|
|
Post by Techno-bot on Jun 12, 2004 23:29:33 GMT -5
Written by Steven S. DeKnight
Directed by Michael Gershman
Air date: 5/7/02
The growing jealousy among Warren, Andrew, and Jonathan gives Buffy an opportunity to stop them from robbing an armored car - but Warren returns to exact a deadly revenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Jan 16, 2006 12:55:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Jan 16, 2006 21:41:33 GMT -5
Another really interesting analysis. I've always thought that Xander's different reactions to Anya and Buffy having sex with Spike stem not only from his idealized love for Buffy, but also from his own actions in leaving Anya at the wedding. I think it is a little bit of understanding that she was hurt and was looking for someone to care about that (he's not admitting this out loud or consciously, mind you, but inside I think he does know it) and feeling like he deserved this "punishment" (having her "cheat" on him) because of what he'd done. In particular, I loved this bit: You make a very good point when you remind us that Buffy was having these feelings constantly - even when the story was not necessarily focusing on it. That the others of the scoobies, and we the audience, would never really know what she was feeling. |
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Jan 18, 2006 13:31:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Jan 18, 2006 14:26:05 GMT -5
Liz, I just read both of your essays, and I'm very impressed. Good thoughts, well expressed.
I watched the show in "real time", and I was completely shocked when Spike got his soul back. I wondered at the time if the demon acted on what Spike really wanted (his soul returned) as opposed to what Spike said he wanted (the chip out) - kind of a "be careful what you wish for".
|
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Jan 18, 2006 22:47:06 GMT -5
I read your second analysis. Great thoughts! Now that you lay it out, I can see how it really was obvious if we but looked! Spike goes to a demon in Africa to get restored to his former self. If it was the removal of the chip, why in hell didn't he go before? No. Because that is not what that demon is there to do. Clearly, the signs all pointed to restoration of his soul.
I love that he fought for and won his soul and it really does go with all of the those things on your list. Thank you for this Liz! Fascinating stuff. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by LadyDi on Feb 26, 2006 15:35:23 GMT -5
Liz,
just read your essays. Very interesting and well-developed. One thing, I asked JM at a con when he knew Spike was getting his soul returned. He said he didn't know until the day they shot that scene.
Joss once said Buffy and Spike's relationship was an exploration of misogyny. So let's take a closer look at the subject.
Misogyny is hatred of or strong prejudice against "/wiki/Woman". Compared with anti-woman "/wiki/Sexism" or "/wiki/Misandry" (antipathy toward men), misogyny is usually regarded as directed against women by some men, though women can also hold misogynistic views. In "/wiki/Feminist" theory, misogyny is recognized as a political ideology similar to "/wiki/Racism" or "/wiki/Anti-Semitism", existing to justify and maintain the subordination of women by men. The word comes from the "/wiki/Greek_language" misos "hatred" + gyne "woman".
Wikipedia
Hatred of women
The Free Dictionary by Farlex
a hatred of women
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
One thing all three of the definitions have in common is hate. Just as anti-Semites demonize the Jews they hate, misogynists demonize women. Btwn Spike and Buffy, Spike's already a demon--no demonizing required. You were quite right in that Buffy and the others are discriminating against Spike by viewing him only as what he is, not who he is. Plus, Spike is objectified into being Buffy's drug.
Spike doesn't hate Buffy. Buffy hates Buffy, and she takes it out on Spike. But the gender roles are reversed in their relationship, so Buffy is by default the misogynist in their relationship (IMO).
"A woman should try to be/whatever her man wants her to be..." sings Marvin Gaye.
"Wear your hair just for him/do the things he likes to do..." sings Dusty Springfield.
Spike is trying to be what Buffy wants him to be. Too bad she doesn't know what that is. But in trying to make himself fit her expectations, he betrays himself (the AR).
Rape is the convergence of sex and dominance, being primarily about dominance. In many times and cultures, women have had little or no power over men except for sex a/o seduction. Spike has had little or no power over Buffy, except sex.
Buffy is so deeply mired in her own misery she can't see Spike for who he is. She can't see what's going on with him, or Willow, or Dawn. Willow's blinded by her (really lame, IMO) magic addiction, just as Xander and Anya are totally caught up in planning their wedding. None of them can see how much Buffy's hurting.
