|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:37:12 GMT -5
It's overwhelming here. Please move us up to the next part.
I tried in the Ep board, (and contributed some of my best analyses)but honestly, I don't like it there. I wanna come home...*sniff*
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:37:50 GMT -5
I have e-mailed Alexandra, from whom we've heard nothing in a couple of days, and asked her to oversee the move of our S3 thread to #14. As she has an .edu e-mail address, I imagine she will not get my post until tomorrow, assuming she gets e-mail only at the college/university rather than at home.
More on another matter, but I'll save it for a separate post.
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:38:28 GMT -5
While Wood's going out the door he can take Kennedy with him. LOL
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:39:13 GMT -5
Diane posted, as a comment on my essay, an analytical post from the ep board. Please take care, Diane and anyone else who had trenchent things to say on the ep board, that you call these discussions to Vlad's attention, so that they can be included in this topic thread at the S3 website.
I also noticed that whether from the ep board or not, someone named Kris had posted a good (if typo-packed) analysis on the Miscellaneous board proper. It's worth reading. Both Diane and I invited her to visit us here, and I hope she does so. I can't help but wonder if the turmoil and anti-Spikage being reported from the ep board is driving others to post independent views on the Misc. board to free them of the clamor (read: rudeness) of otherwise-entrenched opposition. That was the genesis of the S'cubies here, after all.
Interesting, say I.
Nan Dibble
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:39:46 GMT -5
I knew we agreed. I just don't accept that being in a correct, principled minority obliges one to give up the fight (even as a major purveyor of lack of subject/verb agreement, typos, fragments, etc.) What one does at speed, privately, doesn't change the rules or rightful expectations for what's written in public, deliberately.
I believe that's my whole rant for the hour.
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:40:10 GMT -5
Oops. I posted this on the Episode Board but I meant for it to go here. That's what I get for having two sessions open, one for each board
d
245. To Diane 3/26/2003 deborah cohen
Please forgive me for neglecting to include you in my thanks and praise for all your fine comments on the Episode Board today. It was an accidental oversight, by no means a slight.
deborah
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:41:10 GMT -5
Patti, not necessarily for any one post but for the startling takes in nearly all of them, you crack me up, over and over. I don't think I've ever had occasion to praise your one (or two) liners, but I treasure them, truly. You have a wonderful future in stand-up (or horizontal) Spike comedy, which I'm sure will be the NEXT BIG THING.
And I do too know how to spell rogue. Someone on the radio started singing and something just came over me....
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:41:40 GMT -5
I'm impressed, S'cubies! I STILL have yet to view LMPTM. It was my worst nightmare -- I hauled butt to Albany pretty damn quick (it's a 3 hour drive), check into my hotel, enter my room, throw my bags down, seek out the remote in a panic, turn on the TV, and...no UPN. It's precisely 8.02 pm and I'm stuck in a hotel room with NO UPN! Quick call home salvaged the situation. Confirmed that my roommate was taping the show for me in case my drive was delayed. She's NOT a BtVS fan, but she is one of the most thoughtful people I could possibly live with. I'm gonna watch it tonight before Angel, and return here to catch up on all these posts. Athene V
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:42:02 GMT -5
According to TV Guide online, tonight's episode of Angel is Players with Gwen Raeden (sp?), Electro-girl, and is therefore NEW. 9p, ET, the WB.
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:42:43 GMT -5
Nan- your suggestion as usual was excellent- please continue being a grammarian of the board- you kick butt girl-
Patti-
I do not think one has to take an either or postion regarding what Spike said to Wood vs what Spike's mother (as a demon) said to him-
I think it is entirely possible (probable) that Spike's mother was able as a demon to vent unacceptable horrific feelings because she was free of external and emotional constraints just as I think it is possible that Spike was trying to force Wood to face his own conflicted feellings about his mother's choices as the same time he chose to couch that attempt in the most wounding (and possibly not entriely true) words.
I question Nikki's decsion to take her child vamp hunting in Central Park at night but I do not think it means she did not love him any more than I think buffy's seeming inability to connect to anyone other than Spike means she does not love anyone else.
ellie jason
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:43:43 GMT -5
We don't know that Nikki was vamp hunting in Central Park with her kid in towe. Could be it was Spike out Slayer hunting instead. In fact the latter seems far more likely to me. Spike sought out Slayers and their first battle that night in the Park may have marked his initial success at finding her.
deborah
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:44:55 GMT -5
Well, against my better judgment I went to see the infamous posts 70 and 72 on the episode board. The stuff that was typed there was inflammatory in the extreme, and unnecessarily harsh. The 9/11 parallel was ludicrous and disrespectful. Hopefully he's not here reading this because I generally don't attack other posts that strongly...but the post was what it was.
