|
|
Post by Karen on Jul 22, 2003 7:18:52 GMT -5
Also discussed - the AR.
And I suppose that this why we didn't see them make love again or even kiss in S7.
From "writergroupie" posted on Ex Isle on July 20, 2003 who attended a Comic Convention
|
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 22, 2003 9:52:57 GMT -5
Also discussed - the AR. Okay, so Joss was asked by a woman in the audience, how the audience was supposed to accept Spike or a Spike/Buffy relationship after the attempted rape in season 6. -------------------------------------- Joss said, after that scene, the writing staff felt very ambivalent about that relationship and they discussed its ramifications a LOT and that very ambivalence is what they wanted the audience to feel. Joss said they wanted to look at whether the action of rape made Spike automatically 'inhuman' or whether there was a chance that he could genuinely feel contrition for his actions, understand that they were wrong and truly repent those actions and spend the rest of his time dealing with the consequences of it and changing his behavior, evolving into a better person. Joss said that after the rape the writers absolutely did not want to suggest that a future romantic relationship between Buffy and Spike was possible or acceptable. Joss specifically cited that he found the "Luke & Laura" saga disgusting (on General Hospital, Luke originally raped Laura, then married her in what is considered one of the biggest soap opera romance ever) and that's NOT what the Buffy/Spike relationship was going to be. What the writers DID want to explore was the issue of trust. Could Spike's behavior prove that he's worthy of Buffy's trust again -- not her romantic love -- but could they get to a place of intimacy of trust. ---------------------------- And is suppose that this why we didn't see them make love again or even kiss in S7. From "writergroupie" posted on Ex Isle on July 20, 2003 who attended a Comic Convention I can understand why they stayed away from heavy romantic involvement for B/S after the AR . . . but why did they go ahead with B/A involvement after Angel tormented Buffy and killed Jenny? I don't get it. That half-hearted attempted rape of Buffy by soulless Spike was so awful that any further romantic involvement (with SOULED Spike) was out of the question . . . but soulless Angel's relentless cruelty to Buffy (which included a forced kiss) and murder of Jenny wasn't so bad? I agree that Luke/Laura thing was disgusting, but . . . B/S was like B/A (soulless actions vs souled) not like Luke & Laura. |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jul 22, 2003 10:02:51 GMT -5
I can understand why they stayed away from heavy romantic involvement for B/S after the AR . . . but why did they go ahead with B/A involvement after Angel tormented Buffy and killed Jenny? I don't get it. That half-hearted attempted rape of Buffy by soulless Spike was so awful that any further romantic involvement (with SOULED Spike) was out of the question . . . but soulless Angel's relentless cruelty to Buffy (which included a forced kiss) and murder of Jenny wasn't so bad? I agree that Luke/Laura thing was disgusting, but . . . B/S was like B/A (soulless actions vs souled) not like Luke & Laura. The fact that Spike earned his soul should have made a difference. I don't think the writers gave the audience any credit for understanding the difference. I could cry. It was so unfair that he went thru all that to get his soul and then endured even more torture when he returned home with the memory of all he did. If being able to be a savior in the end was his reward - well, in my mind - it was a pretty weak one - what he wanted was Buffy. He earned her love - all of it. He had a soul - we all would have understood the difference between the Spike that did the AR and the Spike with a soul. I don't think it would have been immoral. The writers had it wrong. And I would gladly tell them to their face(s) - including JW's! (Oh, boy - sacrilege.) I would have rather have seen Angel save the world with the amulent, Shanshu and return as human, and leave Spike with his soul and Buffy at his side - to bake. |
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 22, 2003 11:33:27 GMT -5
The fact that Spike earned his soul should have made a difference. I don't think the writers gave the audience any credit for understanding the difference. I could cry. It was so unfair that he went thru all that to get his soul and then endured even more torture when he returned home with the memory of all he did. If being able to be a savior in the end was his reward - well, in my mind - it was a pretty weak one - what he wanted was Buffy. He earned her love - all of it. He had a soul - we all would have understood the difference between the Spike that did the AR and the Spike with a soul. I don't think it would have been immoral. The writers had it wrong. And I would gladly tell them to their face(s) - including JW's! (Oh, boy - sacrilege.) I would have rather have seen Angel save the world with the amulent, Shanshu and return as human, and leave Spike with his soul and Buffy at his side - to bake. Yes - agreed . . . the writers and JW have it wrong if they think we can't make a distinction between soulless and souled Spike - or are they the ones who can't make a distinction? It makes little sense. I don't want to see Buffy with a vampire, even Spike, much as I adore that character. If he became human and if I truly believed that Buffy had come to fully appreciate him, then I'd agree . . . they belong together. They have the best chemistry and connection and they know each other best (they've both seen each other at their best and their worst, they've truly been through it all together - no idealization like there was with Angel, no trying to use him to feel normal like there was with Riley . . . no trying to use him to feel alive again like there was with soulless Spike). |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Jul 22, 2003 13:05:30 GMT -5