Spike and Tara are really the only two characters who aren't too caught up in their problems to help someone else. Tara tries to spend time with Dawn, and Spike takes Buffy's problems as his own. He's "[humming] along with her pity ditty."
|
|
|
|
Post by beccaelizabeth on Aug 25, 2009 21:47:35 GMT -5
This one is really difficult to watch. There's parts where I have to step back in my head and remind myself it's just actors. Roughly the same parts that messed with JM's head, having heard him talk at conventions. Years playing Spike and then the character goes there. Nasty. And just a few seconds really, to go right into the very bad.
It's... plausibly consistent. All the other times Buffy said no and he ignored it. All the other times there's been violence mixed with sex with those two. This time just goes further. And this time Buffy stops him. Got the strength, soon as she has the will. And this time Spike is horrified at himself. Which complicates hell out of the whole idea he's missing something important without a soul.
So off he goes, things change if you make them change.
Compare contrast Spike with Warren, and it shows how much Spike has changed. Spike's actions are shocking, though consistent. Just because he's done it before, seems shocking now, cause he's been fighting for the good guys so long. Warren? All one downward slide. He just adds more violence to existing attitudes. Nasty, but easy to see how he got there. Manipulative bastard who couldn't deal with the idea he couldn't just program people.
Andrew in this is really messed up. He's so into Warren he's into everything he does, is how I read it. Wants the friendship so much. Evil trio, to match the scoobies - Warren, Andrew, Jonathan, evil mirrors for Willow, Xander, Buffy. Andrew with someone different to latch on to can be a very different person. Xander without Willow and Buffy? Fears he could go so far the other way. So Andrew is so easily manipulated by Warren, turns against Jonathan, is the happy little sidekick. He says it's 'hot' when Warren gets the orbs and kills the demon, without any covering statement about not meaning Warren is hot. And then the 'he left me' speech that lines up with Anya's speech. Andrew's preferences not exactly veiled here. Which adds up on the annoying side, if the only m/m attraction leads to this.
And then the ending. Which still makes me tearful, how many years after first broadcast? Willow and Tara's happy reunion, everyone happy for them, them being so cute, and the kissing, and the happy... and the Joss moment. And how many ways do I not like this? Oh so many. It's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil. The fail here isn't just in storytelling, it hurt a lot of real world people. What's so bad about having one happy couple saving the world?
But no. Going for the tears and the great big shove to mess up Willow.
I still feel like it dodges around the actual issues Willow demonstrated earlier. Using magic to do mind control, erasing bad memories, getting Tara to be happy with her, that's not the problem that blows up in her face, that's not the tendency that kicks in here.
But it does connect right back to the first episode. When the worst happens, when death happens, Willow goes for the magic. And it gets dark.
|
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Aug 27, 2009 10:08:17 GMT -5
This one is really difficult to watch. There's parts where I have to step back in my head and remind myself it's just actors. Roughly the same parts that messed with JM's head, having heard him talk at conventions. Years playing Spike and then the character goes there. Nasty. And just a few seconds really, to go right into the very bad. Again, love the thoughts, becca. My two cents: Yes, it is a very difficult episode to watch; I have to admire JM for the acting job he does in it. I've no doubt it was costly for him. The look in Spike's eyes - he's so far gone, he's given himself over - it's haunting, it's profoundly disturbing - he does it so exactly right. Could not have been easy. I like the mention you make of how it's just a few seconds, to go right into the very bad. The scene gives me such a chilling sense of how both the history and the present combine in the moment, to produce that joyful or horrific moment. It's always a build up, but it's also always sudden; it's always destined yet also always a product of every single choice that led to it. The moment is definitely consistent with all things Buffy and Spike, to me. Would that really have been believable? After everything Willow did to Tara, and considering the fact that she didn't yet understand the wrongness of her ways - would that really have been believable? I mean, for Willow and Tara to have become a happy couple, saving the world? Willow was already messed up, IMO. I thought of it as a great big shove to - ultimately - save Willow. You