Death wishes and Quitting. (Spoilers for everything!!)
Elisi
very, very long threads in the FFL post. (So instead I wrote my own
very, very long post... um, that did make sense somehow.)
In the few months I've been here, I've noticed a trend in the
discussions: Very often people pick a detail and start to discuss it as
though it is completely separate from the rest of the show - which of
course makes discussing rather complicated, since with a show like BtVS
nearly everything is connected. And then the arguments end up miles
from where they started - such as the 'death wish' thing that
became a convoluted and rather pointless discussion of whether Buffy
could quit if she wanted. I'll deal with that later.
Anyway, in the part of fandom where I usually hang out a meta approach
is predominant. (That's not to say that there are not discussions of
'why did Spike say 'Sire' in School Hard'. But that's a
trivial point - the basis for fanwank, which is fun, but not all that
important. I like the pot-hole analogy.) What I mean can probably best
be described by this quote:
>From 10 Questions for Joss Whedon:
I think it's always important for academics to study popular culture,
even if the thing they are studying is idiotic. If it's successful or
made a dent in culture, then it is worthy of study to find out why.
'Buffy,' on the other hand is, I hope, not idiotic. We think very
carefully about what we're trying to say emotionally, politically,
and even philosophically while we're writing it. The process of
breaking a story involves the writers and myself, so a lot of different
influences, prejudices, and ideas get rolled up into it. So it really
is, apart from being a big pop culture phenom, something that is deeply
layered textually episode by episode. I do believe that there is plenty
to study and there are plenty of things going on in it, as there are in
me that I am completely unaware of. People used to laugh that academics
would study Disney movies. There's nothing more important for
academics to study, because they shape the minds of our children
possibly more than any single thing. So, like that, I think 'Buffy'
should be analyzed, broken down, and possibly banned.
~~~
BtVS has to be looked at structurally, thematically, emotionally etc.
to get the most out of it. (Which is why choosing to get annoyed over
one bit of bad continuity is so pointless - what about the overarching
analogies, the character's journey, the repercussions of the scene,
the emotions that are at play? All these are important too and can't
be ignored.)
So, let's look at Fool For Love and the 'death wish' speech. I
saw someone contemptuously referring to it as 'death wish my shiny
metal ass!' which (apart from the nifty Futurama reference) is a
great insult to the writers, the characters and the show in general.
First of all season 5 is thematically all about The Slayer. We see this
from beginning to end: The first episode features none other than
Dracula himself - _the_ vampire of mythology. He might be portrayed as
a bit of a comical figure, but almost every word he utters is full of
darkness - he refers to Buffy as 'a killer' and 'kindred', he
wants to teach her what she is capable of - inferring that the Watchers
are not the holders of all knowledge when it comes to Slayers. It spurs
Buffy into delving deeper into her 'slayerness'. By FFL Giles has
already run out of answers more or less, so Buffy turns to someone else
- Spike. A vampire.
So - 'Fool For Love'. The 7th episode of the season. We know that
the 7th episode is always special (Angel, Lie To Me, Revelations, The
Initiative, FFL, OMWF, CWDP), collecting and expanding all the themes
of the season and also pushing the action forward. So the message in
this episode is bound to be important. And what does Buffy explore? Her
own mortality - why do Slayers die? (Do they just slip up, like she
(almost) did? Is there more to it?)
The answers she gets from Spike are not exactly what she was hoping for
I'm sure. The first one she knew already - I'm not going to expand
on that. But the second one... the second one is _significant_! The
whole episode builds to it. It _means_ something: "Every Slayer has a
death wish. Even you."
"But she doesn't!" I can hear you all shout. Well of course she
doesn't - she's happy and in better training than ever before. She
_loves_ slaying! It's good to be Buffy. Still that doesn't mean
that Spike is talking out of his ass as some of you seem to think.
Spike is only the messenger - Joss is the one who gave him the message.
The writers *use* Spike to put this idea across to us. Because - as we
will see by the end of the season - even Buffy can develop a death
wish. From The Gift:
BUFFY: "I sacrificed Angel to save the world. I loved him so much.
But I knew ... what was right. I don't have that any more. I don't
understand. I don't know how to live in this world if these are the
choices. If everything just gets stripped away. I don't see the
point."
"Sooner or later, you're gonna want it..." Spike said.
And he was right. But that doesn't mean that she'll ever follow
through.
When Buffy stands on that platform with a portal opening underneath her
feet she sees a way out - a way to save her sister, a way to save the
world and she takes it. But - the death wish doesn't really play into
it much, even though it might or might not be there.
Although - here's what Joss had to say recently:
"Is taking fire so your men can get to safe ground in combat suicide?
I think not. Buffy's sacrifice draws mainly on two mythic images:
Christ (you all got that) and Ripley in Alien 3. Both sacificing
themselves for the preservation of mankind. Buffy had no pattern of
despair (yet), though she did shoulder her burdens heavily (as did
those other two)."
(http://whedonesque.com/comments/9102#102883)
Every Slayer has a death wish. Sooner or later. If the circumstances
are right. But that does not mean that they'll act on it. See Spike
might or might not be speaking the truth - that's not really the
issue. The issue is the effect his words have on Buffy.
Or to put it another way: Spike's speech is foreshadowing. Not quite
along the lines of 'Restless', since that was a dream, but one
planted by the writers for us, the audience. One of those touches that
shows so clearly that they had a plan all along, we just couldn't see
it until afterwards ("Little Miss Muffet counting down from
7-3-0..."). Let's look at a couple of the key episodes of S5 - The
Body and Intervention. In The Body Buffy finds her mother dead.
Superficially this has nothing to do with the season arc, but delve but
a little below the surface, and yet again we find the two themes: Death
and The Slayer. Joyce's death is natural - she is quite simply a
victim of 'being human' (Ken if you want to argue, bring it on!
*g*). Death has always featured heavily in Buffy's life ("Death is
your art. You make it with your hands, day after day.") and yet it is
as though she has never seen it before: Buffy can save the world, but
she can't save her mother. And that hits her very hard, making her
question her slayerness anew. We see this in 'Intervention' when
she worries what being the Slayer is doing to her. So she goes off on a
'quest', much like in FFL. And what does The First Slayer tell her?
'Death is your gift.' Another unwelcome answer. And yet again death
and slayerhood intertwined.
So in the end, when we get to The Gift and Buffy's sacrifice, we can
look back and see the logical path to the end, clear and satisfying on
every level. And that is one of the reasons I love Buffy - because of
the layers. I can keep watching and see something new every time, a
line here, a scene there, all throwing a new light on what we know.
It's mesmerising. And if the writers sometimes slip up - or decide to
do a little ret-con - quite frankly I think it's worth it. But
that's me. :)
Now, about the whole 'quitting' deal. First of all, I think we were
all at cross purposes, talking about the same thing, but from different
angles.
If I remember rightly, it all started with someone saying "Well if
she has a death wish, why doesn't she just quit?"
Which is a perfectly reasonable question, but one that sort of misses
the point, because it doesn't take into consideration Buffy's
character and the story lines of the show. Buffy would never quit
because of a death wish. She will not even act on it, unless the
circumstances are exceptional. We only have 2 or 3 instances of seeing
her (maybe) acting on a death wish:
1) The Gift. And as I said before, she does it because it
simultaneously combines a lot of different factors. The reason she
sacrifices herself is because it is the only way to save Dawn - it is
the only choice she can live with, even if it means her death.
2) OMWF, when she nearly dances herself to death. At this point
quitting isn't something she has the energy for - she doesn't want
a different life, she wants no life at all. Getting up in the morning
is just as much a chore as Slaying. I'd say this was the only point
she had a fully developed death wish, and so didn't resist when Sweet
'offered' her a way out.
3) 'Normal Again'. This one is tricky. It isn't about a death
wish or quitting, although those factors play into it - this is the
episode where Buffy hits rock bottom and finally starts to live again.
(I've read a theory where it was put forward that Buffy came back a
metaphorical vampire in 'Bargaining' and didn't become
'human' again until this episode. I don't have time to expand on
it, but it's food for thought.)
So, Buffy would not respond to a death wish by quitting - the first two
times quitting quite simply wasn't an option, and the third time she
finally overcame the impulse.
But we've seen her quit several times, so what has prompted this?
Let's look at when she's quit (or threatened to):
1) Pre-series. It's almost the first thing we ever learn about her -
she quit. Slaying cost her all her friends and she was kicked out of
school. She wants to start over. And yet she gets pulled right back in
because she cares and because she can make a difference.
2) Prophecy Girl. "I'm Sixteen years old. I don't want to die!"
But when it comes down to it, she does her duty. She might be a
teenager, but she manages to act completely selflessly here. There's
no death wish (the opposite in fact) but a very, very strong sense of
responsibility.
