Art, angst, realism on B/VS
Jeff and Lisa
episode. They felt that it is good that the episode touched
people emotionally and made them think, they consider that
artistic and feel there should be more of that on television.
They also claimed that B/VS always has had angst and emotion.
Here's my take on it:
I have nothing against a higher art on television, nor against
a show touching on the emotions. My biggest objection to 2/27
was that it was too much, going too far. It was simply too
damn depressing to watch.
I wonder if an episode featured too much intense sex and/or
violence if people applauding this episode would have objected.
(Suppose they had Dawn get really violent, disgustingly so,
with a classmate? Suppose Buffy put aggressive sexual moves
on Spike in a fit of rage?)
I considered last season's finale (the crazy dreams) to be a
very artsy episode, kind of an experiment that producers should
be allowed to do once in a while. While I didn't really care
for it, I didn't find it objectionable nor unpleasant.
There are television shows that feature heavy-duty emotions
and depressing themes. They are known as soap operas, telemovies,
or melodramas. Typical themes are someone struggling to overcome
a horrible disease or crushing poverty or tremendous loss.
Remember "Christy" with Kellie Martin?
B/VS, until this season, has NOT been that kind of show. Sure,
it has shown angst, but it did not wallow solely in it for the whole
episode as this one did. The closest one was when Ms. Calendar
was killed. I remember a single scene in that where first Buffy
and Willow and strolling along blissfully happy, in the next
scene, looking through the window, they get a telephone call and
their faces scrunch up upon hearing bad news. That was poignant.
But in 2/27, the ENTIRE EPISODE was JUST about getting and dealing
with the bad news.
One reason I always liked the show, until now, was that
even in the "heavy" episodes, they had some comic relief.
While I always enjoyed the show and thought the plots were
very creative, I never considered it "high art". As I said,
I don't watch B/VS for "artistic" reasons, I watch it for
'mindless' entertainment. I don't know why some people find
that attitude so offensive. Ironically, in an earlier post
I complained about the image of someone reading a comic book,
and people complained that I insulted comic books. There is a
place in our world for both comic books and literature, and
that applies to television as well.
If Joss & Co. are bored doing 'camp' with B/VS, then it's
time he close down the show and create a new one. Does he
want to write the next "Hill Street Blues?" Great, go ahead,
but don't turn B/VS into that.
Indeed, 2/27 was very inconsistent with the rest of the series.
Others have pointed out that many people close to the gang have
died, and little, if any mourning was shown for them. Xander
lost his best friend in episode #1 and had time to mourn only
briefly and it was never discussed again. Buffy lost Ford, and
had little, if any mourning. Even when they thought Willow
was dead, they didn't get so incredibly down as they did in
this episode.
And in thinking about it, 2/27 was NOT true-to-life. It was
an exaggerated focus of the WORST of a bad situation. Yes,
after a death, people do react as portrayed. But where this
episode failed was to show ONLY one side of it. In this
episode, _everyone_ portrayed as devastated at _all times_.
It's not like that in real life. People of course DO have their
difficult moments (like Willow and her clothes), but then most
pull themselves together and are supportive, even sharing jokes
and a smile. And in real life, there is usually more support
and assistance from friends and family. Buffy would not have
to see Dawn alone, a school official would have accompanied her.
We didn't see Xander's and Willow's parents, normally they would
be present too and helping.
Fire3Sky
>an exaggerated focus of the WORST of a bad situation. Yes,
>after a death, people do react as portrayed. But where this
>episode failed was to show ONLY one side of it.
I think the ep was supposed to be taking place over a few hours, so it was
realistic that they would all still be in shock.
Fire3Sky
Christopher Rickey
"Jeff and Lisa" <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:97m89e$b...@netaxs.com...
> B/VS, until this season, has NOT been that kind of show. Sure,
> it has shown angst, but it did not wallow solely in it for the whole
> episode as this one did.
Parker episodes!
Christopher Rickey
> And in thinking about it, 2/27 was NOT true-to-life. It was
> an exaggerated focus of the WORST of a bad situation. Yes,
> after a death, people do react as portrayed. But where this
> episode failed was to show ONLY one side of it. In this
> episode, _everyone_ portrayed as devastated at _all times_.
> It's not like that in real life.
People have a large range of emotions after someone close dies. Sometimes,
it gets far worse than what they showed on Buffy.
DesertRoaz
>
> Many people seemed offended by my severe criticism of the 2/27
>episode.
I am sorry this happened to you. I don't think you deserved the attacks you
got. You were civil, you didn't personally attack Joss or the writers that I
recall, you didn't say anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You expressed
your feelings and opinion, and that's it.
DesertRoaz
Did I just beat the Spike issue into the ground again? Sorry.
"Bite me." -- Invisigoth, the X Files.