mean it dodges, because we never get to see Willow and Tara actually work through these things? Tara seems almost to be hoping and suggesting the badness can be swept aside, that they can start anew and all can be well . . . their love will conquer all . . . romantic yes . . . realistic? I don't think so, in this case. Willow has learned zilch; I think she would have continued doing the same type of things to Tara. Willow's tendencies kicks in when she decides how she is going to deal with Tara's death - she's had it, and she's going to assume ultimate control - of everything. Yes, relates back to everything we've learned about Willow's ways of dealing with pain and difficulty - all the way back to delusting spell in Lovers Walk, and more. |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Aug 27, 2009 16:54:36 GMT -5
This one is really difficult to watch. There's parts where I have to step back in my head and remind myself it's just actors. Roughly the same parts that messed with JM's head, having heard him talk at conventions. Years playing Spike and then the character goes there. Nasty. And just a few seconds really, to go right into the very bad. It's... plausibly consistent. All the other times Buffy said no and he ignored it. All the other times there's been violence mixed with sex with those two. This time just goes further. And this time Buffy stops him. Got the strength, soon as she has the will. And this time Spike is horrified at himself. Which complicates hell out of the whole idea he's missing something important without a soul. So off he goes, things change if you make them change. Compare contrast Spike with Warren, and it shows how much Spike has changed. Spike's actions are shocking, though consistent. Just because he's done it before, seems shocking now, cause he's been fighting for the good guys so long. Warren? All one downward slide. He just adds more violence to existing attitudes. Nasty, but easy to see how he got there. Manipulative bastard who couldn't deal with the idea he couldn't just program people. Andrew in this is really messed up. He's so into Warren he's into everything he does, is how I read it. Wants the friendship so much. Evil trio, to match the scoobies - Warren, Andrew, Jonathan, evil mirrors for Willow, Xander, Buffy. Andrew with someone different to latch on to can be a very different person. Xander without Willow and Buffy? Fears he could go so far the other way. So Andrew is so easily manipulated by Warren, turns against Jonathan, is the happy little sidekick. He says it's 'hot' when Warren gets the orbs and kills the demon, without any covering statement about not meaning Warren is hot. And then the 'he left me' speech that lines up with Anya's speech. Andrew's preferences not exactly veiled here. Which adds up on the annoying side, if the only m/m attraction leads to this. And then the ending. Which still makes me tearful, how many years after first broadcast? Willow and Tara's happy reunion, everyone happy for them, them being so cute, and the kissing, and the happy... and the Joss moment. And how many ways do I not like this? Oh so many. It's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil. The fail here isn't just in storytelling, it hurt a lot of real world people. What's so bad about having one happy couple saving the world? But no. Going for the tears and the great big shove to mess up Willow. I still feel like it dodges around the actual issues Willow demonstrated earlier. Using magic to do mind control, erasing bad memories, getting Tara to be happy with her, that's not the problem that blows up in her face, that's not the tendency that kicks in here. But it does connect right back to the first episode. When the worst happens, when death happens, Willow goes for the magic. And it gets dark. I love your thoughts, be. And Spring's too. Makes me think, which can be a good or a bad thing, but is nevertheless, much fun for me. Your thought "it's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil." So true - and not just f/f love - but any kind of love. Joss pulls us in and then pulls the rug out from under us. It's his MO; the way he sees the world and the way he wants us to see it too - for what reason does he keep going back to not giving us the happy ever after ending? A cheap way to wring out emotion/thrills/angry/angsty reponse? Or maybe a way to let us safely look into the very mouth of our fear (of death/loss/grief/pain) and come to terms with a way of dealing with all of that in real life. And to also teach us to appreciate and recognize the gift of grace/moments of joy that are present each day. 'Giving us what we need and not what we want.' ETA: I found the scene between Buffy and Spike to be believable. The fact that Spike stopped himself and didn't give into anger when Buffy kicked him off of her said volumes to intent on his part. That is the point when I feel that Spike really got his soul. Realized right from wrong deep down, not just in his head, but in his heart - but knew he needed the soul (or the perception that he had a soul) to be 'right' kind of man for Buffy - for himself. |