Yes - agreed . . . the writers and JW have it wrong if they think we can't make a distinction between soulless and souled Spike - or are they the ones who can't make a distinction? It makes little sense. I don't want to see Buffy with a vampire, even Spike, much as I adore that character. If he became human and if I truly believed that Buffy had come to fully appreciate him, then I'd agree . . . they belong together. They have the best chemistry and connection and they know each other best (they've both seen each other at their best and their worst, they've truly been through it all together - no idealization like there was with Angel, no trying to use him to feel normal like there was with Riley . . . no trying to use him to feel alive again like there was with soulless Spike). I see your point, about Buffy also deserving a human being, and if Spike became human and she truly appreciated him, that would be the best for both. True romance. But I don't know if Buffy would be satisfied with Spike as a human, but then again, maybe she would if she had truly shanshued matured, too. (Not an exact comparison.) And agree about the chemistry - it does sizzle. Of course, I always thought JM could sizzle with just about anyone (even me!). I know, I know - "get in line".  |
|
|
|
Post by Nickim on Jul 22, 2003 21:36:35 GMT -5
I see your point, about Buffy also deserving a human being, and if Spike became human and she truly appreciated him, that would be the best for both. True romance. But I don't know if Buffy would be satisfied with Spike as a human, but then again, maybe she would if she had truly shanshued matured, too. (Not an exact comparison.) And agree about the chemistry - it does sizzle. Of course, I always thought JM could sizzle with just about anyone (even me!). I know, I know - "get in line". I think Buffy would be satisfied with Spike as a human now that she doesn't have to carry the fate of the whole world alone. Also, do the writers realize that most of the viewers are mature adults? To say that Spike and Buffy couldn't be together because of something Spike did when he didn't have a soul when he went to such lengths to make amends is just ridiculous. If Buffy had been lying in Angelus' arms she would have been drained, but Spike didn't even go vamp-gace during the AR. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Jul 22, 2003 23:19:44 GMT -5
I think Buffy would be satisfied with Spike as a human now that she doesn't have to carry the fate of the whole world alone. Also, do the writers realize that most of the viewers are mature adults? To say that Spike and Buffy couldn't be together because of something Spike did when he didn't have a soul when he went to such lengths to make amends is just ridiculous. If Buffy had been lying in Angelus' arms she would have been drained, but Spike didn't even go vamp-gace during the AR. It does seem to bring up the whole redemption thing. I wonder if, in the Joss-verse, you can actually ever redeem yourself if you have done evil. For vampires and witches there is no court and no punishment - just a constant effort to make amends whilst knowing that you can never really succeed. This is the story with Angel and his vampire past, Spike and his vampire past including the attempted rape of Buffy, and Willow and her "evil Willow" stage. There seems to be something so sad about this train of thought. However, after saying that I thought (before the season began) that Spike and Buffy would try and fail (e.g. performance problems) to get back together because neither could really forgive or particularly forget what Spike tried to do. At the start of the season when both were uncomfrtable about touching, I thought I might be right, but they moved in a different direction. |
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 23, 2003 6:30:55 GMT -5
I see your point, about Buffy also deserving a human being, and if Spike became human and she truly appreciated him, that would be the best for both. True romance. But I don't know if Buffy would be satisfied with Spike as a human, but then again, maybe she would if she had truly shanshued matured, too. (Not an exact comparison.) And agree about the chemistry - it does sizzle. Of course, I always thought JM could sizzle with just about anyone (even me!). I know, I know - "get in line". No, no, Sandy, I would never say "get in line." I would stay "forget it, he's mine." On the subject of redemption, Kerrie - we'll see better what all of Spike's efforts result in this coming Season. I don't think Joss believes redemption is impossible . . . just that there are inevitable (and possible permanent )consequences to doing evil that one must accept - for example a particular relationship being limited, or some other door being forever closed. Spike's salvation isn't in one person - one particular smile, or embrace, or one set of starry-eyes. He can (he did, I think) acheive that redemption despite not acheiving the highest heights of love with Buffy. I suspect Angel will do the same. |
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Aug 19, 2003 13:37:14 GMT -5
I missed this discussion when it was going on. It must have been taking place during one of the few times I had to be absent from the board. LadyDi referred to JW's Spike's more evolved than Angel comment in a recent exchange of PMs though and when I questioned the source of the quote she told me about this interview and also mentioned what he said about their conscience decision to keep Spike and Buffy from having a physical romantic relationship after the AR.
