya's lines. He's got a thing for Xander and wanted to be in her
shoes.
Rose
It's not Giles
Rose
>the first step to atonement is accepting
>responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally. Unfortunately,
>it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
You don't think Willow, Spike and Anya have accepted responsibility? I don't
think their redemptive journeys are finished, but they've all taken that first
step you mention.
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030226134041...@mb-mp.aol.com...
> Shannon wrote:
>
> >Anya's words to Xander and kept rewinding the
> >tape. Just as so many hopeless shippers among us watch and rewatch "Fool
> >for Love", "The Prom", "OMWF". It's sad that we are, and pathetic. ME
> >taunts us with it and flings it Andrew like >into our fan person faces.
>
> Shannon, I get some Fan Self-Hate from your post.
I wouldn't say it's self-hate, exactly. But, I admit I feel thoroughly
pathetic every time I see "I Remember You", or "The Prom" and I say to
myself "I will *not* cry at this. I will *not* care about Buffy/Angel." And
I do anyway.
> I don't think it's pathetic to rewatch eps that we love if they destress
us.
> And anyway, I think you miss the point of Andrew rewinding the B/A scene
and
> saying Anya's lines. He's got a thing for Xander and wanted to be in her
> shoes.
>
I picked up on Andrew's attraction to Xander, and that's really the root of
his shipperism. He knows he won't ever be in Anya's shoes because Xander
isn't gay, and Andrew hasn't even admitted to his own orientation, yet.
Seeing Xander with Anya though is the next best thing for him.
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030226134202...@mb-mp.aol.com...
They all need to admit to what they've done, acknowledge that it was their
own choices that led them into evil, feel remorse for their actions, grieve
for their victims, and then find away to redeem themselves. I think they've
each taken baby steps in those various areas on occasion, but I don't feel
like any of them atoned the way that Andrew was forced to.
Michel Boucher
écrivit:
> If you think possessed high
> school students are scary, imagine a school full of diabolical
> first graders.
Or even regular ones.
--
Es la hora de los hornos y no se ha de ver más que la luz.
José Martí
Michel Boucher
écrivit:
> For example, the Seal needs tears of atonement. Why
> make an example out of just poor Andrew? Get Willow, Spike, and
> Anya in there to sob and regret all of the merciless slaughter
> they've indulged in. The Seal will disintegrate and they can sink
> into a quicksand of wah.
I believe the requirement was that it come from the person who caused
it to activate in the first place, and that was Andrew.
DarkMagic
"Ken Arromdee" <arro...@mauve.rahul.net> wrote in message
news:b3j1mq$4jb$2...@blue.rahul.net...
> In article <Zx-cnRvpDor...@comcast.com>,
> DarkMagic <slnosp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >Andrew speaks as a one man universal fan person voice. "Why do Vampyres
> >appear on video?" "I know that Dawn used to be the Key, but I don't know
> >what that means." "Buffy's inspirational speeches are dull." "There's
a
> >lot of heat between Buffy and Spike. Although, technically he's always
at
> >room temperature."
>
> This sounds sadly familiar. The show mentions the plot holes and problems
> without ever addressing them.
>
> Really, letting the viewers know you know is okay, but it's nothing like
> actually addressing the things that are wrong.
Imo, it's not so much even showing the fans they realize what's wrong as it
is showing them that they don't give a damn if they're wrong or not. Like I
said when I opened my post I feel that the first scene to "Storyteller" set
it all up for us. ME is enlightening and entertaining us, they don't have
time for the details.
DarkMagic
"Michel Boucher" <alsa...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:Xns932E94A09C7A...@130.133.1.4...
> Dans un moment de folie, "DarkMagic" <slnosp...@comcast.net>
> écrivit:
>
> > For example, the Seal needs tears of atonement. Why
> > make an example out of just poor Andrew? Get Willow, Spike, and
> > Anya in there to sob and regret all of the merciless slaughter
> > they've indulged in. The Seal will disintegrate and they can sink
> > into a quicksand of wah.
>
> I believe the requirement was that it come from the person who caused
> it to activate in the first place, and that was Andrew.
>
Right, but it couldn't hurt to have every evil member of the cast come and
weep on it as well. The more atonement, the better, I always say.
> ---
Shannon
Cordelia: "Angel is only happy when he's fighting evil. Let's drum up a
little!"
Doyle: "I don't know why we're looking for evil when we got you here."
-
DarkMagic
"William George Ferguson" <william.geo...@domail.maricopa.edu>
wrote in message news:baqp5vkj25nf6i96i...@4ax.com...
I gave it a 4. That's pretty high for me.
> >I loved the way he memorized Anya's words to Xander and kept rewinding
the
> >tape. Just as so many hopeless shippers among us watch and rewatch "Fool
> >for Love", "The Prom", "OMWF". It's sad that we are, and pathetic. ME
> >taunts us with it and flings it Andrew like into our fan person faces.
>
> The one saving grace, if you will, is that ME very clearly loves Andrew.
>
I think ME and the Fans are really as one, we all obsess over the Buffyverse
in our own ways. Andrew seemed to veer back and forth between
storyteller/ME and obsessive fanboy/US.
> >We learned a few things from "Storyteller". Wood's feelings about Spike
> >became crystal clear. Xander and Anya are over. Andrew, again like so
> >many fans, doesn't give a rat's patootie about Willow/Kennedy. He's more
> >enthralled with Xander's carpentry skills.