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Aug 28, 2009 18:22:22 GMT -5
This one is really difficult to watch. There's parts where I have to step back in my head and remind myself it's just actors. Roughly the same parts that messed with JM's head, having heard him talk at conventions. Years playing Spike and then the character goes there. Nasty. And just a few seconds really, to go right into the very bad. It's... plausibly consistent. All the other times Buffy said no and he ignored it. All the other times there's been violence mixed with sex with those two. This time just goes further. And this time Buffy stops him. Got the strength, soon as she has the will. And this time Spike is horrified at himself. Which complicates hell out of the whole idea he's missing something important without a soul. So off he goes, things change if you make them change. Compare contrast Spike with Warren, and it shows how much Spike has changed. Spike's actions are shocking, though consistent. Just because he's done it before, seems shocking now, cause he's been fighting for the good guys so long. Warren? All one downward slide. He just adds more violence to existing attitudes. Nasty, but easy to see how he got there. Manipulative bastard who couldn't deal with the idea he couldn't just program people. Andrew in this is really messed up. He's so into Warren he's into everything he does, is how I read it. Wants the friendship so much. Evil trio, to match the scoobies - Warren, Andrew, Jonathan, evil mirrors for Willow, Xander, Buffy. Andrew with someone different to latch on to can be a very different person. Xander without Willow and Buffy? Fears he could go so far the other way. So Andrew is so easily manipulated by Warren, turns against Jonathan, is the happy little sidekick. He says it's 'hot' when Warren gets the orbs and kills the demon, without any covering statement about not meaning Warren is hot. And then the 'he left me' speech that lines up with Anya's speech. Andrew's preferences not exactly veiled here. Which adds up on the annoying side, if the only m/m attraction leads to this. And then the ending. Which still makes me tearful, how many years after first broadcast? Willow and Tara's happy reunion, everyone happy for them, them being so cute, and the kissing, and the happy... and the Joss moment. And how many ways do I not like this? Oh so many. It's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil. The fail here isn't just in storytelling, it hurt a lot of real world people. What's so bad about having one happy couple saving the world? But no. Going for the tears and the great big shove to mess up Willow. I still feel like it dodges around the actual issues Willow demonstrated earlier. Using magic to do mind control, erasing bad memories, getting Tara to be happy with her, that's not the problem that blows up in her face, that's not the tendency that kicks in here. But it does connect right back to the first episode. When the worst happens, when death happens, Willow goes for the magic. And it gets dark. I love your thoughts, be. And Spring's too. Makes me think, which can be a good or a bad thing, but is nevertheless, much fun for me. Your thought "it's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil." So true - and not just f/f love - but any kind of love. Joss pulls us in and then pulls the rug out from under us. It's his MO; the way he sees the world and the way he wants us to see it too - for what reason does he keep going back to not giving us the happy ever after ending? A cheap way to wring out emotion/thrills/angry/angsty reponse? Or maybe a way to let us safely look into the very mouth of our fear (of death/loss/grief/pain) and come to terms with a way of dealing with all of that in real life. And to also teach us to appreciate and recognize the gift of grace/moments of joy that are present each day. 'Giving us what we need and not what we want.' Yes, agree - I think the message from Joss is, in fact, a very positive one, and that is: Happiness in life isn't ultimately about having any particular external circumstances. It's simply not true, that an ending isn't happy, unless X and Y stay together. Because happiness isn't, ultimately, about the continuation of any particular relationship. It's about loving and being loved, it's about sharing yourself, it's about surrendering and accepting responsibility and understanding when/how to do both. It's about appreciating, as you say, the moments in your life, it's about getting back to yourself when you've been dealt a blow . . . but no matter how much acheiving happiness may seem to be about loving X