3) Becoming II. Yet again she has done her duty - but this time the
outcome was far from happy. She kills Angel, but that's as much as
she can manage. She quite simply does not have the strength to go on.
So she runs away, like so many teens have before her when life got
unbearable. But you can't run forever and after her meeting with Lily
she goes back home.
4) Graduation Day. Not sure this one counts, but it's where she stops
working for the Council. She still continues to battle the forces of
evil though, but she's old enough not to need a Watcher to tell her
to go out patrolling. Another step towards adulthood and shouldering
her Slayer duties herself. The older she gets, the more seriously she
takes her slaying.
5) The Gift. "It doesn't matter. If Dawn dies, I'm done with it. I'm
quitting." This isn't a heartbroken teen just wanting a life.
It's a young woman finding out exactly what her limits are. Don't
know what would have happened if Dawn *had* died - but I'm sure
it's not what you were thinking of when you suggested that she should
quit.
6) Dead Things. Another instance of Buffy reaching her limits - and
considering that she looks upon a life in prison as preferable to what
she has to go through in daily life, there is a lot of running away at
this point. But it's thinking that she is responsible for Katrina's
death that sends her over the edge. When she finds out the truth, she
pulls herself back together again.
7) Normal Again. Too complicated for this post, and also the
'quitting' is of a completely different nature, what with the
demonless AU. Let's just leave it for when AOQ gets to it, it'll
add nothing to this discussion.
8) Empty Places/Touched. This one is also tricky. Because she doesn't
quit as much as get fired. Which was part of the culmination of The
First's plan re. Buffy I think, and might just have worked... Still
not leaving her Slayerness behind so she can have a orchard in France
though.
I think that's all of them. At least I can't think of any more. We
can see that she only considers quitting when she's in extraordinary
emotional trauma. But _not_ when she wants to die (except for The Gift
in some measure).
Now there is another point, and one I think people have (as far as I
could see) failed to address: Buffy is *The Slayer* and that's not
just a job title, it's who she is, literally, just as Dawn is The
Key: It makes her a target, a prize, a symbol, a champion... her
mystical qualities are as important (if not more) than her physical
abilities. To quote Caleb:
"So, you're the slayer. The slayer. The strongest, the fastest, the
most aflame with that most precious invention of all mankind-the
notion of goodness. The slayer must indeed be powerful."
And then sends her flying with one punch. But... Buffy still wins in
the end. Physical strength isn't everything.
Why does The First target the Slayer? (Going back to Amends it would
seem it brought back Angel just so he could kill Buffy.) Why is it not
bothered about the military, or Angel, or any of the other freelance
Champions roaming the earth? How can a weakness in the forces
surrounding the Slayer line spark an apocalypse? Because the Slayer is
important - the Slayer is more than just one girl fighting evil on a
nightly basis. The Slayer is in some way woven into the fabric of
'goodness' (for lack of a better word), a mystical barrier against
the darkness - her mere existence somehow helps tip the scales in
favour of humans over demons.
Which is where the whole notion of 'someone else' doing her job
becomes a major problem. I agree that it would not be too hard to find
a replacement of some kind, if you could talk people into that sort of
job for life. Excluding Faith (for the obvious reasons), who were the
candidates?
1) Angel. Hmm, I can see where you're coming from, but I can't see
him going to Sunnydale on a nightly basis to patrol. Also his life is
very busy - in S2 he is preoccupied with Darla (even leaving his own
mission to fight her) and in S3 he has a baby to look after. In S4 he
has The Beast and a 'happy' apocalypse to stop, when he isn't
evil that is. (Also there's the whole redemption thing and the PTB,
but we can leave that out if you like.) After S4 the question is
obsolete.
2) The Initiative/The Army. I'm not sure about this. What has the
government done until now? Set up The (Demon Research) Initiative, and
sent off a few Army teams to South America to deal with some of the
most vicious demons. And as far as I can tell that's it. The
Initiative wasn't even set up to save people, but to utilise the
demons somehow (also remember the Men In Black who took away Marcie in
OOMOOS). Not to mention the fact that they do not understand the
magical aspects of the world and would not act upon most apocalypses.
Basically I don't trust them and I don't see why they would ever do
the Slayer's job. (There's more to this. If you're curious, ask,
and I'll post the remainder, the main point being: They know about
the demons, and yet they do next to nothing. Now why could that be?)
3) Wesley, Gunn, similar people. This is actually by far the best bet.
Certainly doable, if you got some people willing to risk their lives
just because the Slayer decided to quit. But there are other problems:
Funding for a start (I know Buffy looked after 30-odd Potential Slayers
for a few months. She could not have done this indefinitely, which is
what we're talking about.). So who would pay? The Council certainly
wouldn't, they don't even pay The Slayer. Maybe they could set up
an agency a la Angel Investigations, presuming Sunnydale is big enough
for that kind of agency, and also that the authorities will let them -
do not forget that Sunnydale was built on the Hellmouth specifically
for the demons' sake. And that people _don't talk_ about the things
that go bump in the night. But if I squint, I can just see that it's
possible.
That is all well and good, but does not address the point I made above
- The Slayer is important. What happens when she has a prophetic dream?
Or when there's a prophecy mentioning her? Or when a tenacious
vampire like Spike decides to seek her out? Or when - like in WttH -
she's in a situation where someone needs help and she's the only
one around with the strength and skill to help? Should she just walk on
by? Her Slayerness *isn't* a job, it's who she is, no matter where
she lives or what life she leads!
To quote Spiderman: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Peter Parker didn't ask for his powers, and neither did most super
heroes we read about/watch. But they all decided to use their powers
for good, rather than sit around whining that life's unfair. Well
here's some news: Life is never fair! Just look at Ford in 'Lie To
Me'. His illness means that he has a shorter life expectancy than
Buffy, and he seeks a way out - a way to quit. And here's what she
tells him:
"You have a choice. You don't have a good choice, but you have a
choice. You're opting for mass murder here and nothing you say to me is
gonna make that okay."
Or look at Cordy: She was given visions by TPTB and tried to find any
way out that she could. And yet with time, she came to value her gift,
even though it was killing her. From 'Disharmony':
Cordy: "It's like - I don't know. I had these air pockets inside of
me, and the work I'm doing, uh, we're doing, it's-it's like the pockets
keep getting filled and I'm becoming me..."
And when she had the option to quit (and not like the devil's bargain
Buffy sort-of had in 'Normal Again', but a brand new life with
*everything* she ever wanted) what did she do? She took her visions
right back because she didn't want to see Angel suffer. Now you might
call that stupidity. I call it bravery.
But to return to Buffy. Let's stop talking about hypothetical
scenarios, and think about where in canon you'd like her to quit
(first giving her some sort of personality makeover, since the actual
Buffy never quitted for good in the later seasons, but hey - let's
give it a go!):
S5? She tries to run away, and look how well that went. She can't
leave her 'job' behind, since Dawn's safety is dependant upon it.
Quitting is not an option.
S6? She'd like to quit, absolutely, she even tries a few times. But I
think that she's much too lost herself to even think about putting
together some sort of team to fight evil on her behalf. The Scoobies
aren't capable on their own, especially not with Willow being unable
to use magic. And even *if* she left, it could only be a temporary
reprieve since The First Evil is waiting around the corner, ready to
release mayhem. As the saying goes: All it takes for evil to triumph,
is for good people to do nothing.
S7? As I said - First Evil! And as far as I can tell, it's main aim
re. Buffy was to make her quit. Look at 'Empty Places' and Buffy
being all alone. (Thank goodness for Spike is all I can say.)
It's simple: Buffy can't quit. Even if she could physically walk
away from her mission, the fact of who she is would force her back to
fight, if nothing else then for her own life. And of course (as we have
seen) her conscience would always bring her back. (I see the soul as
giving people a conscience. Whether they act upon it, is something
else. Thankfully Buffy does!)
Basically you need to go outside canon to argue this point, which leads
us to fanfiction. I'm not saying this disparagingly, but just
pointing out that fanfic is a much better way of delving into such
topics. Some of the best thoughts about Buffy that I've ever read
came from fanfic. Because all fanfic springs from one question: 'What
if?' What if Dawn had died in The Gift? Or what if some other
incident made Buffy quit for good? Think about it, and work out where
it would go. If you can make people believe your scenario, especially
those prone to disagree on principle, then you might be onto something!
Anyway, I write too much. Sorry about that - I hope I didn't bore
you. Or offend you or anything like that. I might have stated opinions
as facts, but that is mostly due to time restraints.
*worries*
Espen Schjønberg
> Anyway, I write too much.
Nah- only in the literal sense. ;-)
(Sorry. Couldn't resist it. Didn't mean it, but it was too long to read
on-screen, though. Had to print it.)
The logical successor from late S4 _is_ Faith, though. Just tell the
watchers they get her, and no-one else.