I'm still fuming over this.
I know that everyone moved on from this topic long ago but I just wanted to save my comments, copied from my PM response to LadyDi, on this thread (I wrote these when I was very angry and very rushed):
//Let me preface what I'm about to say with the fact that I am very stressed from my work-load as I write this so it's probably going to turn out more blunt and intense and angrier than if I were in a calmer state of mind but after reading your comments at this moment I hate Joss Whedon.
He had two characters with more chemistry and sparkage and mutual attraction than just about any characters I ever seen on TV or in the movies - the only others I can think of that come close are Rhett Butler and Scarlett O'Hara - and he has deliberately contrived to forever keep them apart. The man is a brutal sadist.
He made Spike try to rape Buffy to teach us recalcitrant Spike lovers/Spuffy shippers how eeevil Spike really was and to give Spike the motivation to seek his soul so he could be worthy of redemption in the Jossverse. Then he punishes us some more by denying them a physical romantic relationship so as not to morally confuse or corupt us by presenting an example of a rape victim falling in love and having a relationship with her rapist.
Only thing wrong with that logic is that I thought we were supposed to associate the AR with his unsouled state and understand that Spike got his soul back so that he could be the kind of man who would never.....So why did Joss feel it necessary to prevent ensouled (not to mention heroic) Spike from attaining the love he had fought for and proven himself worthy of?
Spike has always, always, always been subjected to a nasty double standard by JW/ME. As you mentioned, we have the example of Angel who, having lost his soul, commits premeditated murder and torture of Buffy's friends (edit: I refer to Giles). Yet after his soul is again forced upon him he is presented as worthy of Buffy's love and the Scooby's consideration and respect. Yes, I understand that Bangels could resent Joss for keeping their star-crossed lovers of choice, Buffy and Angel, apart, but at least their only obstacle is a curse not Angel's inherent unworthiness.
But Spike, who having been used, abused and dumped by the woman he loves, caught having drunken, consolation sex with Anya, chastised by Dawn for having hurt Buffy by doing so, goes to Buffy for no other reason than a desire to apologize and ends up losing control. He forces himself on her in an irrational and desperate attempt to rekindle her passion and break through her emotional defences to reach what he is convinced are her repressed feelings of love for him. And as soon as Buffy knocks him back to his senses we see that he is utterly mortified by what he'd done and takes the unprecedented and extrordinary step of seeking to win back his soul so that he'd never be capable (why we're supposed to buy this I don't know; humans succomb to the same pressures and lose control in the same way everyday) of losing control and hurting Buffy again.
Unsouled Angel, utterly evil and devoid of all humanity, coldly and deliberately and with malice aforethought, commits murder and torture and has to have his soul inflicted upon him. Re-ensouled he is presented as one worthy of Buffy's love. Unsouled Spike, with no encouragement or help what so ever and in the face of constant contempt and ridicule, tries, one faltering step at a time, to remake himself from a monster into a man worthy of Buffy's consideration, respect and love. And when he dramatically fails as demonstrated to us by the AR, reaches for what should have been an impossible goal for him to imagine let alone achieve, and seeks to win back his soul. Yet Spike is held up to us as unworthy of being together with Buffy and is recast in the role of Sir Galahad in a black leather duster.