>
> To be fair, the bit with the window sash wasn't about the lack of hotness
> of W/K, it (like his memorizing Anya's lines in the recorded dialogue
> between Xander and Anya) was about Andrew's crush on Xander. In the
> early bit while filling time during Buffy's morning speech (I loved
> 'Buffy's stopped talking, that usually means she had to go to work'), he
> romanticised W/K every bit as much as he had B/S.
>
> >The Seal of Danthalzar can be
> >closed by atonement and the first step to atonement is accepting
> >responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally.
Unfortunately,
> >it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
>
> I don't think it was atonement (or redemption, or any other closure type
> thing). I think it was remorse, and it seemed to clearly have to be
> remorse by the one who initially opened it, just like it had to be
> Angel's blood to close the portal in Becoming.
>
It wasn't just remorse, though. The fact that Andrew had to admit that he
made the choice to be evil, that it wasn't FE's fault it was his, is crucial
I think.
> >Last season I would have gladly dropped Andrew off of a bridge alongside
his
> >compadre in crime Warren. He's come along way since then. Tom Lenk has
> >impeccable comic timing. He can do serious, he can do sad, he can do
funny.
> >My vote is "don't kill off Andrew."
>
> Last year, Andrew didn't really bother me, but he wasn't the member of
> the trio I was interested in, until, looking back, I realized he had been
> getting/delivering the most memorable lines of the trio, starting all the
> way back with wanting Timothy Dalton to win the Oscar and hit Sean
> Connery over the head with it.
>
> Oh, and you left out 'he can do gay' :)
>
Well, he hasn't admitted to it, yet. I don't want to out him before he's
ready. :)
Rose
>From: arro...@mauve.rahul.net (Ken Arromdee)
>Date: 2/26/2003 10:40 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <b3j1mq$4jb$2...@blue.rahul.net>
>
>In article <Zx-cnRvpDor...@comcast.com>,
>DarkMagic <slnosp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>Andrew speaks as a one man universal fan person voice. "Why do Vampyres
>>appear on video?" "I know that Dawn used to be the Key, but I don't know
>>what that means." "Buffy's inspirational speeches are dull." "There's a
>>lot of heat between Buffy and Spike. Although, technically he's always at
>>room temperature."
>
>This sounds sadly familiar. The show mentions the plot holes and problems
>without ever addressing them.
>
A couple of years ago a poster pointed out that the show saying in effect "we
know this is stupid" does not make it un-stupid.
Still, that doesn't take away from Storyteller's entertainment value.
Rose
>Date: 2/26/2003 11:26 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <RYKcnZFU-Ls...@comcast.com>
>
>
>
>"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
>news:20030226134202...@mb-mp.aol.com...
>> Shannon wrote:
>>
>> >the first step to atonement is accepting
>> >responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally.
>Unfortunately,
>> >it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
>>
>> You don't think Willow, Spike and Anya have accepted responsibility? I
>don't
>> think their redemptive journeys are finished, but they've all taken that
>first
>> step you mention.
>>
>They all need to admit to what they've done, acknowledge that it was their
>own choices that led them into evil, feel >remorse for their actions,
Well, Demon Spike isn't capable of feeling remorse, apparently, unless ME
decides at this late date to change canon. I'm not sure that William's own
choices did lead him into evil. He was stupid to let Dru bite him (not that
she necessarily would have given him a choice) but we don't have evidence that
he understood that the incident would lead to his body, sans soul, killing
thousands of people.
Willow feels tremendous remorse for what she did to Warren. More remorse than
a lot of fans think she should feel. I agree that she hasn't taken enough
responsibility for *everything* she did, like hurting Dawn, but Andrew hasn't
acknowledged and shown remorse for everything he did either. He participated
in a kidnapping with intent to commit rape, he was an accessory after the fact
to Katrina's murder and even took pleasure in that fact, he conspired with
Warren to harm Buffy. All he seems to really be sorry about is killing his
friend. So I think Warren is even with Willow. And Spike is a bit ahead of
him, as he feels bad about everyone he hurt (the voices in his head telling him
to go to hell) although he's primarily concerned with the attempted rape,
which, horrid as it was, doesn't quite match eating babies or torturing and
killing zillions of young girls.
I'm sorry that Xander, who ate humble pie and imo, redeemed himself in
Selfless, has backpedaled by using the "it was right to not marry you" excuse
when the real problem was the way he went about calling off the wedding, the
fact that he waited so long to do it, and the pattern he followed in his
treatment of Anya from the time they got engaged.
I'm also sorry Buffy hasn't taken more responsibility for how she treated Spike
last year, but I know you disagree with me about that.
I wonder why Xander feels the marriage wouldn't have worked. Does he believe
the demon was right, that Anya would have been a shrew and he would have killed
her?
Growltiger
article <20030226134041...@mb-mp.aol.com>...
When I read "rewinding the B/A scene" I have the feeling that I have
just observed a Freudian slip. Buffy and Angel haunt us to this day,
eh, Rose?
--
Be seeing you,
Growltiger
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030226153653...@mb-mp.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: ME vs The Fans (Storyteller spoilers)
> >From: "DarkMagic" slnosp...@comcast.net
> >Date: 2/26/2003 11:26 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id: <RYKcnZFU-Ls...@comcast.com>
> >
> >
> >
> >"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
> >news:20030226134202...@mb-mp.aol.com...
> >> Shannon wrote:
> >>
> >> >the first step to atonement is accepting
> >> >responsibility for your actions. Somebody did it, finally.
> >Unfortunately,
> >> >it wasn't one of the main characters, but at least it's happened.