or marrying Y . . . it just isn't about that. No extreme 'shipper, about any of the 'ships, was ever going to be happy in the Jossverse. Because like life, the Jossverse isn't about the 'ships. The world IS a place where anything can happen, at any moment. The world IS a place where you can lose everything, in the blink of an eye, for no fathomable reason. The world IS a place where all relationships are temporary. And when you live in a particularly high-risk world (fighting evil in Sunnydale or LA or flying around on a spaceship), the incidents of sudden loss are going to be that much higher. But what Joss is telling us is that, despite this, the world IS a wonderful place, where happiness can be found inside yourself. BtVS, as a series, had a happy ending. Definitely the AR is what sent Spike soulward. I want to make one last comment here, about something that I mentioned way back when I analyzed the Joss-written ep, "Family:" Mr McClain was portrayed in an unflattering way, and he was very wrong in the way he tried to manipulate/shame Tara back to the fold. But he was 100% right in being concerned about Tara's safety. His parental instincts were right on target. What he didn't understand was that Tara preferred to take the risk, and that was Tara's right. I doubt Tara would have chosen differently, even if she'd known what might be ahead. You're safer locked up in your house, but you're not living. So you risk, and sometimes you lose. In many ways, you're sure to lose. No one gets out of this world alive. So you can believe there are NO happy endings, or you can believe that any ending can be a happy ending. I'm not sure anything in between is really valid . . . I mean, that it isn't illusory. I don't mean to sound . . . maudlin or pessimistic, and I don't think Joss does either. He's telling us that the hardest thing to do in the world is live in the world . . . but it is worth doing. Joss loves this world 1000 times more than any writer of stories with classic "happy endings." You can tell, because his stories are about this world, not some alternate world meant to help you escape reality. Ah, well . . . enough, as Pixi says, soapbox. |
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Aug 29, 2009 11:30:34 GMT -5
(snipped) Yes, agree - I think the message from Joss is, in fact, a very positive one, and that is: Happiness in life isn't ultimately about having any particular external circumstances. It's simply not true, that an ending isn't happy, unless X and Y stay together. Because happiness isn't, ultimately, about the continuation of any particular relationship. It's about loving and being loved, it's about sharing yourself, it's about surrendering and accepting responsibility and understanding when/how to do both. It's about appreciating, as you say, the moments in your life, it's about getting back to yourself when you've been dealt a blow . . . but no matter how much acheiving happiness may seem to be about loving X or marrying Y . . . it just isn't about that. No extreme 'shipper, about any of the 'ships, was ever going to be happy in the Jossverse. Because like life, the Jossverse isn't about the 'ships. The world IS a place where anything can happen, at any moment. The world IS a place where you can lose everything, in the blink of an eye, for no fathomable reason. The world IS a place where all relationships are temporary. And when you live in a particularly high-risk world (fighting evil in Sunnydale or LA or flying around on a spaceship), the incidents of sudden loss are going to be that much higher. But what Joss is telling us is that, despite this, the world IS a wonderful place, where happiness can be found inside yourself. BtVS, as a series, had a happy ending. (snipped) Spring, I love how you express this, particularly the part I bolded. It is how we deal with life that makes us stronger. And you are indeed a very strong person, and we are very priviledged to hear your thoughts in S'cubieland. leftylady, who regrets not being able to be around the board much recently |
|
|
|
Post by Michelle on Aug 30, 2009 11:11:39 GMT -5
I love your thoughts, be. And Spring's too. Makes me think, which can be a good or a bad thing, but is nevertheless, much fun for me. Your thought "it's ground long since covered, but still true: he dives right into a cliche, connects up f/f love and death, and going evil." So true - and not just f/f love - but any kind of love. Joss pulls us in and then pulls the rug out from under us. It's his MO; the way he sees the world and the way he wants us to see it too - for what reason does he keep going back to not giving us the happy ever after ending? A cheap way to wring out emotion/thrills/angry/angsty reponse? Or maybe a way to let us safely look into the very mouth of our fear (of death/loss/grief/pain) and come to terms with a way of dealing with all of that in real life.