I admit that I posted thoughts in a similar vein last night, but eventually I cut him some slack because, after all, Wood was trying to KILL him. This doesn't change my basic opinion of the things he said, but it certainly makes it more palatable considering the circumstances.
Let me put it in a Xander-centric context. If I'm willing to accept the fact that he made a pragmatic decision--without the purest intentions--when it came to Angel in Season 2, I'm sure as Hell not going to be inconsistent. I forgave him instantly because of the circumstances, unlike most fans....many of whom STILL hate him after all these years. Spike may have been a little rough on the principal, but he had his justification.
On second viewing I also get a strong impression that he's talking to himself as much as he is Wood.....the principal is simply caught in the crossfire of Spike's epiphany. That doesn't make me pity Robin any less, though. No one deserves to lose a parent at a young age.
I have problems with many of the things Xander has done; yet I love him with all my heart. Same goes for Buffy, Willow, Giles, Dawn, and of course Spike.
Here's one thing I've learned about character bashing on message boards: generally speaking the most virulent ones are people who have an axe to grind that has nothing whatever to do with the subject at hand.
People who hate Xander do so because he was the stereotypical jealous, embittered, rejected male when it came to Buffy and Angel.
People who hate Spike are even more vicious because he's been places--emotionally and physically--with Buffy that Angel could never reach.
I try very hard to look at it with a clear, unbiased mind--remember, this is coming from a B/X shipper--and to me it's patently obvious that that Spike is FAR more deserving of Buffy's affections than Angel.
He understands her better. He sacrificed tremendously in a way that Angelus NEVER would have for her. The very fact that Spike would retrieve his soul in the first place is a clear sign that some of it never left. As vampires go, he is special. Far more special than Angel, in fact.
Spike and Xander are therefore quite similar in a fundamental way. Spike chose to get a better set of reins for his demonic side by fully reacquiring his soul (note I said fully...clearly Spike retained something of his humanity based on his actions toward his mother). Xander chose to sacrifice a normal human existence, no matter how many times Buffy and Willow tried to push him away. He knew the needed him, whether or not they understood.
It's irrelevant whose sacrifice is greater or which one means more. The point is they have one key thing in common: they both have an enormous capacity for love. This drives their actions more often than not. Generally speaking their less heroic moments are as a result of love going wrong somehow.
It may also explain why they butted heads so much. We have two strong personalities here who hold deep feelings for the same woman. This year, however, Xander has scrupulously avoided judging Spike, and Spike has not gone out of his way to abuse Xander as much as he once did.
It's not much....but it's something. I wish we had more time. Spike and Xander could become good friends as easily as they became natural enemies. As silly as it sounds, no one in the Jossverse is more similar to Spike than Xander.
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:45:38 GMT -5
Right you are, Deb. I hadn't thought of it that way, but it seems persuasive. Even Slayers have off hours...and have their stakes with them ALL the time. I accept that Nikki was just out walking with her little kid, not patrolling, at the time of her first Spike encounter.
A question several pages back (forgive me for forgetting whose) was in regard to why Spike was in game face in that initial encounter with Nikki in the park whereas in the subway duel, he was in human face the whole time. One possible explanation was that he wasn't in any way trying to sneak up or "fool" Nikki (in the park): he wanted to know exactly what he was and why he was seeking her out--an open challenge that then was fulfilled in the subway. She already knew, at that point, who and what he was. And Spike doesn't go into automatic game face nearly as often as Angelus does...or Angel, for that matter. He fights as monster AND man about in equal proportion in any given fight, it seems. And I don't recall his going to game face when he and Buffy were dueling by way of S6 "foreplay" either, though I could easily be wrong about that in whole or in part. Just the impression, I guess, that Spike does what he does regardless and doesn't "need" game face to do it. He's always been well-integrated that way, not "two-faced" in any meaningful way.
Nan Dibble
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:46:19 GMT -5
I meant, Spike wanted HER to know exactly what he was, etc.
And as an added thought: he killed Nikki by breaking her neck. He didn't want to bite her: he wanted to beat her. Hence, no game face.
Anybody find that persuasive?
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 17, 2003 16:47:18 GMT -5
Electro-Girl=Ebulgence. Picture me standing with my hands on my hips like Yul Brynner in The King and I (complete with accent). "Bathe her. Then bring her to me." LOL
Hey, I saw some of those disapproving expressions. Do I have to reference some previous posts from a few of you regarding a certain someone? I am a guy, and it's allowed in the Bylaws Of Masculinity for me to make the occasional piggish reference.
By the way, 9 months pregnant and Charisma Carpenter is still as sexy as all get out. Does that make me strange? Ok....let me rephrase. Is there anything creepy in an Oedipal sort of way about it? I hope not. I have enough issues I can't figure out.
Rob Sorenson
|
|