> >>
> >> You don't think Willow, Spike and Anya have accepted responsibility? I
> >don't
> >> think their redemptive journeys are finished, but they've all taken
that
> >first
> >> step you mention.
> >>
> >They all need to admit to what they've done, acknowledge that it was
their
> >own choices that led them into evil, feel >remorse for their actions,
>
> Well, Demon Spike isn't capable of feeling remorse, apparently, unless ME
> decides at this late date to change canon.
I think they made it pretty clear in Season Six that demon Spike is very
capable of feeling remorse. The reasons behind his remorse and the ways in
which he choose to deal with that remorse may have been motivated by
selfishness, but I think the level of remorse is the same. That's why I say
the remorse isn't enough, it has to be accompanied by acceptance of
responsibility, grief and empathy for the victims, etc....
I'm not sure that William's own
> choices did lead him into evil. He was stupid to let Dru bite him (not
that
> she necessarily would have given him a choice) but we don't have evidence
that
> he understood that the incident would lead to his body, sans soul, killing
> thousands of people.
>
Imo, they can't have it both ways. If excuses are made for Spike than
excuses must be made for everybody. Buffy says the determinant is free will
and the absence of free will. I say horse puckey. Free will doesn't come
and go. Certainly, there are mitigating circumstances that make it more
difficult for a person to exercise their powers of free will, the fact that
they're about to drop dead from blood loss if they don't agree to become a
vampire is a really good one. As it stands right now, though, if the free
will and soul thing are really the factors in determining responsibility
Spike is responsible for nothing. He has nothing to atone for. And I don't
buy that for a minute.
> Willow feels tremendous remorse for what she did to Warren. More remorse
than
> a lot of fans think she should feel.
I haven't picked up on a lot of remorse over what she did to Warren. Guilt
over being unable to prevent what happened to Tara, yes. Guilt about the
way she treated her friends and Giles, yes. The biggest thing Willow
hasn't shown though is that she's responsible for the things she does with
magic. She still makes it seem as though the magic takes over and she isn't
responsible for what happens as a result. I don't buy that, either.
He participated
> in a kidnapping with intent to commit rape
He was. But, in typical misogynistic fashion he didn't realize it until
Katrina wacked him over the head with the fact. He was just playing at cool
super villain who has no trouble getting the chicks to do whatever he wants.
All three of the nerds were pretty shocked by Katrina's revelation about
what "playing at being bad" really meant.
, he was an accessory after the fact
> to Katrina's murder and even took pleasure in that fact, he conspired with
> Warren to harm Buffy.
True.
All he seems to really be sorry about is killing his
> friend.
More than that, though, is that Andrew accepts that *he* did it. It wasn't
the fault of FE, or FE's influence, it was his own evil, his own weakness,
that killed Jonathon. And he got a taste, for one second, of what it was
like to be in Jonathon's shoes that day. To be with a person you trust to
help and protect you and have them turn the tables on you. To know he was
going to die. That was important.
I said early on in this season that this was going to be the year of "walk a
mile in my shoes" where the characters would be getting a taste of what it
feels like to be another character. Spike and Willow are getting a taste of
what it's like to be Buffy. To have enormous, world changing, world ending,
power and to have to restrain it, control it, and always try to use it only
for good. Even when what's good isn't very clear. Dawn got a feel for what
it's like to be Xander. To be surrounded by people with enormous power and
potential, and deal with having none of it himself. Willow got a taste of
what it felt like to be Warren. Just a small taste, since Gnarl only
nibbled on her and she was completely numb when he did. Andrew knows what
Jonathon felt just before he murdered him. Now it looks as though Spike
will find out what it feels like to be stalked and tormented by someone who
wants to kill him. I think these are crucial experiences for them to go
through, the final test FE presents, whatever it is, is going to involve
them all being able to understand each others feelings and motives.
>
> I wonder why Xander feels the marriage wouldn't have worked. Does he
believe
> the demon was right, that Anya would have been a shrew and he would have
killed
> her?
>
I think Xander's problem is his own insecurity. He doesn't believe enough
in himself, in his desire to be different than his parents are, to go ahead
and get married. The catch is, I don't think he ever will be until he does
get married.
Rob Myers
<arro...@mauve.rahul.net> wrote:
> This sounds sadly familiar. The show mentions the plot holes and problems
> without ever addressing them.
>
> Really, letting the viewers know you know is okay, but it's nothing like
> actually addressing the things that are wrong.
I just listened last night to Espenson's interview from last year on
the Succubus Club, and she talked about the technique of "hanging a
lantern on something."
They were discussing the "penis-monster" from "Doublemeat Palace," and
how they didn't mean for it to be at all dick-like, and had no idea it
would look so much like a one till they saw the FX work. And by then it
was too late. They knew the viewers would notice it, and would probably
draw mistaken conclusions about the episode's message as a result. At
the very least it would become a distraction.
So in a later episode they had Willow mention off-handedly how weird it
was the monster looked like a penis, and then drop the subject. The
idea being that by acknowledging something unintended in the show
that's weird or off or distracting, the issue is settled the issue in
the viewer's mind. Andrew's question about vampires and video last
night was like that. By mentioning it and then just dropping it the
editorial voice of ME decrees "it's a non-issue, not part of the
story."
Neat way of neutralizing a persistent yet meaningless question.
It would be even neater if they didn't need to use it so much!
--
rob m at rob myers dot net
Growltiger
>
[snipped]
>
> I wonder why Xander feels the marriage wouldn't have worked. Does he believe
> the demon was right, that Anya would have been a shrew and he would have killed
> her?