Did you ever read that essay "Ain't Love Grand: Spike and Courtly Love" by Victoria Spah? Boy that turned out to be more prophetic than she ever could have anticipated.
It infuriates me.
Anyway, I've run way over my lunch hour and never even got to check the board. Must go. I will try to remember to read that interview you mentioned on the Articles and Interviews thread.
Thanks,
deborah//
|
|
|
|
Post by karalee on Aug 19, 2003 14:46:21 GMT -5
I missed this discussion when it was going on. It must have been taking place during one of the few times I had to be absent from the board. LadyDi referred to JW's Spike's more evolved than Angel comment in a recent exchange of PMs though and when I questioned the source of the quote she told me about this interview and also mentioned what he said about their conscience decision to keep Spike and Buffy from having a physical romantic relationship after the AR. I'm still fuming over this. I know that everyone moved on from this topic long ago but I just wanted to save my comments, copied from my PM response to LadyDi, on this thread (I wrote these when I was very angry and very rushed): //Let me preface what I'm about to say with the fact that I am very stressed from my work-load as I write this so it's probably going to turn out more blunt and intense and angrier than if I were in a calmer state of mind but after reading your comments at this moment I hate Joss Whedon. He had two characters with more chemistry and sparkage and mutual attraction than just about any characters I ever seen on TV or in the movies - the only others I can think of that come close are Rhett Butler and Scarlett O'Hara - and he has deliberately contrived to forever keep them apart. The man is a brutal sadist. He made Spike try to rape Buffy to teach us recalcitrant Spike lovers/Spuffy shippers how eeevil Spike really was and to give Spike the motivation to seek his soul so he could be worthy of redemption in the Jossverse. Then he punishes us some more by denying them a physical romantic relationship so as not to morally confuse or corupt us by presenting an example of a rape victim falling in love and having a relationship with her rapist. Only thing wrong with that logic is that I thought we were supposed to associate the AR with his unsoulled state and understand that Spike got his soul back so that he could be the kind of man who would never.....So why did Joss feel it necessary to prevent ensoulled (not to mention heroic) Spike from attaining the love he had fought for and proven himself worthy of? Spike has always, always, always been subjected to a nasty double standard by JW/ME. As you mentioned, we have the example of Angel who, having lost his soul, commits premeditated murder and torture of Buffy's friends. Yet after his soul is again forced upon him he is presented as worthy of Buffy's love and the Scooby's consideration and respect. Yes, I understand that Bangels could resent Joss for keeping their star-crossed lovers of choice, Buffy and Angel, apart, but at least their only obstacle is a curse not Angel's inherent unworthiness. But Spike, who having been used, abused and dumped by the woman he loves, caught having drunken, consolation sex with Anya, chastised by Dawn for having hurt Buffy by doing so, goes to Buffy for no other reason than a desire to apologize and ends up losing control and forces himself on her in an irrational and desparate attempt to rekindle her passion and break through her emotional defences to reach what he is convinced are her repressed feelings of love for him. And as soon as Buffy knocks him back to his senses we see that he is utterly mortified by what he'd done and takes the unprecedented and extrordinary step of seeking to win back his soul so that he'd never be capable (why we're supposed to buy this I don't know; humans succomb to the same pressures and lose control in the same way everyday) of losing control and hurting Buffy again. Unsouled Angel, utterly evil and devoid of all humanity, coldly and deliberately and with malice aforethought, commits murder and torture and has to have his soul inflicted upon him. Re-ensoulled he is presented as one worthy of Buffy's love. Unsoulled Spike, with no encouragement or help what so ever and in the face of constant contempt and ridicule, tries, one faltering step at a time, to remake himself from a monster into a man worthy of Buffy's consideration, respect and love. And when he dramatically fails as demonstrated to us by the AR, reaches for what should have been an impossible goal for him to imagine let alone achieve, and seeks to win back his soul. Yet Spike is held up to us as unworthy of being together with Buffy and is recast in the role of Sir Galahad in a black leather duster. Did you ever read that essay "Ain't Loave Grand: Spike and Courtly Love" by Victoria Spah? Boy that turned out to be more prophetic than she ever could have anticipated. It infuriates me. Anyway, I've run way over my lunch hour and never even got to check the board. Must go. I will try to remember to read that interview you mentioned on the Articles and Interviews thread. Thanks, deborah// Yes! Deborah, You just wrote exactly what I've b*tched about to my poor husband for the last year. I beg you to rant more often! |
