|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:21:15 GMT -5
//Uh...in one episode there was a false distress call and Klingons came on board and they kept fighting each other, and it was called Day of the Dove....laughter drove out the evil entity....is that the episode? //
Might have been Klingons now that I think about it. Gosh, in those days, the Klingons looked so much like the Romulans who looked so much like the Vulcans who looked so much like the humans .... how on Earth can any self-respecting Star Trek fan keep it all straight?
David Crenshaw
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:22:56 GMT -5
Dave - No worries. As I said, you are a valued poster. It's just that one of the reasons we moved here (and many of us gave up on the ep board - and hadn't planned on it, but I finally did) was to avoid "spike-fan baiting."
So we can be extra sensitive on that stuff. Or I should speak for myself and say I can be extra-sensitive on that stuff.
I don't mind lively debate, but I do mind something designed to see how far Spike fans might go to defend Spike, or to show up how illogical they can be by trying to trap them in inconsistencies, etc. I mind it when that "baiting/trapping" seems to be the goal, more so than the debate.
I just felt like I was getting a whiff of that in your posts, though again, I admit to paranoia on this subject. Please forgive any misreading - I just felt the need to nip that kind of thing in the bud - you know, before the bud nips me. :-)
Edited By Spring Summers at 5/2/2003 3:35:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:24:09 GMT -5
Just wanted to add to the other posts that I will be praying for Dianne's grandchildren and Spring's son.
There is a huge discussion going on the the Angel board (bear with me, this does tie in and is in no way meant to trivialize real life heartache by comparing them to TV characters) about how Angel's motives have "deteriorated" and are somehow less "noble" because it is all about Connor rather than saving humanity.
No offense intended to the singles (Lee has already written eloquently about her mother's love of child vs husband), but I think I could pick out the posters who have kids vs those who do not.
I know Joss just had a child, but he's less directly involved with the writing, but some of the writers must have kids to write Angel's unconditional love of Connor as they do.
Just to say, if you've got kids--it's all about them. And blessings be upon you and your children, especially those who are currently ill.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:25:36 GMT -5
No worries, Spring. I'm really sorry that others have made you extra-sensitive to the issue. I respect that you didn't get that way of your own accord.
It doesn't sound as if the problem is that people thought you liked Spike an awful lot. You do like Spike an awful lot. The problem was they thought you were WEIRD for liking Spike an awful lot. Sure, it's ok to be ga-ga over Willow or Angel or .... but SPIKE!? Hypocisy can be such an ugly thing.
Yeah, I did bait the Spike debate a bit, and on purpose. But believe me, I do look in the mirror quite frequently, I know who I am. And I know that my obsessions are no better or worse than your obsessions.
Peace?
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:26:45 GMT -5
your pleas (whinings *wink*)have not gone unnoticed. However, Geocities has other plans evidently. Starting last night, it has been increasingly difficult to get hte software that Geo's insists I use to upload files and edit with to perform said actions. I don't know what is wrong with them. The site itself is operating just fine.
Anyway, there are several things that I have done but it will nto allow me to post them. I apologize for this delay and iconvenience. Also, I will be gone this weekend starting this late afternoon and won't be back til sometime Sunday, so nothing will change until then. Anyone posting LARGE emails (like pictures or archived Parts) to the scubiefan address is advised to please wait til later Sunday. Please don't max it out. It makes it frustrating for all concerned. I cleaned out hte email-bag as much as possible, but still have less than 3 Mb left. I may have to start a supplamentary email for us *L*
Anyway, til I see you all next week, have a good time and play nice with each other!
Vlad, TA, tp
Edited By Vlad I at 5/2/2003 3:49:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:28:21 GMT -5
//It doesn't sound as if the problem is that people thought you liked Spike an awful lot. You do like Spike an awful lot. The problem was they thought you were WEIRD for liking Spike an awful lot. Sure, it's ok to be ga-ga over Willow or Angel or .... but SPIKE!? Hypocisy can be such an ugly thing.//
I see it like this: People have their favorite characters, fans can sometimes give those favorite characters "a break" and can be inconsistent due to their emotional attachments.
We are all grown-ups here, and we try not to do this - or at least we try to recognize when we are doing it. But heck, we are all human too. Perfection not required, emotional attachments get in the way. Human nature. No problem.
It just seemed like, on the ep boards, other fans could mostly get away with their emotional or illogical arguments, while Spike fans were continually baited and ridiculed. We were portrayed as addled by his charms - no other fans got consistently picked on in this manner.
Personally, I thought we were picked on due to jealousies. Spike is one of the most popular characters, he has a central storyline, Buffy - our heroine - is heavily involved with him, etc. I thought it was a "you are a target when you are "on top" phenomenon. I understand that "it's due to jealousies" is a self-serving way of looking at things, but that's how it seemed to me.
Peace.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:30:06 GMT -5
Sue, thanks for the kind words. I was afraid that my post would be misconstrued - glad to see it wasn't.
I too could tell (or at least, I think I could tell) the posters who had children versus the posters who don't have children. You're right when you wrote that when you have children it is all about them.
My mother and father have shown me this from the moment I was born. She always says that when you get married "I" becomes "we" but when you have children "we" becomes "them". This is not to say that once you have children, you forget about your spouse. Rather, you and your spouse are working for a greater good: the benefit of your children. My mother and father always made sure that my sister and I knew we were the MOST important things to them.