And to also teach us to appreciate and recognize the gift of grace/moments of joy that are present each day. 'Giving us what we need and not what we want.' Yes, agree - I think the message from Joss is, in fact, a very positive one, and that is: Happiness in life isn't ultimately about having any particular external circumstances. It's simply not true, that an ending isn't happy, unless X and Y stay together. Because happiness isn't, ultimately, about the continuation of any particular relationship. It's about loving and being loved, it's about sharing yourself, it's about surrendering and accepting responsibility and understanding when/how to do both. It's about appreciating, as you say, the moments in your life, it's about getting back to yourself when you've been dealt a blow . . . but no matter how much acheiving happiness may seem to be about loving X or marrying Y . . . it just isn't about that. No extreme 'shipper, about any of the 'ships, was ever going to be happy in the Jossverse. Because like life, the Jossverse isn't about the 'ships. The world IS a place where anything can happen, at any moment. The world IS a place where you can lose everything, in the blink of an eye, for no fathomable reason. The world IS a place where all relationships are temporary. And when you live in a particularly high-risk world (fighting evil in Sunnydale or LA or flying around on a spaceship), the incidents of sudden loss are going to be that much higher. But what Joss is telling us is that, despite this, the world IS a wonderful place, where happiness can be found inside yourself. BtVS, as a series, had a happy ending. Definitely the AR is what sent Spike soulward. I want to make one last comment here, about something that I mentioned way back when I analyzed the Joss-written ep, "Family:" Mr McClain was portrayed in an unflattering way, and he was very wrong in the way he tried to manipulate/shame Tara back to the fold. But he was 100% right in being concerned about Tara's safety. His parental instincts were right on target. What he didn't understand was that Tara preferred to take the risk, and that was Tara's right. I doubt Tara would have chosen differently, even if she'd known what might be ahead. You're safer locked up in your house, but you're not living. So you risk, and sometimes you lose. In many ways, you're sure to lose. No one gets out of this world alive. So you can believe there are NO happy endings, or you can believe that any ending can be a happy ending. I'm not sure anything in between is really valid . . . I mean, that it isn't illusory. I don't mean to sound . . . maudlin or pessimistic, and I don't think Joss does either. He's telling us that the hardest thing to do in the world is live in the world . . . but it is worth doing. Joss loves this world 1000 times more than any writer of stories with classic "happy endings." You can tell, because his stories are about this world, not some alternate world meant to help you escape reality.Ah, well . . . enough, as Pixi says, soapbox. I love you guys!  How astute of you both to point out that Joss uses his universe and mythology, not to escape from reality, but to better understand and appreciate it. I was one of the people that was initially discouraged by the lack of a "true happy ending." But I've come to realize that when Buffy says "I love you" to Spike, that is a sign of her elevation into adulthood. She is able to see beyond all the pain she and Spike went through in their not too distant past and love him for what he has become. And when Spike says, "No you don't, but thanks for saying it," he isn't squashing the possibility for a happy ending, he's demonstrating his own elevation into adulthood. He's showing appreciation for the kindness that Buffy has shown him, even when he perhaps didn't deserve it, but he's also telling her that he has moved past the obsessive, dysfunctional feelings he had and moved onto something richer, I guess, and more honest. It's sad to me that it is only as he's sacrificing himself that they can communicate in this way, but ultimately they needed to be apart for their own growth. Very bittersweet. |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Aug 31, 2009 12:34:54 GMT -5
Yes, agree - I think the message from Joss is, in fact, a very positive one, and that is: Happiness in life isn't ultimately about having any particular external circumstances. It's simply not true, that an ending isn't happy, unless X and Y stay together. Because happiness isn't, ultimately, about the continuation of any particular relationship. It's about loving and being loved, it's about sharing yourself, it's about surrendering and accepting responsibility and understanding when/how to do both. It's about appreciating, as you say, the moments in your life, it's about getting back to yourself when you've been dealt a blow . . . but no matter how much acheiving happiness may seem to be about loving X or marrying Y . . . it just isn't about that. No extreme 'shipper, about any of the 'ships, was ever going to be happy in the Jossverse. Because like life, the Jossverse isn't about the 'ships. The world IS a place where anything can happen, at any moment. The world IS a place where you can lose everything, in the blink of an eye, for no fathomable reason. The world IS a place where all relationships are temporary. And when you live in a particularly high-risk world (fighting evil in Sunnydale or LA or flying around on a spaceship), the incidents of sudden loss are going to be that much higher. But what Joss is telling