|
|
|
Post by LadyDi on Aug 19, 2003 22:22:07 GMT -5
Yes! Deborah, You just wrote exactly what I've b*tched about to my poor husband for the last year. I beg you to rant more often! I can see both sides of this, ven tho' it pained me to see Spike go thru so much. I really do think it would've been too upsetting/unrealistic for Buffy and Spike to get back together right away. I think part of the reason they handled the B/A thing differently is because Buffy felt guilty for sending Angel to a hell dimension (even if he did have it coming). Also, she was younger then. I'm not saying I'm happy about it, but it's kinda understandable. I just wish the writers could've come up with a positive reason for Spike to seek his soul. It would've been really cool to see the Scoobies encourage Spike's goodness. He'd have to be highly evolved indeed to overcome all their negativity and redeem himself. I'm very glad that Buffy and Spike could rebuild the trust they had in each other, it's just the timing that s*cks. S8 Buffy and Spike could've gotten to an even better place than they'd been before. Love and Sex, so much better than just one or the other. As for making the distinction btwn soulless and soulful Spike, we can do it, but I'm not so sure about everybody else. The git essayist who wrote that terrible piece about Spike was livid to see Buffy and Spike together in Touched, and they were just cuddling. Too bad Spike didn't give his evil twin a different name.  Reading another tanscript w/quotes from JW, the writers actually did go back and forth about whether or not Buffy and Spike should get back together romantically. I think they made the only decision they could that fit the feminist message they were trying to get across. What I don't understand is Spike's "No you don't..." Now it seems it's canon that Buffy doesn't love Spike, which also s*cks. I really, really hope they can change that impression on AtS S5. |
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Aug 20, 2003 11:23:42 GMT -5
I can see both sides of this, ven tho' it pained me to see Spike go thru so much. I really do think it would've been too upsetting/unrealistic for Buffy and Spike to get back together right away. I think part of the reason they handled the B/A thing differently is because Buffy felt guilty for sending Angel to a hell dimension (even if he did have it coming). Also, she was younger then. I'm not saying I'm happy about it, but it's kinda understandable. I just wish the writers could've come up with a positive reason for Spike to seek his soul. It would've been really cool to see the Scoobies encourage Spike's goodness. He'd have to be highly evolved indeed to overcome all their negativity and redeem himself. I'm very glad that Buffy and Spike could rebuild the trust they had in each other, it's just the timing that s*cks. S8 Buffy and Spike could've gotten to an even better place than they'd been before. Love and Sex, so much better than just one or the other. As for making the distinction btwn soulless and soulful Spike, we can do it, but I'm not so sure about everybody else. The git essayist who wrote that terrible piece about Spike was livid to see Buffy and Spike together in Touched, and they were just cuddling. Too bad Spike didn't give his evil twin a different name. Reading another tanscript w/quotes from JW, the writers actually did go back and forth about whether or not Buffy and Spike should get back together romantically. I think they made the only decision they could that fit the feminist message they were trying to get across. What I don't understand is Spike's "No you don't..." Now it seems it's canon that Buffy doesn't love Spike, which also s*cks. I really, really hope they can change that impression on AtS S5. The author of that vitriolic essay could not see a single positive aspect to Spike's character throughout the entire history of the show so I don't think views such as her's should be considered by ME in determining character development any more than the sensibilities and beliefs of KKK or neo-Nazi members should be taken into account and catered to by legislators, public policy makers or the media. On a number of occasions I have heard JW/ME comment on how intelligent and discerning the Buffy audience is. One of the reasons I like the show so much is that it never seemed to cater to the lowest common denominator as is true of so much of TV. But in