>
>
It would be nice to have some exposition here now, wouldn't it? So I am
left to conjecture. On the surface it appears that Xander feared that
their marriage would have become like his parents. But that, in itself,
would be an effect and not the cause for this dismal vision. If memory
serves me, what set off the decline was that Buffy died and he was not
able to protect her. So in his heart of hearts, Xander still carries a
torch for Buffy.
And the irony would be that the torch is not for lost romance but for
lost purpose. Xander may be insecure but he wants to do good. And he
has accepted the fact that although he may never be the hero, he can be
the hero's faithful ally. To marry would force him to forego that self-
ascribed obligation.
Rob Myers
<fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
> Well, Demon Spike isn't capable of feeling remorse, apparently, unless ME
> decides at this late date to change canon. I'm not sure that William's own
> choices did lead him into evil. He was stupid to let Dru bite him (not that
> she necessarily would have given him a choice) but we don't have evidence that
> he understood that the incident would lead to his body, sans soul, killing
> thousands of people.
I've used this analogy before, but compare a vampire with a drunk
driver who's killed someone. If the driver was drinking while knowing
they had to drive home, they dismissed the possibility of causing the
death of an innocent. Therein lies their (ir)responsibility.
Like that driver, a person who chooses to embrace evil and undeath in
the face of their own demise has made a choice. At that moment they've
turned their back on the consequences of their actions for their own
selfishness, and exchanged their human soul for an evil demon. Every
vampire was once somebody who made the same choice Ford did in LTM.
Don Sample
<260220031818101351%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>, Rob Myers
<ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net> wrote:
> I've used this analogy before, but compare a vampire with a drunk
> driver who's killed someone. If the driver was drinking while knowing
> they had to drive home, they dismissed the possibility of causing the
> death of an innocent. Therein lies their (ir)responsibility.
>
> Like that driver, a person who chooses to embrace evil and undeath in
> the face of their own demise has made a choice. At that moment they've
> turned their back on the consequences of their actions for their own
> selfishness, and exchanged their human soul for an evil demon. Every
> vampire was once somebody who made the same choice Ford did in LTM.
The main problem with this theory is that most of the vamps we've seen
made had no idea what was happening to them, and we've been told that a
vamp can force someone who *doesn't* want to become a vampire to drink
their blood. That's what happened to Darla with Drusilla.
--
Don Sample, dsa...@synapse.net
Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/
Quando omni flunkus moritati
David Marc Nieporent
arro...@mauve.rahul.net (Ken Arromdee) wrote:
>DarkMagic <slnosp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>Andrew speaks as a one man universal fan person voice. "Why do Vampyres
>>appear on video?" "I know that Dawn used to be the Key, but I don't know
>>what that means." "Buffy's inspirational speeches are dull." "There's a
>>lot of heat between Buffy and Spike. Although, technically he's always at
>>room temperature."
>This sounds sadly familiar. The show mentions the plot holes and problems
>without ever addressing them.
>Really, letting the viewers know you know is okay, but it's nothing like
>actually addressing the things that are wrong.
True, but those things above aren't plot holes. They're just random
observations about the show. Not everything can or needs to be explained;
that vampires show up on video doesn't need to be "addressed." It's just
strange, so they commented on it.
---------------------------------------------
David M. Nieporent niep...@alumni.princeton.edu
Shuggie
I agree with you about Anya and Willow. Souled Spike doesn't need to be
redeemed because he's a different being to Unsouled Spike. Although if
Angel's an example to go by he'll *feel* like he needs to earn
redemption.
--
Shug
The two things that matter the most to me in the work that I do are emotional resonance and rocket launchers.
- Joss Whedon
Lee S. Billings
says...
Ooh, nice analysis! Fits in very well with his speech to Dawn in "Potentials".
Celine
--
Handmade jewelry at http://www.rubylane.com/shops/starcat
"Only the powers of evil claim that doing good is boring."
-- Diane Duane, _Nightfall at Algemron_
himiko
>
> I've used this analogy before, but compare a vampire with a drunk
> driver who's killed someone. If the driver was drinking while knowing
> they had to drive home, they dismissed the possibility of causing the
> death of an innocent. Therein lies their (ir)responsibility.
>
> Like that driver, a person who chooses to embrace evil and undeath in
> the face of their own demise has made a choice. At that moment they've
> turned their back on the consequences of their actions for their own
> selfishness, and exchanged their human soul for an evil demon. Every
> vampire was once somebody who made the same choice Ford did in LTM.
Except that we've never seen one of them "choose" except for Ford and
maybe Darla. The others were never asked; they were just turned.
himiko
Rose
>
>Imo, they can't have it both ways. If excuses are made for Spike than
>excuses must be made for everybody.
I know you believe Spike's soul was present all along, but my theories assume
the show's statements are canon, that the soul goes away, elsewhere, when the
vampire is made, and so the soul is not tainted by the vampire's crimes.
> Buffy says the determinant is free will
>and the absence of free will. I say horse puckey. Free will doesn't come
>and go.
It does in ME's fictional world if ME says it does.
> As it stands right now, though, if the free
>will and soul thing are really the factors in determining responsibility
>Spike is responsible for nothing.
If vampires have no choice but to be evil.. and since they are all evil, it
would seem that way, as otherwise the law of averages would figure in,
resulting in some non evil vampires...then it's arguable they are not
responsible.