BTW, those monks screw up big-time. Who should have protected the Key if
Buff got killed early in the season? Did they _know_ she would at least
last for 22 episodes or what?
--
Espen
Elisi
Espen Schjønberg wrote:
> On 23.06.2006 18:56, Elisi wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I write too much.
>
> Nah- only in the literal sense. ;-)
>
> (Sorry. Couldn't resist it. Didn't mean it, but it was too long to read
> on-screen, though. Had to print it.)
Well I'll take that as a compliment! *g*
>
> The logical successor from late S4 _is_ Faith, though. Just tell the
> watchers they get her, and no-one else.
Ah yes. And Buffy was definitely thinking of letting Faith take over in
S3 so she could have a more normal life. The problem with that is of
course that I don't think Faith would be able to deal with it - as
'Five by Five' so very amply shows. She really, really needed that time
in prison just to learn to live with herself.
And also of course the show is called 'Buffy'! ;-)
> BTW, those monks screw up big-time. Who should have protected the Key if
> Buff got killed early in the season? Did they _know_ she would at least
> last for 22 episodes or what?
>
> --
> Espen
Maybe they stole the season plan from Joss?
George W Harris
:BtVS has to be looked at structurally, thematically, emotionally etc.
:to get the most out of it. (Which is why choosing to get annoyed over
:one bit of bad continuity is so pointless - what about the overarching
:analogies, the character's journey, the repercussions of the scene,
:the emotions that are at play? All these are important too and can't
:be ignored.)
A hearty IAWTP.
--
/bud...@nirvana.net/h:k
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
Elisi
Thank you - but what does IAWTP stand for?
Stephen Tempest
>I'm new here, but I hope it's OK to post this -
Nope, it's not. The a-t-bvs Secret Police will be knocking on your
door shortly after midnight tonight, to take you away for re-education
for the dreadful crime of posting something long, thoughtful and
interesting to the group. Please have a bag packed ready.
<g>
>In the few months I've been here, I've noticed a trend in the
>discussions: Very often people pick a detail and start to discuss it as
>though it is completely separate from the rest of the show -
Well, that's partly because the nature of Usenet makes it such an easy
thing to do - just as I'm doing now. Also, the fact that we're all on
the Internet posting about a show that was cancelled three years ago
means that it's maybe not surprising to run across obsessive behaviour
here from time to time... But mostly, I think it's the same reason
that AoQ's reviews sparked such debate: the regulars have become
jaded, and needed some fresh eyes andopinions to liven things up.
>First of all season 5 is thematically all about The Slayer. We see this
>from beginning to end:
Good point (although obviously there are other themes too, like the
distinction between real family and created family which is a
favourite of Joss's. and Dawn is, of course, quite literally 'created
family'.). The way I see it, the first few seasons were all about
"here's a girl with special powers, let's see how she would behave if
put into situation x, y and z." By season 5, though, they're starting
to think much more about what it actually *means* for her to have
those powers: to explore the inward effects on Buffy rather than her
effects on her surroundings.. The show becomes less about metaphor
and more about myth.
> It _means_ something: "Every Slayer has a
>death wish. Even you."
>
>"But she doesn't!" I can hear you all shout. Well of course she
>doesn't - she's happy and in better training than ever before. She
>_loves_ slaying! It's good to be Buffy. Still that doesn't mean
>that Spike is talking out of his ass as some of you seem to think.
>Spike is only the messenger - Joss is the one who gave him the message.
>The writers *use* Spike to put this idea across to us. Because - as we
>will see by the end of the season - even Buffy can develop a death
>wish. From The Gift:
My problem here is that I'm not really sure what "a death wish"
actually means. It's a phrase that's used in casual conversation
often enough, but what is the reality?
I *don't* thnk that Buffy's mental state in 'The Gift' can be
characterised as a death wish in Spike's sense, even though I do
believe she's suicidal. (Despite what Joss claims. What does he know
about it, anyway?)
Suicidal feelings can come from anguish, despair and, maybe anger -
all feelings that most of us experience from time to time, though
hopefully never to the point of being suicidal.
Anguish: when the pain is too great to bear. It can be physical pain;
some crippling impairment that makes life not worth living; the loss
of a loved one; or being forced to do or endure what cannot be
endured. This is what I think motivates Buffy in 'The Gift'
Despair: when life just doesn't seem to be worth the effort, and death
is just easier. This would be Buffy's motivation in most of Season 6.
Anger: when someone believes that killing themselves is the only way
to hit back at someone who has hurt them. The "That'll teach them!
They'll be sorry when I've gone!" response. I'm not sure Buffy ever
experiences this one, though: it's really the ultimate expression of
powerlessness.
However, what Spike seemed to be talking about wasn't just accepting
death as the least bad alternative in a horrible situation: it was
about positively embracing it, seeking it out, accepting it as a
lover. That's something that's totally foreign to our everyday
experience, although it's something I've read about in literature.
According to Spike, the Slayer doesn't _give_up_ and die: she _wants_
to die, to experience herself what she's given to so many others in
her short life. He almost makes it sound as if curiosity is the
motivation - as well as the desire for peace after the struggle. Did
Buffy ever experience this?
Maybe this ties in with what the First Slayer has to say: Death is
your gift. It has lots of interpretations, of course: she gives death
to the demons she slays, making the world a better place; she can use
her own death as her gift to Dawn and to the world, saving both from
destruction. Indeed, for Buffy her own death *was* a gift: and she
goes into it with open eyes. "This is the work I have to do. Tell
Giles I... I figured it out. And I'm okay." And after that, she felt
that "I was happy. At peace. I knew that everyone I cared about was
all right. I knew it. Time didn't mean anything, nothing had form...
but I was still me, you know? And I was warm and I was loved... and I
was finished." In that moment on top of Glory's tower, I would say
that Buffy *did* have a deathwish in Spike's sense. She wasn't raging
at the dying of the light; she was leaping joyfully straight into it,
her arms open and a look of bliss on her face.
However, there's one very important thing we have to remember about
the First Slayer: Buffy ultimately *rejects* every lesson she has to
teach. "You're not the source of me." In 'Restless', the First
Slayer tells Buffy she has to abandon her friends: "No friends, just
the kill. We are alone." Buffy refuses to agree. In 'Get It Done',
the FS tells Buffy that her own power is not enough - but again she
refuses the extra power when it's offered and demands knowledge
instead.
So why should 'Intervention' be the exception? Death might be Buffy's
gift - but ultimately, at the end of season 6, she rejects it and
embraces Life instead, climbing out of her grave then turning around
to give Dawn a hand up out of it too.
If you'll forgive me getting all Campbellian for a moment, Death,
Apotheosis and Resurrection is an essential part of the Hero's
Journey. They die and achieve bliss; but the mark of a true Hero is
that they return to the world, to share their gifts and knowledge with
the people they left behind. "Mastery leads to freedom from the fear
of death, which in turn is the freedom to live." If Buffy had taken
the easy way out and stayed dead, she wouldn't be a hero - but
equally, she had to die first to gain the self-knowledge it brought.
She now knows the worst that can possibly happen to her - and that she
can survive it.
Or to be more prosaic, she's got over her Slayer death wish by dying,
and then deciding she didn't like it after all.
Told you things would get Mythic...
Stephen
John Briggs
>
> Or to put it another way: Spike's speech is foreshadowing. Not quite
> along the lines of 'Restless', since that was a dream, but one
> planted by the writers for us, the audience. One of those touches that
> shows so clearly that they had a plan all along, we just couldn't see
> it until afterwards ("Little Miss Muffet counting down from
> 7-3-0...").
I would be wary of "foreshadowing" - most (if not all) of "Restless" didn't
mean anything. What usually happens is that the writers pick up on these
enigmatic statements and make something of them afterwards. There wasn't a
"plan". I think Joss had only a general idea of the season arc and would
develop it as the season progressed. So, yes, there could be an element of
foreshadowing in Spike's speech, but it is more likely that it *later*
became a foreshadowing. "Foreshadowing" across seasons can be discounted.