Jacqueline Price
found the show touching...I was crying through it. It hit struck a rather
emotional chord in me. This is not standard fare for Buffy, true, if every
week were like that, I wouldn't watch. But once in a while, felt good.
Jeff and Lisa
While the weird dream season finale of last season did nothing
for me, I didn't find it objectionable.
My objection to the 2/27 episode was the fact that it was not only
a tearjerker, but every theatric device possible was used to enforce
the sadness and pain of the characters at their loss. To me, that
was going overboard and inconsistent with the type of show B/VS used
to be. It certainly had its emotional moments, but it never wallowed
in them to extent this episode did.
The only thing I must admit I don't understand is how people would
enjoy an episode that brought them to tears.
Jacqueline Price
moves us.
bethan...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>
>
>The only thing I must admit I don't understand is how people would
>enjoy an episode that brought them to tears.
I'll second that.
I'm one of the crowd that thought "The Body" was excellent, but
although I didn't cry I can't say I enjoyed watching it one bit.
I emailed my mother on Wednesday warning her the episode was
depressing before she watched it (she just done home from a trip to
visit *her* mother on Tuesday, so hadn't watched it then.) She
emailed back the next day saying they'd watched part of it and doubted
they'd ever finish it.
Her comment was to the effect that it very realistic about the
aftermath of the death of a loved one, and that that's not the sort of
thing you want to deal with until there's no other choice.
That's kind of how I see it. I think the episode was very well done,
but I didn't enjoy watching it and I have no desire whatsoever to
watch it again. Does that make it worse objectively than many of the
other episodes of the past that I'd happily watch as many times as
they come on? Well, no, not at all. But in a sense it makes it worse
to me.
Hell, in the sense that I'll watch it again and enjoy it I think
"Epiphany" was better than "The Body" -- and everyone who reads ata
knows how well-done I think "Epiphany" was. :-P
Bethany
*****The Official Weredragon of the State University of New Jersey*****
"
Ever since she ran me through with a 2x4 things have been different."
-Angel, "The Prodigal"
***********************************************************************
Talamasca
is, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff and Lisa) replied :
>My objection to the 2/27 episode was the fact that it was not only
>a tearjerker, but every theatric device possible was used to enforce
>the sadness and pain of the characters at their loss.
"Every theatric device"? That's interesting, considering that
a maudlin score is prolly the most often used device in movies and TV
to "enforce" sadness, and as has been noted numerous times already, no
score, maudlin or otherwise, was used here. Myself, I was glad that
such an intrusive effect was missing for this episode.
^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^
We watch
And we are always here
-- (from Anne Rice's The Witching Hour)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Talamasca
Jeff and Lisa
> >a tearjerker, but every theatric device possible was used to enforce
> >the sadness and pain of the characters at their loss.
>
> "Every theatric device"? That's interesting, considering that
> a maudlin score is prolly the most often used device in movies and TV
> to "enforce" sadness, and as has been noted numerous times already, no
> score, maudlin or otherwise, was used here.
The stark silence by having no music at all enforced the sadness.
Leaving the eyes of the body open enforced the sadness.
Showing flashbacks to earlier joyful dinners enforced the sadness.
Indeed, such kinds of dinner gatherings--just having fun--were very
rare on the show.
Sarah Trombley
<bethan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 3 Mar 2001 00:54:25 GMT, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff and Lisa)
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>The only thing I must admit I don't understand is how people would
>>enjoy an episode that brought them to tears.
>
>I'll second that.
>
>I'm one of the crowd that thought "The Body" was excellent, but
>although I didn't cry I can't say I enjoyed watching it one bit.
Whereas some of my favorite art moves me to tears. I must have read
_Portrait of a Lady_ fifteen times, and I still cannot get through the
scene where Ralph dies without tearing up. Or the death scene at the
end of the film of "Wings of the Dove." There's a fifty-fifty chance
my eyes will start to water at the climax of the Fantasia on a Theme
by Thomas Tallis. I could go on indefinitely.
It's _good_ if art can reach you emotionally. However, simply
because something reaches you emotionally doesn't mean it's good art.
--Sarah T.
vicpusateri
[...]
> The only thing I must admit I don't understand is how people would
> enjoy an episode that brought them to tears.
Really?
I adore a good tear-jerker every once in a while.
Little Women, Roman Holiday, Casablanca, hell, even Brian's Song... the list
goes on and on.
Enjoy may not be the right word, but it can be cathartic.
victoria p.
Miss July
--
"Squint your eyes and look closer / I'm not between you and your ambition /
I am a poster girl with no poster / I am thirty-two flavors and then some /
and I'm beyond your peripheral vision / so you might want to turn your head
/ 'cause someday you're going to get hungry and eat most of the words you
just said" - "32 Flavors" - Ani DiFranco
Jeff and Lisa
> > enjoy an episode that brought them to tears.
>
> Really?
>
> I adore a good tear-jerker every once in a while.