It IS my belief, based on ME realities about the soul, that soully Angel and
soully Spike do not need to redeem themselves for what their unsouled
counterparts did.
Rose
Wood: Very wrong. And yet understandable.
It's not Giles, no, it's not
Rose
>Date: 2/26/2003 3:13 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <260220031818101351%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>
>
>In article <20030226153653...@mb-mp.aol.com>, Rose
><fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
>
>> Well, Demon Spike isn't capable of feeling remorse, apparently, unless ME
>> decides at this late date to change canon. I'm not sure that William's own
>> choices did lead him into evil. He was stupid to let Dru bite him (not
>that
>> she necessarily would have given him a choice) but we don't have evidence
>that
>> he understood that the incident would lead to his body, sans soul, killing
>> thousands of people.
>
>I've used this analogy before, but compare a vampire with a drunk
>driver who's killed someone. >
>the face of their own demise has made a >choice.
If, in fact, the person who is turned has a choice whether to be sucked and
then do the sucking. Darla did choose to do so back in the 1600s.. I don't
think either Angel or William had enough information available to them in order
to make an informed choice. We don't even know if William drank willingly or
if Drusilla pluggegd his nose and forced blood down his throat. Vampire Willow
said the issue can be forced, and Angel himself implied the same thing when
Darla was turned a second time.
>At that moment they've
>turned their back on the consequences of their actions for their own
>selfishness, and exchanged their human soul for an evil demon. Every
>vampire was once somebody who made the same choice Ford did in LTM.
>
I disagree...I don't think that fits what we have seen on the screen.
PJ Browning
<fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
> If, in fact, the person who is turned has a choice whether to be sucked and
> then do the sucking. Darla did choose to do so back in the 1600s.. I don't
> think either Angel or William had enough information available to them in
> order
> to make an informed choice.
I doubt that Darla really knew what she was getting into when she
accepted the Master's offer. She was afraid to die and he played that
fear.
Rob Myers
<dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
> The main problem with this theory is that most of the vamps we've seen
> made had no idea what was happening to them, and we've been told that a
> vamp can force someone who *doesn't* want to become a vampire to drink
> their blood. That's what happened to Darla with Drusilla.
Then consider someone who was dosed at a party, who then goes out and
runs someone over. Partly their fault, partly not. Certainly they are a
danger to others when they're intoxicated. In a sense they are
possessed by the intoxicant.
Now they wake up the next morning in the hospital to find they've
caused a fatal accident. They're certainly deserving of forgiveness,
but any thinking being would still never be free of the remorse.
Rob Myers
<fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
> If, in fact, the person who is turned has a choice whether to be sucked and
> then do the sucking. Darla did choose to do so back in the 1600s.. I don't
> think either Angel or William had enough information available to them in
> order
> to make an informed choice.
Angel and William both chose to do so. ME hasn't explicitly said, but I
can't imagine the act of replacing your soul with a vicious demon could
feel like a good.
cjn
But did either Liam or William know at the time what would happen to
them? I somehow don't think that either Darla or Drusilla would have
gone into the nitty-gritty of what it means to be a vampire. William
certainly was in no fit state to make an informed decision about
anything, let alone becoming a demonic vampire, when sired by
Drusilla, who had herself been driven mad by Angel before being sired.
There doesn't seem to be much room for debate about keeping or losing
one's soul when faced by a blood-hungry, super-strong, hypnotically
persuasive undead-being.
cjn
Rose
>From: Rob Myers ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net
>Message-id: <270220030301046846%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>
How would Angel and William know anything about replacing their souls with
vicious demons? I don't think too much vampire literature had made its way to
Ireland by the time Angel was turned. The vampire literature (that I have read)
that was available by the time William was turned doesn't talk a whole lot
about what happens to the soul, or say anything about a vicious demon entering
the body. William chose not to think about nasty, unpleasant things, so I tend
to doubt he read gothic horror anyway.
Rose
>Date: 2/27/2003 4:45 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <457a6a3e.03022...@posting.google.com>
>
>Rob Myers <ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net> wrote in message
>news:<270220030301046846%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>...
>> In article <20030227001743...@mb-fu.aol.com>, Rose
>> <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
>>
>> > If, in fact, the person who is turned has a choice whether to be sucked
>and
>> > then do the sucking. Darla did choose to do so back in the 1600s.. I
>don't
>> > think either Angel or William had enough information available to them in
>> > order
>> > to make an informed choice.
>>
>> Angel and William both chose to do so. ME hasn't explicitly said, but I
>> can't imagine the act of replacing your soul with a vicious demon could
>> feel like a good.
>
>
>But did either Liam or William know at the time what would happen to
>them? I somehow don't think that either Darla or Drusilla would have
>gone into the nitty-gritty of what it means >to be a vampire.
Yeah, somehow I don't see Dru saying, after almost draining William, "OK love,
you'll either die or you can drink from me and live forever. Know there is a
catch though. Your soul will leave your body, and a little worm er I mean
demon will replace it. As a result, you will become a vicious killer with no
conscience to hold you back. So please think carefully and make an informed
and educated choice."
DarkMagic
"Ken Arromdee" <arro...@mauve.rahul.net> wrote in message
news:b3k43b$esm$1...@blue.rahul.net...
> In article <260220031745464429%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>,
> Rob Myers <ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net> wrote:
> >The
> >idea being that by acknowledging something unintended in the show
> >that's weird or off or distracting, the issue is settled the issue in
> >the viewer's mind. Andrew's question about vampires and video last
> >night was like that. By mentioning it and then just dropping it the
> >editorial voice of ME decrees "it's a non-issue, not part of the
> >story."