--
John Briggs
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> seem it brought back Angel just so he could kill Buffy.) Why is it not
its not clear how bright or powerful the first evil is
it claims to have brought back angel
but we dont know if thats the truth
something saves angel in amends and it aint first evil
so theres another powerful agent at work
whatever its plans were it wanted a souled vampire under its control
first it tried angel and then spike for awhile
it was waiting to use spike but we arent told exactly what
perhaps simply to kill the slayers after all the potentials
perhaps something else
> bothered about the military, or Angel, or any of the other freelance
> Champions roaming the earth? How can a weakness in the forces
> surrounding the Slayer line spark an apocalypse? Because the Slayer is
> important - the Slayer is more than just one girl fighting evil on a
> nightly basis. The Slayer is in some way woven into the fabric of
> 'goodness' (for lack of a better word), a mystical barrier against
> the darkness - her mere existence somehow helps tip the scales in
> favour of humans over demons.
we know buffy has been maneuvered to sunnydale
giles was already in place waiting for her
but he didnt know about the hellmouth until after he researched its history
the last guardian was also waiting in sunnydale
but she appears to have been passive at that point
so someone or something arranged one and then two slayers
to be sitting on top of the hellmouth to guard it
apparently for the first time in sunnydales history
until the end was near (or here)
perhaps buffy wasnt torn from a heaven
but rather was sent back from what was intended as temporary respite
so that she and her friedns could prepare for the final battle of the hellmouth
> Which is where the whole notion of 'someone else' doing her job
> becomes a major problem. I agree that it would not be too hard to find
> a replacement of some kind, if you could talk people into that sort of
> job for life. Excluding Faith (for the obvious reasons), who were the
> candidates?
i dont think one or even two slayers could defeat
an army of turok-han by mere force of armies
it seems their presence was holding the seal
by more than merely inept pig sacrafices
> 2) The Initiative/The Army. I'm not sure about this. What has the
> government done until now? Set up The (Demon Research) Initiative, and
according to a future episode of angel
human governments have known about vampires
for decades or longer
> S7? As I said - First Evil! And as far as I can tell, it's main aim
> re. Buffy was to make her quit. Look at 'Empty Places' and Buffy
> being all alone. (Thank goodness for Spike is all I can say.)
actually buffy was being goaded to lead the wannabes into a trap
the way faith did
buffy sensed the trap and realized the prize was at the winery
not at the hellmouth or any kind armory
and wanted to attack the winery again
the girls rebelled against marching to their deaths
(the successful tactics buffy used on the second assault wouldve been hampered
if she had not been alone or if the bringers were not busy elsehwere)
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
George W Harris
:
I Agree With This Post[er].
--
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar." -Wash, 'Serenity'
Don Sample
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Some things were planned out. Kristine Sutherland told Joss at the end
of season 3 that she wouldn't be available much for the next season, and
he told her "That's fine, but you have to come back for season 5 because
I'm going to kill you!"
Plus there were clear indications that Dawn was coming sprinkled through
season 4, including "Little sis coming" in Faith's dream in "This Year's
Girl" and "Be back before dawn" in Buffy's dream in "Restless."
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Elisi wrote:
> >
> > Or to put it another way: Spike's speech is foreshadowing. Not quite
> > along the lines of 'Restless', since that was a dream, but one
> > planted by the writers for us, the audience. One of those touches that
> > shows so clearly that they had a plan all along, we just couldn't see
> > it until afterwards ("Little Miss Muffet counting down from
> > 7-3-0...").
7-3-0 was first said by dream faith in graduation day ii
> I would be wary of "foreshadowing" - most (if not all) of "Restless" didn't
> mean anything. What usually happens is that the writers pick up on these
> enigmatic statements and make something of them afterwards. There wasn't a
> "plan". I think Joss had only a general idea of the season arc and would
> develop it as the season progressed. So, yes, there could be an element of
> foreshadowing in Spike's speech, but it is more likely that it *later*
> became a foreshadowing. "Foreshadowing" across seasons can be discounted.
730 is twice 365
two years after graduation day buffy was dead
in restless the clock still said 730 but tara said the clock was wrong
Don Sample
<mair_fheal-EFA38...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
<mair_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <r2Ymg.73378$rC1....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>,
> "John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Elisi wrote:
> > >
> > > Or to put it another way: Spike's speech is foreshadowing. Not quite
> > > along the lines of 'Restless', since that was a dream, but one
> > > planted by the writers for us, the audience. One of those touches that
> > > shows so clearly that they had a plan all along, we just couldn't see
> > > it until afterwards ("Little Miss Muffet counting down from
> > > 7-3-0...").
>
> 7-3-0 was first said by dream faith in graduation day ii
>
> > I would be wary of "foreshadowing" - most (if not all) of "Restless" didn't
> > mean anything. What usually happens is that the writers pick up on these
> > enigmatic statements and make something of them afterwards. There wasn't a
> > "plan". I think Joss had only a general idea of the season arc and would
> > develop it as the season progressed. So, yes, there could be an element of
> > foreshadowing in Spike's speech, but it is more likely that it *later*
> > became a foreshadowing. "Foreshadowing" across seasons can be discounted.
>
> 730 is twice 365
> two years after graduation day buffy was dead
But at the time, I doubt if Joss had much idea about what would happen
in two years. He knew that the contract with the WB would be up in two
years, and that would likely be the end of the series, and he wanted to
go out with a big bang, so he could plant the idea that *something*
important was going to happen in two years, without having a clue what
it was.
John Briggs
> In article <r2Ymg.73378$rC1....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>,
> "John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Elisi wrote:
>>>
>>> Or to put it another way: Spike's speech is foreshadowing. Not quite
>>> along the lines of 'Restless', since that was a dream, but one
>>> planted by the writers for us, the audience. One of those touches
>>> that shows so clearly that they had a plan all along, we just
>>> couldn't see it until afterwards ("Little Miss Muffet counting down
>>> from 7-3-0...").
>>
>> I would be wary of "foreshadowing" - most (if not all) of "Restless"
>> didn't mean anything. What usually happens is that the writers pick
>> up on these enigmatic statements and make something of them
>> afterwards. There wasn't a "plan". I think Joss had only a general
>> idea of the season arc and would develop it as the season
>> progressed. So, yes, there could be an element of foreshadowing in
>> Spike's speech, but it is more likely that it *later* became a
>> foreshadowing. "Foreshadowing" across seasons can be discounted.
>
> Some things were planned out. Kristine Sutherland told Joss at the
> end of season 3 that she wouldn't be available much for the next
> season, and he told her "That's fine, but you have to come back for
> season 5 because I'm going to kill you!"
Which doesn't mean that he intended to kill her in season 5 until he heard
that she wouldn't be available for season 4. If true, all that the story
tell us is that Joss had vague plans for future seasons.
> Plus there were clear indications that Dawn was coming sprinkled
> through season 4, including "Little sis coming" in Faith's dream in
> "This Year's Girl" and "Be back before dawn" in Buffy's dream in
> "Restless."
Those are hardly clear indications. How do we know that "Be back before
dawn" didn't inspire the name of the character?
--
John Briggs
BTR1701
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The answers she gets from Spike are not exactly what she was hoping for
> I'm sure. The first one she knew already - I'm not going to expand
> on that. But the second one... the second one is _significant_! The
> whole episode builds to it. It _means_ something: "Every Slayer has a
> death wish. Even you."
I always wondered how Spike could possibly know what every Slayer thinks
and feels.
(Harmony) Watcher
"Stephen Tempest" <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vpdo92d6l4knd98gf...@4ax.com...
> "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> <snip>
>
> >In the few months I've been here, I've noticed a trend in the
> >discussions: Very often people pick a detail and start to discuss it as
> >though it is completely separate from the rest of the show -
>
> Well, that's partly because the nature of Usenet makes it such an easy
> thing to do - just as I'm doing now. Also, the fact that we're all on
> the Internet posting about a show that was cancelled three years ago
> means that it's maybe not surprising to run across obsessive behaviour
> here from time to time... But mostly, I think it's the same reason
> that AoQ's reviews sparked such debate: the regulars have become
> jaded, and needed some fresh eyes andopinions to liven things up.
>
>
(http://bdb.vrya.net/bdb/clip.php?clip=6120).
--
==Harmony Watcher==
One Bit Shy
news:vpdo92d6l4knd98gf...@4ax.com...
> "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> writes:
> Anguish: when the pain is too great to bear. It can be physical pain;
> some crippling impairment that makes life not worth living; the loss
> of a loved one; or being forced to do or endure what cannot be
> endured. This is what I think motivates Buffy in 'The Gift'
Personally I don't. I think that made her catatonic. But a different Buffy
came out of that than went into it. Between that and the fight she was just
in - her greatest performance as a Slayer ever - I think she had largely
moved past that as a real death wish. She is now totally engaged in being
hero - not using that as an excuse - but truly being one. And the hero's
handshake with death is something different than a death wish.
> However, what Spike seemed to be talking about wasn't just accepting
> death as the least bad alternative in a horrible situation: it was
> about positively embracing it, seeking it out, accepting it as a
> lover. That's something that's totally foreign to our everyday
> experience, although it's something I've read about in literature.
> According to Spike, the Slayer doesn't _give_up_ and die: she _wants_
> to die, to experience herself what she's given to so many others in
> her short life. He almost makes it sound as if curiosity is the
> motivation - as well as the desire for peace after the struggle. Did
> Buffy ever experience this?
I think Spike is much closer. And I think Spike's words have probably been
worming around in Buffy's brain ever since he spoke them. I suspect she was
really struck by his description of death being her art - something she
recognized in herself and not too far from what Dracula seemed to imply.