this instance, that of the *moral* lesson they chose to impart with Spike, I feel that is just what they have done. For several years they'd shown us the story of a vampire who contrary to previously established canon retains much of his humanity, possesses a tremendous capacity for love and an unusual ability to adapt and grow under the pressure of changing circumstances. He is often presented in a sympathetic light, revealing inner conflict and emotional pain. We see him fall in love with Buffy and try to remake himself into the kind of a *man-pire* who would be acceptable to her. We watch him develop a genuine affection for Joyce and Dawn. We see him time and again denying his own evil vampire-nature to do good things. And then when a great number of us are solidly on his side, rooting for his eventual redemption and decrying his deplorable treatment by Buffy and the Scoobys we're punished for caring too much, for being too sympathetic and forgetting his evil nature (even though since "Intervention" he'd been presented as doing far more good than evil) and ME decides they had must teach us a lesson and remind was what Spike really is. And I had thought that the lesson that they wanted to impart was that as a vampire Spike is still fundamentally evil and without a soul he can never be trusted not to lose control and succumb to his evil impulses. And as such he is inherently unworthy of Buffy's trust and love. But they do want to eventually redeem him so besides teaching us the aforementioned lesson the AR, or more precisely Spike's reaction to the AR, also serves as the catalyst for his quest to restore his soul so that the writers can present him as someone who is worthy of redemption. That's what I thought they were trying to tell us. So why did they continue to penalize Spike for bad behavior committed in his soulless state by then denying ensoulled Spike Buffy's love, especially when they don't hold Angel up to the same standard? Doesn't that contradict their own lesson? I'm sorry LadyDi, I am confident that ME is smart enough and creative enough to have made it clear to the audience that Spike had put the AR behind him in a way that "Luke" (is it?) never could, because he had resorted to that AR before he earned back his soul. BTW, where can I find and read the other transcript about how the writers went back and fourth about whether or not Spike and Buffy should get back together romantically? |
|
|
|
Post by missbuffy on Aug 29, 2003 9:48:36 GMT -5
*snip* Spike has always, always, always been subjected to a nasty double standard by JW/ME. As you mentioned, we have the example of Angel who, having lost his soul, commits premeditated murder and torture of Buffy's friends (edit: I refer to Giles). Yet after his soul is again forced upon him he is presented as worthy of Buffy's love and the Scooby's consideration and respect. Yes, I understand that Bangels could resent Joss for keeping their star-crossed lovers of choice, Buffy and Angel, apart, but at least their only obstacle is a curse not Angel's inherent unworthiness. But Spike, who having been used, abused and dumped by the woman he loves, caught having drunken, consolation sex with Anya, chastised by Dawn for having hurt Buffy by doing so, goes to Buffy for no other reason than a desire to apologize and ends up losing control and forces himself on her in an irrational and desparate attempt to rekindle her passion and break through her emotional defences to reach what he is convinced are her repressed feelings of love for him. And as soon as Buffy knocks him back to his senses we see that he is utterly mortified by what he'd done and takes the unprecedented and extrordinary step of seeking to win back his soul so that he'd never be capable (why we're supposed to buy this I don't know; humans succomb to the same pressures and lose control in the same way everyday) of losing control and hurting Buffy again. Unsouled Angel, utterly evil and devoid of all humanity, coldly and deliberately and with malice aforethought, commits murder and torture and has to have his soul inflicted upon him. Re-ensoulled he is presented as one worthy of Buffy's love. Unsoulled Spike, with no encouragement or help what so ever and in the face of constant contempt and ridicule, tries, one faltering step at a time, to remake himself from a monster into a man worthy of Buffy's consideration, respect and love. And when he dramatically fails as demonstrated to us by the AR, reaches for what should have been an impossible goal for him to imagine let alone achieve, and seeks to win back his soul. Yet Spike is held up to us as unworthy of being together with Buffy and is recast in the role of Sir Galahad in a black leather duster. *snip* Thanks, deborah// OK, I don't often get involved in these discussions, because I don't really have that strong an