>
> The penis monster makes perfect logical sense within the story. It's not
an
> inconsistency or a plot hole--the only thing strange about it is that it
makes
> the audience snigger. So acknowledging its presence is enough.
>
> Treating actual inconsistencies this way, like having the show mention
that
> nobody understood Dawn being made from Buffy, doesn't work.
> --
> Ken Arromdee / arro...@rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee
Exactly. It's along the same lines of "How old is Spike, exactly?" and
"Vampires don't breath, why drown him?" One issue really is irrelevant in
the grand scheme of things and one issue is crucial to the entire concept of
the show.
DarkMagic
"Growltiger" <ty...@never.invalid> wrote in message
news:MPG.18c6e6624...@netnews.attbi.com...
I don't doubt that Xander's obligation to Buffy is a big part of what drives
his descision making. It would kind of be like Robin deserting Gotham City
and Batman to move to Long Island and raise a family.
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030227001115...@mb-fu.aol.com...
> Shannon wrote:
>
> >
> >Imo, they can't have it both ways. If excuses are made for Spike than
> >excuses must be made for everybody.
>
> I know you believe Spike's soul was present all along, but my theories
assume
> the show's statements are canon, that the soul goes away, elsewhere, when
the
> vampire is made, and so the soul is not tainted by the vampire's crimes.
>
ME still hasn't defined the soul. Angel isn't locked up in a bottle right
now, his soul is. Whatever it is that makes Angel who he is, it's still
inside of his body. His memories, his personality, all of those things are
intact. Angel is tainted by all of his crimes even if his soul is not. Or
what would be the purpose of him having his own show?
> > Buffy says the determinant is free will
> >and the absence of free will. I say horse puckey. Free will doesn't
come
> >and go.
>
> It does in ME's fictional world if ME says it does.
I don't think ME has said that. Buffy has said that and I think Buffy is
quite mistaken. If ME *is* about to say that then I think they have
completely defeated the purpose of telling this story to begin with.
>
> > As it stands right now, though, if the free
> >will and soul thing are really the factors in determining responsibility
> >Spike is responsible for nothing.
>
> If vampires have no choice but to be evil.. and since they are all evil,
it
> would seem that way, as otherwise the law of averages would figure in,
> resulting in some non evil vampires...then it's arguable they are not
> responsible.
>
We have seen vampires who try not to be evil. Vamp whores, Harmony, Spike.
It's harder for them to make good choices, but they still understand the
difference between right and wrong, good and bad. They are capable of
making good choices, or better choices. They just don't. That's free will.
> It IS my belief, based on ME realities about the soul, that soully Angel
and
> soully Spike do not need to redeem themselves for what their unsouled
> counterparts did.
Like I said that pretty much defeats the entire purpose of their characters
then.
Rose
>Date: 2/27/2003 7:36 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <iZadnS4iEse...@comcast.com>
>
>
>
>"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
>news:20030227001115...@mb-fu.aol.com...
>> Shannon wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Imo, they can't have it both ways. If excuses are made for Spike than
>> >excuses must be made for everybody.
>>
>> I know you believe Spike's soul was present all along, but my theories
>assume
>> the show's statements are canon, that the soul goes away, elsewhere, when
>the
>> vampire is made, and so the soul is not tainted by the vampire's crimes.
>>
>ME still hasn't defined the soul. Angel isn't locked up in a bottle right
>now, his soul is.
The soul is the essence of Liam. When Angel has a soul, the essence of Liam,
rather than the vampiric demon spirit infecting the animated corpse, is in
charge. Since Liam is not the same person as the vampire Angelus, I don't see
how, when you combine the vampire with Essence of Liam, you have the same
person.
> Whatever it is that makes Angel who he is, it's still
>inside of his body.
Whatever makes Angelus who he is, is inside his body. Angelus has Liam's
memories and psychology, but the true essence of the person in the B-verse is
the soul. That soul, right now, is gone, so therefore Angel is not, right now,
Liam trapped inside a corpse with a demon.
>His memories, his personality, all of those things are
>intact. Angel is tainted by all of his crimes even if his soul is not. Or
>what would be the purpose of him having his own show?
>
He's an interesting character whom people like. The duality of Angel and
Angelus represents the dual nature of man. Etc.
Angel can be an effective metaphor for all sorts of situations that occur in
real life... split personality, insanity, addiction, etc. Angel and Angelus
aren't the same, merely intersecting. Like my illustration: The presence of
Angelus is in brackets, the presence of Liam is in parenthesis. Angel is
contained within the intersection of the brackets and the parens:
[Angelus ( ANGEL ] Liam )
>> > Buffy says the determinant is free will
>> >and the absence of free will. I say horse puckey. Free will doesn't
>come
>> >and go.
>>
>> It does in ME's fictional world if ME says it does.
>
>I don't think ME has said that. Buffy has said that and I think Buffy is
>quite mistaken.
I don't think she was mistaken as to what Spike was doing when he was Firstie's
sleeper. I agree that vampires have some degree of free will, but that free
will is hampered by the overwhelming compulsions of their basic natures. If it
weren't the law of averages would dictate that some vampires would choose not
to kill maim and destroy. Just as not all sociopaths are killers, neither
would all vampires be.
>If ME *is* about to say that then I think they have
>completely defeated the purpose of telling this story to begin with.
>
I gave up on figuring out their purposes long ago. Joss is still saying BtVS
has a strong feminist message and I think THAT's horsepuckey.