That gave credibility to the rest of his observation. At least made her
wonder about whether it was possible for death to be something to embrace.
But Spike's failing, especially with Buffy, is not truly getting the hero
part. (He probably understood a lot better at the end when he blamed
himself for failing to protect Dawn. But the greater understanding is still
far off in the future.)
> Maybe this ties in with what the First Slayer has to say: Death is
> your gift. It has lots of interpretations, of course: she gives death
> to the demons she slays, making the world a better place; she can use
> her own death as her gift to Dawn and to the world, saving both from
> destruction. Indeed, for Buffy her own death *was* a gift: and she
> goes into it with open eyes. "This is the work I have to do. Tell
> Giles I... I figured it out. And I'm okay." And after that, she felt
> that "I was happy. At peace. I knew that everyone I cared about was
> all right. I knew it. Time didn't mean anything, nothing had form...
> but I was still me, you know? And I was warm and I was loved... and I
> was finished." In that moment on top of Glory's tower, I would say
> that Buffy *did* have a deathwish in Spike's sense. She wasn't raging
> at the dying of the light; she was leaping joyfully straight into it,
> her arms open and a look of bliss on her face.
Yes, she was at peace with the choice. But I don't believe that was the
gift. I still see that as primarily for Dawn.
> However, there's one very important thing we have to remember about
> the First Slayer: Buffy ultimately *rejects* every lesson she has to
> teach. "You're not the source of me." In 'Restless', the First
> Slayer tells Buffy she has to abandon her friends: "No friends, just
> the kill. We are alone." Buffy refuses to agree. In 'Get It Done',
> the FS tells Buffy that her own power is not enough - but again she
> refuses the extra power when it's offered and demands knowledge
> instead.
>
> So why should 'Intervention' be the exception? Death might be Buffy's
> gift - but ultimately, at the end of season 6, she rejects it and
> embraces Life instead, climbing out of her grave then turning around
> to give Dawn a hand up out of it too.
Because the gift wasn't death. It was life. And here, much more so than
merely saving life. It was truly giving it. This is what's so special
about Dawn and why Buffy's choice on the tower was a real choice - not just
the usual one of The Slayer putting her life first.
The thing about Dawn - and probably why the ambiguities about her nature
that Ken complains about are left open - is that up until this moment she
exists simultaneously as human and magical device. A horribly dangerous
device that threatens the world just by existing. She is a magical
construct that has played games with the memories - the personal histories -
of the people around her. Her identity as human stands in doubt no matter
how much Joyce and others have wanted her to be accepted. It would be a
moral choice - perhaps even an obligation of Dawn - for her to be
sacrificed. Dawn accepts that too. No matter how innocent she may be
herself, she is still the world's end forced upon Buffy and friends, who are
no less innocent of that.
Buffy's choice, however, changes all that. Not just because she solves the
problem that Dawn created, but because in the doing she demonstrates to all
that it is Buffy's blood that runs in Dawn. Buffy is the source of Dawn's
existence, and Buffy's death establishes Dawn's life.
And so, Buffy's death is beyond sacrifice. Way beyond death wish. And it
goes to the greater mythic story of Buffy's hero's journey, where her trial
is to accept death not merely as consequence, not merely as duty, but
instead as the way itself, a thing of immense value in itself.
OBS
Mark Jones
> BtVS has to be looked at structurally, thematically, emotionally etc. to
> get the most out of it. (Which is why choosing to get annoyed over one bit
> of bad continuity is so pointless - what about the overarching analogies,
> the character's journey, the repercussions of the scene, the emotions that
> are at play? All these are important too and can't be ignored.)
It also has to be looked at as a commercial production, with all the
economic and artistic and practical consequences that follow from _that_.
> So, let's look at Fool For Love and the 'death wish' speech. I saw someone
> contemptuously referring to it as 'death wish my shiny metal ass!' which
> (apart from the nifty Futurama reference) is a great insult to the
> writers, the characters and the show in general.
I said that, and I stand by it. My contempt, such as it was, was actually
aimed at the notion that some kind of death wish is a) inherent in all
slayers, and b) necessary to explain why they die. All that's needed to
explain their frequent and early deaths is the law of averages. If you
engage in lethal combat with monsters on a daily (or nightly) basis, sooner
or later, you're going to lose--and the monsters will kill you.
If I'm expected to believe that Spike believes this (or is just saying so to
manipulate Buffy), I'll accept that. But I don't for a moment buy into the
notion that there's any truth to it.
> "But she doesn't!" I can hear you all shout. Well of course she doesn't -
> she's happy and in better training than ever before. She _loves_ slaying!
> It's good to be Buffy. Still that doesn't mean that Spike is talking out
> of his ass as some of you seem to think. Spike is only the messenger -
> Joss is the one who gave him the message. The writers *use* Spike to put
> this idea across to us. Because - as we will see by the end of the season
> - even Buffy can develop a death wish. From The Gift:
It doesn't matter who said it. It's still a load of rubbish.
And let me give you fair warning: I think the series went to hell on a
rocket sled with the introduction of Dawn, and the crapfest came to its
inglorious pinnacle of awfulness with "The Gift" (and in particular the
ending). The whole "Summers blood" deus ex machina was aggressively,
arrogantly, abysmally stupid.
I'm...not inclined to take anything the characters said or did in that
season particularly seriously.
Elisi
> Which doesn't mean that he intended to kill her in season 5 until he heard
> that she wouldn't be available for season 4. If true, all that the story
> tell us is that Joss had vague plans for future seasons.
> Those are hardly clear indications. How do we know that "Be back before
> dawn" didn't inspire the name of the character?
I'm afraid you don't give Joss enough credit! The man plans *way*
ahead! From an interview with SMG
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/buffy/interviews/gellar/page8.shtml):
Q: When did you learn of Season Five's spectacular ending?
SMG: We knew for quite some time. I've actually known the [plot of
the] entire last season for about three years. There was a dream
sequence that Buffy had - I think it was year three - with Faith. Faith
had a riddle, and it was something like "Little Miss Muffet, sitting on
her tuffet, counting down from whatever the numbers were," and I went
to Joss to ask what it meant.
That's when he explained to me that I was going to have a sister,
that Dawn, the character of Dawn, would be coming on the show. I think
that's exactly when I became aware also of what the future plans
were, for the big surprise that we're not mentioning. So I think that
was when I found out.
Elisi
Nope. He knew exactly! Don't you know that Joss is a God?
Interviewer: When did you learn of Season Five's spectacular ending?
(Spoilers)
SMG: We knew for quite some time. I've actually known the [plot of
the] entire last season for about three years. There was a dream
sequence that Buffy had - I think it was year three - with Faith. Faith
had a riddle, and it was something like "Little Miss Muffet, sitting on
her tuffet, counting down from whatever the numbers were," and I went
to Joss to ask what it meant.
That's when he explained to me that I was going to have a sister,
that Dawn, the character of Dawn, would be coming on the show. I think
that's exactly when I became aware also of what the future plans
were, for the big surprise that we're not mentioning. So I think that
was when I found out.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/buffy/interviews/gellar/page8.shtml)
Elisi
> Nope, it's not. The a-t-bvs Secret Police will be knocking on your
> door shortly after midnight tonight, to take you away for re-education
> for the dreadful crime of posting something long, thoughtful and
> interesting to the group. Please have a bag packed ready.
> <g>
Oh dear. I better make my reply short then!
> Well, that's partly because the nature of Usenet makes it such an easy
> thing to do - just as I'm doing now. Also, the fact that we're all on
> the Internet posting about a show that was cancelled three years ago
> means that it's maybe not surprising to run across obsessive behaviour
> here from time to time... But mostly, I think it's the same reason
> that AoQ's reviews sparked such debate: the regulars have become
> jaded, and needed some fresh eyes andopinions to liven things up.
I thought that was probably the case. And it's quite fun for me, since
I wasn't around in fandom back when the show was still on. So it feels
like catching up or something!
> Good point (although obviously there are other themes too, like the
> distinction between real family and created family which is a
> favourite of Joss's. and Dawn is, of course, quite literally 'created
> family'.). The way I see it, the first few seasons were all about
> "here's a girl with special powers, let's see how she would behave if
> put into situation x, y and z." By season 5, though, they're starting
> to think much more about what it actually *means* for her to have
> those powers: to explore the inward effects on Buffy rather than her
> effects on her surroundings.. The show becomes less about metaphor
> and more about myth.
That's a very good way to put it - and one reason I think I like the
later seasons the best.
Hmmm, that's a lot of interesting thoughts (and excactly what I was
hoping for - because none of these things are set in stone, so new
interpretations are always welcome).