>
> Little Women, Roman Holiday, Casablanca, hell, even Brian's Song... the list
> goes on and on.
I think Casablanca can bring a tear to the eye, but I don't call that
a "tear-jerker", certainly don't throw it in the class of this episode
of Buffy--which was hanky-time from the start.
Robert Scott Clark
>I think Casablanca can bring a tear to the eye, but I don't call that
>a "tear-jerker", certainly don't throw it in the class of this episode
>of Buffy--which was hanky-time from the start.
Yea, I wouldn't put Casablanca and The Body in the same class either -
in so many diffreent ways.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
vicpusateri
> >I think Casablanca can bring a tear to the eye, but I don't call that
> >a "tear-jerker", certainly don't throw it in the class of this episode
> >of Buffy--which was hanky-time from the start.
>
> Yea, I wouldn't put Casablanca and The Body in the same class either -
> in so many diffreent ways.
The Body ain't nowhere near Casablanca, but the point was that I enjoy the
angst and sadness each provided. Lisa and Jeff wondered why anyone would
want to watch something that made them cry, and I provided examples of
things that make me cry, but that I enjoy not in spite of that, but because
of it.
I'm not talking about Stella Dallas or Imitation of Life, which are real
5-hankie weepies, but Little Women is a great book, the fact that Beth dies
doesn't detract from that - learning to know and love the character makes
the death have a strong impact. Thus, with Joyce, I felt the sadness of the
characters, and for myself as well, because she was nice and I liked her and
they didn't always treat her well...
I just wish Spike had been the one to kill her.
dorthsteve
Sarah Trombley <trom...@is06.fas.harvard.edu> wrote in
<snip>
> It's _good_ if art can reach you emotionally. However, simply
> because something reaches you emotionally doesn't mean it's good art.
I know you don't care for "me too" posts. Nevertheless, WSS!
Dot
more and more disturbed by all the discussion of BTVS as "art".
vicpusateri
[...]
> more and more disturbed by all the discussion of BTVS as "art".
Aha! You're a snob, Dot. You don't think that BtVS can be classified as art.
I think certain episodes certainly can - the Body, maybe not. Just like I
think certain episodes of Homicide, China Beach and maybe Wiseguy can be
classified as art.
Not all television is good, and not all of it is good art, but some of it
is, indeed, art.
victoria p.
Miss July
--
"Screw the dead. What have their mouldering asses ever done for me?"
Mike Kellerman, _Homicide: Life on the Street_
Sarah Trombley
vicpusateri <vicpu...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Dot wrote...
>[...]
>> more and more disturbed by all the discussion of BTVS as "art".
>
>Aha! You're a snob, Dot. You don't think that BtVS can be classified as art.
>I think certain episodes certainly can - the Body, maybe not. Just like I
>think certain episodes of Homicide, China Beach and maybe Wiseguy can be
>classified as art.
>
>Not all television is good, and not all of it is good art, but some of it
>is, indeed, art.
I think all of it is art. Some good, some bad, some...well..."Where the Wild
Things Are." Art is a function of intent, not of quality or of medium.
--Sarah T.
"Well, that was the suckiest suck that ever sucked." --Homer J. Simpson
Forge
> I think all of it is art. Some good, some bad, some...well..."Where the Wild
> Things Are." Art is a function of intent, not of quality or of medium.
Right, I know you've all been waiting for this...
What she said.
dorthsteve
vicpusateri <vicpu...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Mxfp6.5426$yv4.4...@bgtnsc07-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Dot wrote...
> [...]
> > more and more disturbed by all the discussion of BTVS as "art".
>
> Aha! You're a snob, Dot. You don't think that BtVS can be classified as
art.
> I think certain episodes certainly can - the Body, maybe not. Just like I
> think certain episodes of Homicide, China Beach and maybe Wiseguy can be
> classified as art.
>
> Not all television is good, and not all of it is good art, but some of it
> is, indeed, art.
While I am going to assiduously avoid a discussion of "what is art", I agree
with you that some television qualifies. It's just that in reading a lot of
the responses to "The Body" I can't escape the feeling that a lot of these
people have aesthetic judgements shaped by watching too much tv, and
sensibilities which are moved to tears by pop music such as "The Wind
Beneath My Wings".
Shawn Hill
: While I am going to assiduously avoid a discussion of "what is art", I agree
: with you that some television qualifies. It's just that in reading a lot of
: the responses to "The Body" I can't escape the feeling that a lot of these
: people have aesthetic judgements shaped by watching too much tv, and
: sensibilities which are moved to tears by pop music such as "The Wind
: Beneath My Wings".
Yeah, and we also all read The Bridges of Madison County, and think Barbra
Streisand is always sincere (people should stop picking on her!), and cry
when we hear about orphaned children, or see those pictures with kids with
really, really big eyes. It's all true. Good observation skills, and
really great generalizing. I couldn't have put it better myself if I
tried.
Shawn