Rose
>Message-id: <O_OdndkCmcV...@comcast.com>
Not exactly, because in the Batmanverse, Robin's love is reciprocated by the
super hero, so his leaving would be a romantic betrayal. >:-)
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030227105655...@mb-mk.aol.com...
I read an interesting article on the nature of the soul a month or so ago.
It was published in a metaphysical/spirtual magazine that's produced
locally. It's called "Phenomenews" http://www.phenomenews.com/ I don't
know if they have old articles available online or not. I took a quick look
and couldn't find it again, but I don't remember the name of the author or
the article.
At any rate, the gist of the article is that the soul is the essence of
life. It's not the essence of the human, it's the life force of the being.
The soul is life itself. The veiws of the author actually coincided pretty
well with what we know, or think we know, about the soul in the Buffyverse.
Vampires have no human soul, therefore no human life and no respect for
human life. They have apparently, demonic life which wasn't covered in the
article.
If this is the case in the B-verse, as I believe it might be, then Angel and
Spike have everything they need to be truly alive as humans again. (well
Angel will once his soul is out of that jar and back into his body) What
magic formula or twist ME might use to jump start that life, I don't know.
The bottom line, though, is that the soul is *not* the essence of the
person. It's the persons life force, life energy. Soulless Spike and
souled Spike are not two different people. The soul isn't good or evil,
the person is good or evil, the soul is merely a conduit of life. What is
done with that life force is up to the person that has it. My best guess is
that soulless Spike and Angelus appear to be more evil without their life
force because lacking a life force means lacking respect for life.
> >If ME *is* about to say that then I think they have
> >completely defeated the purpose of telling this story to begin with.
> >
>
> I gave up on figuring out their purposes long ago. Joss is still saying
BtVS
> has a strong feminist message and I think THAT's horsepuckey.
>
I think BtVS does have a strong feminist message. Which is not to say that
the message is always a positive one. But, I think BtVS sends a lot of
messages some of which are clearly pretty garbled and can take on a
different meaning depending on the writer. Such is life, though. It's all
shades of grey depending upon your perspective.
cjn
Perhaps each vampire should carry around a "So I'm thinking of turning
you into a Vampire" contract: "Clause 15: please indicate by signing
below in your own blood that you have fully understood the terms of
this Contract. (Note to Clause 15: any potential not wishing to adhere
to Clause 15 will immediately bring into effect Clause 15a, which
requires the immediate and painful death of said potential)." That
probably should cover all eventualities, and help protect the sirer
against any siree who felt he'd/she'd got a bad deal.
cjn ;~)
Rose
>That
>probably should cover all eventualities, and help protect the sirer
>against any siree who felt he'd/she'd got a bad deal.
>
Spike was pretty fair to Willow in The Initiative. He said he could bring her
back to be like him. That pretty much said it all.
Rob Myers
<c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> But did either Liam or William know at the time what would happen to
> them?
You know, maybe the gameface, the fangs, the getting sucked dry,
vampire legends around the world .... those could just possibly be
hints.
Rose
>Date: 2/27/2003 1:14 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <270220031617220095%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>
>
>In article <457a6a3e.03022...@posting.google.com>, cjn
><c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> But did either Liam or William know at the time what would happen to
>> them?
>
>You know, maybe the gameface, the fangs, the getting sucked dry,
>vampire legends around the world ....
Vampire legends were mostly centered in eastern Europe, not Ireland and
England. As I said, I strongly doubt there was any vampire literature
circulating Ireland in Liam's day. In the vampire literature William might
(MIGHT) have read (that I've read myself), the vampires don't look particularly
like Dru did, and there's nothing stated specifically about souls, though the
killer thing is apparent.
Arnold Kim
He would feel remorse, yes, but would he be responsible?
Arnold Kim
PJ Browning
wrote:
i go to a party and I get so drunk that I hit another car and kill
someone. does anyone doubt that I'm responsible.
I am driving down the street and I have a sudden heart attack. I lose
control of the wheel and hit another car, killing the driver. Am I
really responsible. Especially if I'm in prime health and there was no
reason to think that I would have a heart attack.
Rob Myers
> He would feel remorse, yes, but would he be responsible?
Ask him.
Rob Myers
<fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
> Vampire legends were mostly centered in eastern Europe, not Ireland and
> England. As I said, I strongly doubt there was any vampire literature
> circulating Ireland in Liam's day.
First off, I think you're wrong. Secondly, since we're discussing the
Buffyverse and not reality, I extra-seriously think you're wrong.
Rose
>From: Rob Myers ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net
>Message-id: <270220031856208255%ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net>
>
>In article <20030227163033...@mb-bg.aol.com>, Rose
><fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
>
>> Vampire legends were mostly centered in eastern Europe, not Ireland and
>> England. As I said, I strongly doubt there was any vampire literature
>> circulating Ireland in Liam's day.
>
>First off, I think you're wrong.
If you have examples, I'd love to know, because I would greatly enjoy reading
mid-18th-century English language vampire literature.
>Secondly, since we're discussing the
>Buffyverse and not reality, I extra-seriously think you're wrong.
>
So I am obligated to assume that even if there wasn't much vampire literature
floating around in the 1700s in reality, there must have been vamp lit floating
around Ireland in the 1700s in the B-verse? :)
Nah, not me. I assume the B-verse is the same as the me-verse unless we're
told otherwise.
Joe Curwen
says...