opinion one way or the other, but I enjoy reading them and this has made me want to comment... so here goes. The one thing that I think is being overlooked in regards to how everyone (Buffy, the Scooby gang, Giles) treats Spike and Angel differently is the circumstances on how they met. Everyone met and got to know and love Angel as a good guy, who did heroic things to help them even though he was a vampire. They met and got to know Spike as a very evil Vampire who had killed two Slayers and tried time and time again to wreak much havoc. Then, even after Spike was chipped, he still tried to return to his old ways (tried twice to have the chip removed) and still participated in plans to wreak havoc. So, I can see how they would want to save their friend Angel (and Willow for that matter) despite his wrong actions - because you try to save your friends when they're in trouble - that's just what people do. And I can see how they would view any of Spike's wong actions as a sign of his former self showing through. It is much easier to form an opinion than it is to change an opinion. I would like to state that all that is just my opinion on how the characters feel, and not on wether Joss and the writers were right or wrong to handle it that way. I doubt anyone will actually read this, but if you do - let me know how I did. |
|
|
|
Post by LeeHollins on Aug 29, 2003 10:36:35 GMT -5
OK, I don't often get involved in these discussions, because I don't really have that strong an opinion one way or the other, but I enjoy reading them and this has made me want to comment... so here goes. The one thing that I think is being overlooked in regards to how everyone (Buffy, the Scooby gang, Giles) treats Spike and Angel differently is the circumstances on how they met. Everyone met and got to know and love Angel as a good guy, who did heroic things to help them even though he was a vampire. They met and got to know Spike as a very evil Vampire who had killed two Slayers and tried time and time again to wreak much havoc. Then, even after Spike was chipped, he still tried to return to his old ways (tried twice to have the chip removed) and still participated in plans to wreak havoc. So, I can see how they would want to save their friend Angel (and Willow for that matter) despite his wrong actions - because you try to save your friends when they're in trouble - that's just what people do. And I can see how they would view any of Spike's wong actions as a sign of his former self showing through. It is much easier to form an opinion than it is to change an opinion. I would like to state that all that is just my opinion on how the characters feel, and not on wether Joss and the writers were right or wrong to handle it that way. I doubt anyone will actually read this, but if you do - let me know how I did. I agree with you. I think the circumstances in which the Scoobies met Angel and Spike plays an important role in trying to understand why each vampire was treated differently. I also agree with those that say that the Scoobies continued to treat Spike horribly and they had no reason to - I definitely agree with that sentiment. I can understand why the Scoobies would react the way they did - I don't agree with it but I can understand it. And I'm starting to ramble. So, yes, missbuffy, I agree with your post about the circumstances of their first encounters with Angel and Spike coloring the Scoobies' treatment of each. |
|
|
|
Post by makd on Aug 29, 2003 12:35:22 GMT -5
I just want to reinforce that I agree with everything that has been discussed here, from the notion that Spike's treatment stems from early days as enemy, and Angel's treatment stems from early days as "helpful", to the Kick the Spike behavior of seasons 4-7.
Nevertheless, I think it's really hard, if not downright impossible, for the folks at ME/JW to see the possibility that a person can love someone at 16, then love another at 22.
Still, that is the reality out there. Most marriages where one of the partners if under 21 end in divorce. Why? because our first love is usually chosen when we are still too young to know who WE are, let alone who THEY are.
Buffy is fortunate in that she knows Angel - knows he has moved on to love Cordy, to have a son with Connor, oh, wait....she doesn't know that....and now, Connor is conveniently "dawned" and Cordy is in a coma. Curious that he did this THEN went to Sunny-D to act as her champion.......So that, when and if SMG does return to Angel, no one will know about the Cordy/Connor thing.....oh, that Angel; he's so clever....
and our Spike gets oh so royally kicked again.
Oh, Please, ME/JW, let Spike move on to a better and cleaner love --- a love that doesn't come with the "dirty" attachments of an unhealthy first love and clever and cruel and calculating lover's ex....
Here endeth the rant.
|
|