I actually like what OBS said about this:
"I think that made her catatonic. But a different Buffy
came out of that than went into it. Between that and the fight she was
just
in - her greatest performance as a Slayer ever - I think she had
largely
moved past that as a real death wish. She is now totally engaged in
being
hero - not using that as an excuse - but truly being one. And the
hero's
handshake with death is something different than a death wish."
That rings true to me. And it's something that I don't think Spike
could understand then (but did in 'Chosen' of course) - as I said,
Spike's words have truth in them, but they're informed by his nature,
so the point isn't what he says as much as how Buffy responds. And I
think that judging by her reaction there is a measure of truth in what
he said. Actually to quote Spring Summers for a moment (from her FFL
review):
'Spike goes on to tell her that every Slayer has a death wish. The
look on Buffy's face tells us that he has struck a nerve. Death is
Spike and Spike is Death and Sex is Spike and Spike is Sex and Death is
so damned Sexy. Buffy is just a little bit in love with it, and with
him:
SPIKE: "Come on. I can feel it, Slayer. You know you want to
dance."
BUFFY: "Say it's true. Say I do want to. It wouldn't be you,
Spike. It would never be you."
Unlike William with Dru's offer, Buffy is attracted but she finds the
strength to say no to Spike's offer.'
And of course there's CWDP:
BUFFY: See, this is what I hate about you vampires. Sex and death and
love and pain - it's all the same damn thing to you.
Of course Buffy explores a lot of that in S6...
> Maybe this ties in with what the First Slayer has to say: Death is
> your gift. It has lots of interpretations, of course: she gives death
> to the demons she slays, making the world a better place; she can use
> her own death as her gift to Dawn and to the world, saving both from
> destruction. Indeed, for Buffy her own death *was* a gift: and she
> goes into it with open eyes. "This is the work I have to do. Tell
> Giles I... I figured it out. And I'm okay." And after that, she felt
> that "I was happy. At peace. I knew that everyone I cared about was
> all right. I knew it. Time didn't mean anything, nothing had form...
> but I was still me, you know? And I was warm and I was loved... and I
> was finished." In that moment on top of Glory's tower, I would say
> that Buffy *did* have a deathwish in Spike's sense. She wasn't raging
> at the dying of the light; she was leaping joyfully straight into it,
> her arms open and a look of bliss on her face.
I love 'Death is you gift'. Remember that Buffy asked if it was a gift
she was given or received. Now I think it was both (although I like
your take on it a lot). First it was a gift she gave to Dawn (and the
world) when she saved her, but it was also a gift she received from
Spike in 'Chosen' - his death was a gift to her.
> However, there's one very important thing we have to remember about
> the First Slayer: Buffy ultimately *rejects* every lesson she has to
> teach. "You're not the source of me." In 'Restless', the First
> Slayer tells Buffy she has to abandon her friends: "No friends, just
> the kill. We are alone." Buffy refuses to agree. In 'Get It Done',
> the FS tells Buffy that her own power is not enough - but again she
> refuses the extra power when it's offered and demands knowledge
> instead.
>
> So why should 'Intervention' be the exception? Death might be Buffy's
> gift - but ultimately, at the end of season 6, she rejects it and
> embraces Life instead, climbing out of her grave then turning around
> to give Dawn a hand up out of it too.
Oh I love all the Slayer stuff - her dual nature and how she tries to
fight it. And yes, she does reject what The First Slayer tells her,
although it gets echoed before and after (everything Dracula says, and
what Spike tells her in S6, not to mention the way she acts) - but in
the end she carves a new path. I love 'Chosen' so much for what she
does, empowering all the Potentials, because it's the final nail in the
coffin for the 'being alone'. (I hope that made sense, I might have to
mull it over more.)
> If you'll forgive me getting all Campbellian for a moment, Death,
> Apotheosis and Resurrection is an essential part of the Hero's
> Journey. They die and achieve bliss; but the mark of a true Hero is
> that they return to the world, to share their gifts and knowledge with
> the people they left behind. "Mastery leads to freedom from the fear
> of death, which in turn is the freedom to live." If Buffy had taken
> the easy way out and stayed dead, she wouldn't be a hero - but
> equally, she had to die first to gain the self-knowledge it brought.
> She now knows the worst that can possibly happen to her - and that she
> can survive it.
>
> Or to be more prosaic, she's got over her Slayer death wish by dying,
> and then deciding she didn't like it after all.
>
> Told you things would get Mythic...
>
>
> Stephen
That's very good! And one reason I wouldn't love the show the way I do,
if it had ended after The Gift. (And just because I have to, a bit of
Buffy's speech in 'Potential': "You're all gonna die. But you knew that
already. 'Cause that's the cool reward for being human. Big dessert at
the end of the meal.")
Thank you so much for all your very interesting thoughts - as I said,
this was exactly the sort of comment I was hoping for. :)
Elisi
Elisi
One Bit Shy wrote:
> "Stephen Tempest" <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:vpdo92d6l4knd98gf...@4ax.com...
> > "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> > Anguish: when the pain is too great to bear. It can be physical pain;
> > some crippling impairment that makes life not worth living; the loss
> > of a loved one; or being forced to do or endure what cannot be
> > endured. This is what I think motivates Buffy in 'The Gift'
>
> Personally I don't. I think that made her catatonic. But a different Buffy
> came out of that than went into it. Between that and the fight she was just
> in - her greatest performance as a Slayer ever - I think she had largely
> moved past that as a real death wish. She is now totally engaged in being
> hero - not using that as an excuse - but truly being one. And the hero's
> handshake with death is something different than a death wish.
I love that.
> > However, what Spike seemed to be talking about wasn't just accepting
> > death as the least bad alternative in a horrible situation: it was
> > about positively embracing it, seeking it out, accepting it as a
> > lover. That's something that's totally foreign to our everyday
> > experience, although it's something I've read about in literature.
> > According to Spike, the Slayer doesn't _give_up_ and die: she _wants_
> > to die, to experience herself what she's given to so many others in
> > her short life. He almost makes it sound as if curiosity is the
> > motivation - as well as the desire for peace after the struggle. Did
> > Buffy ever experience this?
>
> I think Spike is much closer. And I think Spike's words have probably been
> worming around in Buffy's brain ever since he spoke them. I suspect she was
> really struck by his description of death being her art - something she
> recognized in herself and not too far from what Dracula seemed to imply.
> That gave credibility to the rest of his observation. At least made her
> wonder about whether it was possible for death to be something to embrace.
>
> But Spike's failing, especially with Buffy, is not truly getting the hero
> part. (He probably understood a lot better at the end when he blamed
> himself for failing to protect Dawn. But the greater understanding is still
> far off in the future.)
Yes I think Spike strikes a nerve - which is what makes what he says
important. But - as you say - he does not comprehend the hero part.
Which is why I'll always love the fact that he got a soul. Because I
see his sacrifice in 'Chosen' as a mirror of Buffy's in The Gift. Which
brings me to the 'Death is your gift', that she first gave, and then
received. *happy sigh*
> > Maybe this ties in with what the First Slayer has to say: Death is
> > your gift. It has lots of interpretations, of course: she gives death
> > to the demons she slays, making the world a better place; she can use
> > her own death as her gift to Dawn and to the world, saving both from
> > destruction. Indeed, for Buffy her own death *was* a gift: and she
> > goes into it with open eyes. "This is the work I have to do. Tell
> > Giles I... I figured it out. And I'm okay." And after that, she felt
> > that "I was happy. At peace. I knew that everyone I cared about was
> > all right. I knew it. Time didn't mean anything, nothing had form...
> > but I was still me, you know? And I was warm and I was loved... and I
> > was finished." In that moment on top of Glory's tower, I would say
> > that Buffy *did* have a deathwish in Spike's sense. She wasn't raging
> > at the dying of the light; she was leaping joyfully straight into it,
> > her arms open and a look of bliss on her face.
>
> Yes, she was at peace with the choice. But I don't believe that was the
> gift. I still see that as primarily for Dawn.
Yes - at least primarily.
I love all this. Thank you so much for joining in! You truly have a way
with words. :)
Elisi
Elisi
Oh he can't. A lot of it is projection. But that isn't really the
question - what matters is that we can see that he strikes a nerve with
Buffy. And if you stop to think about it, Slayers and vampires do have
a lot in common.
Elisi
I see. I guess there's no point in even discussing it then! If you
plain don't like it, then that's fair! :)
Elisi
John Briggs
That's not evidence, because it's published after the event. In fact, I'd
say it's complete bullshit - all part of the myth "Joss plans everything in
advance", for which there is no evidence. [It's very easy to say
afterwards, "That's what I meant", and people will think that you told them
then!]