"vampire scare britain" then you'll find some stuff. They had some serious
scares in Western Europe in the early 1700s. They make a point that many
scholars and educated people did not at first disbelieve, and officials were
pestered with it all. No mention of Ireland, though, AFAICT.
Joe
David Marc Nieporent
Michel Boucher <alsa...@rogers.com> wrote:
>Dans un moment de folie, "DarkMagic" <slnosp...@comcast.net> écrivit:
>> If you think possessed high
>> school students are scary, imagine a school full of diabolical
>> first graders.
>Or even regular ones.
What's the difference?
---------------------------------------------
David M. Nieporent niep...@alumni.princeton.edu
David Marc Nieporent
Rob Myers <ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net> wrote:
>> He would feel remorse, yes, but would he be responsible?
>Ask him.
Note that guilt is not rational.
You're a passenger in a car. The driver loses control, the car crashes.
Four of the five people inside die; you survive. Do you feel guilty? Very
likely. Is that rational? No. (Assuming you had no part in causing the
accident, of course.) Survivor's guilt.
I'm not saying that this is what Angel/Spike feel; I'm just using this as a
real-life example of irrational guilt.
David Marc Nieporent
fyl...@aol.comspam (Rose) wrote:
>From: Rob Myers ro...@robmyers.removethisspamblocker.net
>> Rose <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote:
>>> Vampire legends were mostly centered in eastern Europe, not Ireland and
>>> England. As I said, I strongly doubt there was any vampire literature
>>> circulating Ireland in Liam's day.
>>First off, I think you're wrong.
>If you have examples, I'd love to know, because I would greatly enjoy reading
>mid-18th-century English language vampire literature.
>>Secondly, since we're discussing the
>>Buffyverse and not reality, I extra-seriously think you're wrong.
>So I am obligated to assume that even if there wasn't much vampire literature
>floating around in the 1700s in reality, there must have been vamp lit floating
>around Ireland in the 1700s in the B-verse? :)
>Nah, not me. I assume the B-verse is the same as the me-verse unless we're
>told otherwise.
Well, the B-verse, unlike the me- (er, you-) verse has vampires floating
around Ireland. So it's very likely the B-verse would also have vamp-lit
floating around Ireland.
Michel Boucher
<niep...@alumni.princeton.edu> écrivit:
> In article <Xns932E9421BBD9...@130.133.1.4>,
> Michel Boucher <alsa...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>Dans un moment de folie, "DarkMagic" <slnosp...@comcast.net>
>>écrivit:
>
>>> If you think possessed high
>>> school students are scary, imagine a school full of diabolical
>>> first graders.
>
>>Or even regular ones.
>
> What's the difference?
My point exactly.
--
Es la hora de los hornos y no se ha de ver más que la luz.
José Martí
DarkMagic
"Rose" <fyl...@aol.comspam> wrote in message
news:20030227195828...@mb-fs.aol.com...
Me too, which is why I say that the ability to exercise free will doesn't
just come and go, here or in the B-verse. Btw, I've never heard of an Irish
vampire, I believe they are frightened of Leprechauns.
Shannon
Chelsea Christenson
> I am driving down the street and I have a sudden heart attack. I lose
> control of the wheel and hit another car, killing the driver. Am I
> really responsible.
In the technical, causative sense, yes. In the moral sense, no.
Rob Myers
<jcu...@freeonline.com> wrote:
> Don't know if this will help, but if you google "vampire scare europe" or
> "vampire scare britain" then you'll find some stuff. They had some serious
> scares in Western Europe in the early 1700s. They make a point that many
> scholars and educated people did not at first disbelieve, and officials were
> pestered with it all. No mention of Ireland, though, AFAICT.
Well, there you go then. Considering they were also wearing the same
fashions at that time, seems reasonable my Irish ancestors heard news
from the continent.
Timothy K. Morris
>>> Vampire legends were mostly centered in eastern Europe, not Ireland and
>>> England. As I said, I strongly doubt there was any vampire literature
>>> circulating Ireland in Liam's day.
You might want to take a look at this website.
http://countdarkness.tripod.com/thenight/id15.html
Rose
>Date: 2/28/2003 8:06 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <YnidnXALRYo...@comcast.com>
Well, I said "unless we're told otherwise." The ability to exercise free will
when vamped or under the sway of the First is up to ME. The color of grass in
suburban New Jersey is up to my memories (green, unless you forgot to water
your lawn during dry spells. :) ).
Anyhoo, free will can come and go in Real Life if you are psychotic with
occasional lucid intervals.
Rose
It's not Giles, no, it's not
"Mine is a redemptive struggle. These ropes itch." -- Andrew
Rose
>Date: 2/28/2003 6:37 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <26706vsfole851hkr...@4ax.com>
Thanks very much for the link! Smooches.
According to this site, the first English vamp story was published in 1798,
considerably later than Angel was turned, no? I saw nothing about any Irish
publications earliers. So big fat neeners, I'm right again, ha ha ha.
Phooey. Me the best.
Rose
>
>You don't think Buffy's rejection of the whole 'chain me up and make
>me a slayer' thing was feminist?
>
Yes. But for me, enough anti-female-empowerment stuff has happened on BtVS and
Angel to cancel out the feminist moments. Furthermore, too often, ME seems to
confuse bashing and emasculation of males with feminism.
>
>Maybe its me, but I find a lot of feminists act like fundamentalists
>when it comes to what they think 'true feminism' actually is.
>
>
I'm not one of them, although I do maintain that true feminism precludes sexism
against men, as it should be about everyone being equal and not one group being
superior to another.