A poster a l-o-n-g time ago (and I can't remember if it was on the Buffy or Angel board) wrote that while she loves her children, the love she has for her husband was far greater. When I read that, I felt disappointed for her children. Before anyone jumps on me, let me explain: yes, I'm not married yet but I know that I will love my husband beyond a shadow of a doubt. But I also recognize that, God forbid, it may not last. We may fall out of love. People change and marriage, I think, is always suspectible to this change. I think you can grow with a person and stay married forever but I also know that sometimes, you can't. No matter how much you may want it to, your marriage just might not make it. Yes, you can love your spouse deeply and passionately but I just find it hard to believe that someone would love his/her spouse MORE than his/her children. It's the not the same type of love but I think the love between a parent and his/her child is a greater, richer love than the love between spouses.
I think the one constant love out there is the love a parent has for a child. I mean, this person came from you - it is literally a part of you. How absolutely amazing that feeling must be, to know that you helped create such a wondrous person! I can't even imagine the level of joy that brings and, hopefully, one day I will get to experience that joy. People always comment how their life changed once they had children - like a new world had opened for them. That says a lot to me, really shows the mindset of a parent - you realize you are a part of something much greater than you as an individual.
Sorry to have rambled on and I apologize to anyone who I might have offended. I could be completely off-base since I don't have any children yet but this is how I see it.
-L :-)
Replies appreciated but not expected
Edited By Lee Hollins at 5/2/2003 4:30:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:32:06 GMT -5
Well, it's finally happened to me. I had my "Buffy's over breakdown" and at work, no less.
I was reading the Thank You message that the buffyfan.com people have worked up and reading all the names of all the actors and writers and, oh man, I'm starting to cry again just thinking about it.
I wrote a little note to the creators of Buffy: Thanks aren't enough.
I'll miss you all very much. Good luck and bon voyage.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to kick some ass!
Sincerely, Michelle Belle, a member of the S'cubies
I can't stop crying now. I hope no one wanders into my cube.
Can anyone tell me thwsite I go to to send a postcard to the WB about renewing Angel?
Love, Michelle
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:33:25 GMT -5
Michelle Belle
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:34:51 GMT -5
I don't know if you guys read the Scoop Me scoop because you may be avoiding spoilers, but DB had this to say:
"The addition of someone like him coming over would be fantastic. He's been stuck in a small town for too long, he needs to get out in a big city and see where the big dogs play." ? says David Boreanaz on the possibility of "Spike" joining the cast of Angel.
Michelle Belle
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:35:56 GMT -5
Lee -- I don't have kids yet, but I think I get it.
In fact, I was more touched by the fact that Angel would be fighting for his son than for the world. THere won't be a world for Angel, if he doesn't save his son.
It's not the same but I remember having a conversation with a friend once about whom we would die for. He said, "Anyone, everyone."
I said. "Only my little sister."
My sister is much younger than I am and in a way I was a third parent for her. I love her so much, no matter what, that I can't even imagine how much deeper my parents love goes for both of us.
when Angel began the PTB wanted to make sure he had a connection to the world. Some posters over there have been complaining that his love for his son has clouded his mission but I think that having a son has connected him more to the world than anything else. If he weren't fighting for Connor then I would think that somehting was wrong with him. For the first time in his un-life he has someone else to live for, that he MUST live for. He loved Buffy, and some may say he loved Cordelia and Wesley, but he lives for Connor.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:36:56 GMT -5
//THere won't be a world for Angel, if he doesn't save his son.//
Very true Michelle and very well-put.
Connor is the WORLD to Angel now - some might argue that Buffy used to be and I would probably be one of those. Before Connor, Buffy was THE reason for Angel to go on. As he has said before, she showed him "how to live again." However, as time and distance drove a wedge between Buffy and Angel, he sort of lost his focus. Then he has his son and everything is clear again. Connor is the reason Angel continues to fight, Connor is the reason Angel went up against Jasmine, Connor is the reason for all of Angel's actions. Does this make Angel's actions selfish? Yes and no. I think it's a very admirable motivation but I can understand why some people think that Angel is just being selfish, he's not concerned about "the mission" anymore. Yes, he is: only Angel now sees the mission as Connor. That doesn't make him selfish per se, it makes him a parent.
Besides, Angel is doing good - yes, it might be because of his son and not for the world, but in the end, does that matter? Shouldn't doing good, whatever your motivation and if the end results are good, be considered "good"? Points to ponder.
-L :-)
Edited By Lee Hollins at 5/2/2003 4:48:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:38:04 GMT -5
::You know what? You wouldn't have even wanted to. I of course saw the gorgeousness of him, but he was just so warm and kind and mature and thoughtful (as in wise) that I had no (almost no) Spike induced naughty thoughts about him. I just wanted to talk to him and listen to him for hours because I just KNEW we would be fast friends and have so much in common. And I am sure that's how he made everyone feel. He is a generous, - well, I can't express it. It makes me cry. ::
Does that mean you don't want to hog-tie him and bring him back to Texas?
Diane U
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:39:27 GMT -5
Thank you Michelle, for pointing out the www.buffythankyou.com site, it is really something else!! and the crew photo section is pretty cool!! here is an image of the Ad that will be going into the Hollywood Reporter, funded by fan donations, in order to thank everyone on BtVS for their work. and yes, it made me tear up too, Michelle! thanks!! If it doesnt appear then click here to see it: Image link to www.buffythankyou.com/images/hr-ad.jpg Edited By Shannon Hill at 5/2/2003 5:20:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Sept 22, 2003 15:40:44 GMT -5
Re confusing James Marsters & James Marsden (of X-Men) I'm in no position to sneer, because I had the same problem. Looked at the guy hard (with his eye-covering glasses), thought, Gee he doesn't exactly LOOK like Spike...hmmm. I can see all right, I just don't process visual information particularly well and am hopeless with faces until I've memorized them. Then I NEVER forget them and even recognize them 20 years later or earlier (like spotting a much younger Lance Henriksen in Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, for instance).
Nan Dibble
|
|