--
John Briggs
Elisi
> > Why does The First target the Slayer? (Going back to Amends it would
> > seem it brought back Angel just so he could kill Buffy.) Why is it not
>
> its not clear how bright or powerful the first evil is
> it claims to have brought back angel
> but we dont know if thats the truth
>
> something saves angel in amends and it aint first evil
> so theres another powerful agent at work
>
> whatever its plans were it wanted a souled vampire under its control
> first it tried angel and then spike for awhile
> it was waiting to use spike but we arent told exactly what
> perhaps simply to kill the slayers after all the potentials
> perhaps something else
Oooh lots of thoughts about The First! (As time goes by I like it more
and more - it's by far the most fascinating villian.)
I think it was TPTB that saved Angel in Amends (and they might also
have pulled him out of Hell, who knows?), but it's safe to say that TFE
does not like souled vampires (and since they make such good champions
that's not surprising).
I have a theory about TFE which is that it's very Angelus-like in it's
approach. It knows that it has a giant army to unleash sooner or later,
so during the course of S7 it plays with the Scoobies for amusement
(like Angelus in the second part of S2).
About Spike then I'm not sure what it was going for, but I like the
idea that it wanted Wood to kill him, because it would cause a HUGE
rift in the Slayers camp (and even the attempt had a great fallout),
and TFE would have been delighted with this.
> > bothered about the military, or Angel, or any of the other freelance
> > Champions roaming the earth? How can a weakness in the forces
> > surrounding the Slayer line spark an apocalypse? Because the Slayer is
> > important - the Slayer is more than just one girl fighting evil on a
> > nightly basis. The Slayer is in some way woven into the fabric of
> > 'goodness' (for lack of a better word), a mystical barrier against
> > the darkness - her mere existence somehow helps tip the scales in
> > favour of humans over demons.
>
> we know buffy has been maneuvered to sunnydale
> giles was already in place waiting for her
> but he didnt know about the hellmouth until after he researched its history
> the last guardian was also waiting in sunnydale
> but she appears to have been passive at that point
>
> so someone or something arranged one and then two slayers
> to be sitting on top of the hellmouth to guard it
> apparently for the first time in sunnydales history
> until the end was near (or here)
>
> perhaps buffy wasnt torn from a heaven
> but rather was sent back from what was intended as temporary respite
> so that she and her friedns could prepare for the final battle of the hellmouth
Oooh that's excellent! It's a ret-con along the lines of Jasmine's, but
I like it. :)
> > Which is where the whole notion of 'someone else' doing her job
> > becomes a major problem. I agree that it would not be too hard to find
> > a replacement of some kind, if you could talk people into that sort of
> > job for life. Excluding Faith (for the obvious reasons), who were the
> > candidates?
>
> i dont think one or even two slayers could defeat
> an army of turok-han by mere force of armies
> it seems their presence was holding the seal
> by more than merely inept pig sacrafices
Heh.
>
> > 2) The Initiative/The Army. I'm not sure about this. What has the
> > government done until now? Set up The (Demon Research) Initiative, and
>
> according to a future episode of angel
> human governments have known about vampires
> for decades or longer
I was sort of trying to allued to that with the 'Demon Research' bit,
since that is what they call it in 'Why We Fight', but I was obviously
being too obscure for my own good. *g* But I think there are a lot of
reasons why the government isn't hunting demons. The biggest one being
'Wolfram & Hart'!
> > S7? As I said - First Evil! And as far as I can tell, it's main aim
> > re. Buffy was to make her quit. Look at 'Empty Places' and Buffy
> > being all alone. (Thank goodness for Spike is all I can say.)
>
> actually buffy was being goaded to lead the wannabes into a trap
> the way faith did
>
> buffy sensed the trap and realized the prize was at the winery
> not at the hellmouth or any kind armory
> and wanted to attack the winery again
> the girls rebelled against marching to their deaths
>
> (the successful tactics buffy used on the second assault wouldve been hampered
> if she had not been alone or if the bringers were not busy elsehwere)
Yes, that's very true. Right plan, wrong method. I like S7. :)
Elisi
John Briggs wrote:
> That's not evidence, because it's published after the event. In fact, I'd
> say it's complete bullshit - all part of the myth "Joss plans everything in
> advance", for which there is no evidence. [It's very easy to say
> afterwards, "That's what I meant", and people will think that you told them
> then!]
> --
> John Briggs
So the fact that he told SMG two years in advance that Buffy would die
at the end of S5, is a big fat lie by SMG?
John Briggs
> John Briggs wrote:
>
>> That's not evidence, because it's published after the event. In
>> fact, I'd say it's complete bullshit - all part of the myth "Joss
>> plans everything in advance", for which there is no evidence. [It's
>> very easy to say afterwards, "That's what I meant", and people will
>> think that you told them then!]
>
> at the end of S5, is a big fat lie by SMG?
That bit is possible - as has been pointed out, he knew the contract with
The WB ran out then. The stuff about Dawn is complete bullshit.
--
John Briggs
Stephen Tempest
>I have a theory about TFE which is that it's very Angelus-like in it's
>approach. It knows that it has a giant army to unleash sooner or later,
>so during the course of S7 it plays with the Scoobies for amusement
>(like Angelus in the second part of S2).
It makes sense that an immortal, indestructible force wouldn't behave
the same way humans - or even 'normal' demons and vampires - do. It
may have its Evil plans to take over the world, but it's not working
on the same timescale as mortals. There's no urgency. It can spend a
human lifetime messing with the mind of a single individual, or trying
different mental torments on a small group to see which one hurts
most, without worrying about how long it takes.
Plus, it's strongly implied in both S3 and S7 that The First is
capricious and, frankly, not as clever as it thinks it is...
Stephen
Daniel Damouth
news:1151140423.2...@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>> I think Spike is much closer. And I think Spike's words have
>> probably been worming around in Buffy's brain ever since he spoke
>> them. I suspect she was really struck by his description of
>> death being her art - something she recognized in herself and not
>> too far from what Dracula seemed to imply. That gave credibility
>> to the rest of his observation. At least made her wonder about
>> whether it was possible for death to be something to embrace.
>>
>> But Spike's failing, especially with Buffy, is not truly getting
>> the hero part. (He probably understood a lot better at the end
>> when he blamed himself for failing to protect Dawn. But the
>> greater understanding is still far off in the future.)
>
> Yes I think Spike strikes a nerve - which is what makes what he
> says important. But - as you say - he does not comprehend the hero
> part. Which is why I'll always love the fact that he got a soul.
> Because I see his sacrifice in 'Chosen' as a mirror of Buffy's in
> The Gift. Which brings me to the 'Death is your gift', that she
> first gave, and then received. *happy sigh*
I loved reading this. Perceptive stuff. Thanks to you both.
-Dan Damouth
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Stephen Tempest <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >I have a theory about TFE which is that it's very Angelus-like in it's
> >approach. It knows that it has a giant army to unleash sooner or later,
> >so during the course of S7 it plays with the Scoobies for amusement
> >(like Angelus in the second part of S2).
>
> It makes sense that an immortal, indestructible force wouldn't behave
> the same way humans - or even 'normal' demons and vampires - do. It
> may have its Evil plans to take over the world, but it's not working
> on the same timescale as mortals. There's no urgency. It can spend a
actually it is impatient
it feels once its army takes over the earth
it can then possess humans and finally become a (proxy) corporal creature
it wants so much to strangle small children
> human lifetime messing with the mind of a single individual, or trying
> different mental torments on a small group to see which one hurts
> most, without worrying about how long it takes.
>
> Plus, it's strongly implied in both S3 and S7 that The First is
> capricious and, frankly, not as clever as it thinks it is...
andrew asks but doesnt get an answer
if the first disappears if everyone is unconscious
perhaps the first is not an independent entity
but rather the collective evil of human beings
linked subconsciously or telepathically
that would mean the first is incorporal because when it is perceived
it is actually a mental image imposed on the incoming perceptions
Elisi
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
There is a fascinating essay here:
http://community.livejournal.com/lateseasonlove/2371.html
The main premise being the The First was quite simply just a visual
represantation of the characters' inner struggle. I like it very much.
:)
One Bit Shy
news:1151139886.4...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Stephen Tempest wrote:
>> However, there's one very important thing we have to remember about
>> the First Slayer: Buffy ultimately *rejects* every lesson she has to
>> teach. "You're not the source of me." In 'Restless', the First
>> Slayer tells Buffy she has to abandon her friends: "No friends, just
>> the kill. We are alone." Buffy refuses to agree. In 'Get It Done',
>> the FS tells Buffy that her own power is not enough - but again she
>> refuses the extra power when it's offered and demands knowledge
>> instead.
>>
>> So why should 'Intervention' be the exception? Death might be Buffy's
>> gift - but ultimately, at the end of season 6, she rejects it and
>> embraces Life instead, climbing out of her grave then turning around
>> to give Dawn a hand up out of it too.
>
> Oh I love all the Slayer stuff - her dual nature and how she tries to
> fight it. And yes, she does reject what The First Slayer tells her,
> although it gets echoed before and after (everything Dracula says, and
> what Spike tells her in S6, not to mention the way she acts) - but in
> the end she carves a new path. I love 'Chosen' so much for what she
> does, empowering all the Potentials, because it's the final nail in the
> coffin for the 'being alone'. (I hope that made sense, I might have to
> mull it over more.)
You've reminded me of the other thing I wanted to say about why the First
Slayer's words wouldn't be rejected this time. But I forgot as I wrote the
other part.
The short answer to the question is because Buffy's journey isn't done. She
hasn't found the solution to the Slayer trap yet.
Part of her great trial this season is to be compelled to accept the full
package of being Slayer - right up to the inevitable death part. The whole
Glory construct is essentially to be an impossible challenge. One she
cannot beat, even though she is at her slayer best and comes heart
breakingly close. She must face a slayer death as part of who she is.
Being truly trapped by her slayer aspect - no matter how much she may want
to resist - has been subtext through most of the season. Dracula was drawn
to it. Buffy was living it with joy - like the scene I've always loved of
her crouching on a crypt like a feral cat on the hunt and then leaping to a
rapid kill.
I think you could make a case that this oneness with slaying that infused
the early part of the season was a major cause of her distance from Riley -
what started their decline. All of it being absorbed in the process of
death, which soon enough became all she could think about as death
surrounded her and both Spike and the First Slayer speak of it as part of
what she is. What a slayer is.
She doesn't want that. The horribleness of that fate (not death, but being
a creature of death) is probably part of what makes her catatonic. She
can't cope with not having a choice acceptable to her. But she can't figure
out an escape - a way to reject it. That's for the future. First she must
succumb to it.
It would have been OK if the story ended here. This is where she becomes
the complete hero. And the fate of many great heroes is much like this.
But it is better that the story continues, that she goes on to be the truly
unique hero that discovers how to rid herself of the hero's binds while only
adding to her heroic legacy.
OBS
Rowan Hawthorn
Of course; as alien as *it* is to humans, humans (and those demons with
human-like personalities; maybe *all* human-demon hybrids,) are *just*
as alien to it. Despite its having millenia to observe us, our thought
processes don't work the same way, so we do things that go against its
concept of "logic" and it continually has to adapt its plans.
From "Amends":
JENNY: Couldn’t you just... feel her? Couldn’t you almost smell her
skin? You never were a fighter, Angel, don’t start trying now.
Sooner or later you will drink her.
ANGEL: I’ll never hurt her.
JENNY: You were born to hurt her. Have you learned nothing? As long as
you are alive...
ANGEL: Then I’ll die.
JENNY: You don’t have the strength to kill yourself.
ANGEL: I don’t need strength. I just need the sun to rise.
He walks out into the atrium.
JENNY: You’re not supposed to die. This isn’t the plan. (beat) But it’ll do.
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
George W Harris
<john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
So basically you're saying because Joss didn't
spoil the entire seven year series in advance to you
(because anyone else could be lying to you), then he
must have been making it up episode by episode, and
all the foreshadowing is happy coincidence? So the
world is flat and God put the fossils there to fool us?
--
"Intelligence is too complex to capture in a single number." -Alfred Binet
John Briggs
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 09:48:33 GMT, "John Briggs"
> <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Elisi wrote:
>>> John Briggs wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's not evidence, because it's published after the event. In
>>>> fact, I'd say it's complete bullshit - all part of the myth "Joss
>>>> plans everything in advance", for which there is no evidence.
>>>> [It's very easy to say afterwards, "That's what I meant", and
>>>> people will think that you told them then!]
>>>
>>> So the fact that he told SMG two years in advance that Buffy would
>>> die at the end of S5, is a big fat lie by SMG?
>>
>> That bit is possible - as has been pointed out, he knew the contract
>> with The WB ran out then. The stuff about Dawn is complete bullshit.
>
> So basically you're saying because Joss didn't
> spoil the entire seven year series in advance to you
> (because anyone else could be lying to you), then he
> must have been making it up episode by episode, and
> all the foreshadowing is happy coincidence? So the
> world is flat and God put the fossils there to fool us?
No, I'm saying that Joss only had the vaguest of ideas about the overall
shape of the series. (He only knew in S3 that he would have five seasons,
only at the beginning of S6 that he would have seven). He would consider
each season on its own, but as a whole - S5 is about "death", for example.
Although he would have a general idea of the shape of the season arc, yes,
he was making it up in detail episode by episode. The examples of
"foreshadowing" can equally be explained as back-linking as forward-linking.
I would say that foreshadowing *within* a season is deliberate,
foreshadowing *between* seasons is after-the-event.
--
John Briggs
Elisi
Hmmmm interesting! See now I have to quote the nest bit of her speech
to the potentials:
"Don't kid yourselves, you guys. This whole thing is all about death.
You think you're different 'cause you might be the next slayer? Death
is what a slayer breathes, what a slayer dreams about when she sleeps.
Death is what a slayer lives. My death could make you the next slayer."
I don't know that I have anything to add to that really. But the way
she talks about it shows how far she's come. I remember reading
somewhere that Buffy is akin to Spike and Angel at this point - they
often and easily refer to themselves as being dead. Buffy has a
similarly matter of fact approach.
burt...@hotmail.com
For the most part, I agree with this assessment. However, I believe
(and I don't have a cite for this) that Joss&Co. knew before the end of
the fourth season that the show was going to be renewed for a fifth. I
think it was the only time when that was known ahead of time. So I can
believe that the "be back before Dawn" foreshadowing in "Restless" was
exactly that - deliberate foreshadowing concerning something that was
already known and planned out.
Don Sample
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
So you are saying that SMG lied when she said that Joss told her about
Dawn and the entire plot for season 5, at the end of season 3.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
John Briggs
I'm saying that it was not true - but at the time she said it, she may have
believed what she was saying. Subsequent events may have convinced her that
she had actually been told - that there was foreshadowing, if you like.
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
I think he always knew before the final episode was broadcast - but not
always before it was written.
> So I can believe that the "be back before Dawn" foreshadowing
> in "Restless" was exactly that - deliberate foreshadowing concerning
> something that was already known and planned out.
But we don't *know* that. It may have been - but it is also possible that
it was writing this scene that (later?) inspired Joss to name the sister
"Dawn".
--
John Briggs
One Bit Shy
Well, yeah. That's after The Gift and before Chosen. Presumably she has
more options after the latter. They all do.
OBS
Elisi
I really think you give them too little credit. F.ex. here's a bit from
an interview with David Fury where he talks about what they would have
done in ATS S6. (Interview can be found here:
http://www.mikejozic.com/buffyweek6.html)
JOZIC: I heard a rumour that you guys had planned to bring Seth Green
back had you gone to a sixth season.
FURY: We had talked about bringing...Oh...for Angel?
JOZIC: Yeah.
FURY: Well...it's possible. You know, we talked about a lot of things.
I don't know where you would have heard the rumour.
The really cool thing about Season 6, we knew how Season 5 was going to
end very early on and we knew what it was going to launch into with
Season 6, which was a post-apocalyptic show [and] which I thought was
going to be great. It was going to be Angel in The Road Warrior, which
I thought would be awesome. In the ruined city of LA or out in the
desert or something, it was just going to be kind of a really cool,
different, show. Bringing Seth into it? I could see that.
There were lots of talks about who could we load in here, who would be
great to return and, if there is an apocalypse, who would survive it?
Who will be in the show next season? And I'm sure Seth's name was
brought up because he was brought up for the end of Buffy as well, he
was going to return for the finale. So, it's very possible, but again,
Seth's got a pretty successful career without the Buffy shows.
~~~
Elisi
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
if thats supposed to mean for example
there is a perfectly serviceable acronym in use for many many many years
ig est it is the acronym ie
cry...@panix.com
> if thats supposed to mean for example
> there is a perfectly serviceable acronym in use for many many many years
> ig est it is the acronym ie
Exempli gratia, perhaps? :-)
--
-Crystal
Daniel Damouth
news:mair_fheal-FF762...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net:
>> I really think you give them too little credit. F.ex. here's a
>> bit from
>
> if thats supposed to mean for example
> there is a perfectly serviceable acronym in use for many many many
> years ig est it is the acronym ie
Ahh, the irony of one person using nonstandard English admonishing
another person for using nonstandard English. And getting it wrong.
-Dan Damouth
Elisi
Considering that I wrote the comment in like 2 minutes flat (wonky
internet), I'm surprised that I didn't get anything else wrong!
(Harmony) Watcher
failed attempt, not your non-standard abbreviation. In fact, I understood
your "F.ex." just fine.
e.g.
Literal: exempli grati
Meaning: for example
i.e.
Literal: id est
Meaning: it is (or, in other words)
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/latin.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_abbreviations
--
==Harmony Watcher==