us is that, despite this, the world IS a wonderful place, where happiness can be found inside yourself. BtVS, as a series, had a happy ending. Definitely the AR is what sent Spike soulward. I want to make one last comment here, about something that I mentioned way back when I analyzed the Joss-written ep, "Family:" Mr McClain was portrayed in an unflattering way, and he was very wrong in the way he tried to manipulate/shame Tara back to the fold. But he was 100% right in being concerned about Tara's safety. His parental instincts were right on target. What he didn't understand was that Tara preferred to take the risk, and that was Tara's right. I doubt Tara would have chosen differently, even if she'd known what might be ahead. You're safer locked up in your house, but you're not living. So you risk, and sometimes you lose. In many ways, you're sure to lose. No one gets out of this world alive. So you can believe there are NO happy endings, or you can believe that any ending can be a happy ending. I'm not sure anything in between is really valid . . . I mean, that it isn't illusory. I don't mean to sound . . . maudlin or pessimistic, and I don't think Joss does either. He's telling us that the hardest thing to do in the world is live in the world . . . but it is worth doing. Joss loves this world 1000 times more than any writer of stories with classic "happy endings." You can tell, because his stories are about this world, not some alternate world meant to help you escape reality.Ah, well . . . enough, as Pixi says, soapbox. I love you guys! How astute of you both to point out that Joss uses his universe and mythology, not to escape from reality, but to better understand and appreciate it. I was one of the people that was initially discouraged by the lack of a "true happy ending." But I've come to realize that when Buffy says "I love you" to Spike, that is a sign of her elevation into adulthood. She is able to see beyond all the pain she and Spike went through in their not too distant past and love him for what he has become. And when Spike says, "No you don't, but thanks for saying it," he isn't squashing the possibility for a happy ending, he's demonstrating his own elevation into adulthood. He's showing appreciation for the kindness that Buffy has shown him, even when he perhaps didn't deserve it, b ut he's also telling her that he has moved past the obsessive, dysfunctional feelings he had and moved onto something richer, I guess, and more honest. It's sad to me that it is only as he's sacrificing himself that they can communicate in this way, but ultimately they needed to be apart for their own growth. Very bittersweet. So very bittersweet - and much more of a life lesson that if they walked off into the sunset together. Although I guess you could say they each walked off into separate sunsets because of each other. And thanks for that observation! I understood what Buffy meant by her I love you, but I have struggled with Spike's - 'no you don't'. |
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 1, 2009 16:57:48 GMT -5
I love you guys! How astute of you both to point out that Joss uses his universe and mythology, not to escape from reality, but to better understand and appreciate it. I was one of the people that was initially discouraged by the lack of a "true happy ending." But I've come to realize that when Buffy says "I love you" to Spike, that is a sign of her elevation into adulthood. She is able to see beyond all the pain she and Spike went through in their not too distant past and love him for what he has become. And when Spike says, "No you don't, but thanks for saying it," he isn't squashing the possibility for a happy ending, he's demonstrating his own elevation into adulthood. He's showing appreciation for the kindness that Buffy has shown him, even when he perhaps didn't deserve it, b ut he's also telling her that he has moved past the obsessive, dysfunctional feelings he had and moved onto something richer, I guess, and more honest. It's sad to me that it is only as he's sacrificing himself that they can communicate in this way, but ultimately they needed to be apart for their own growth. Very bittersweet. So very bittersweet - and much more of a life lesson that if they walked off into the sunset together. Although I guess you could say they each walked off into separate sunsets because of each other. And thanks for that observation! I understood what Buffy meant by her I love you, but I have struggled with Spike's - 'no you don't'. Yes, I agree with Michelle that Spike is basically expressing his deeper understanding of love. It reminds me very much of the exchange they have in Crush where Spike is saying "I love you" and she tells him, basically "no you don't." Her words are "whatever you're feeling, it's not love." She says this from a place of authority . . . from feeling like she understands love better than he does. It's not that she doesn't believe he's sincere. She's not saying that he's lying to her. She's basically saying: "You think you're in love with me, but I understand love better than you do, and what you're feeling is short of true love." And I think they've switched places by the time we get to Chosen. It's Spike who understands love better than Buffy does, at this point. And I think he's coming from the same place Buffy was, that day, years before, chained up in Spike's basement. I think Spike is saying "whatever you're feeling, it's not love." He knows that Buffy is still cookie-dough . . . he's saying back to her what she said to Angel, earlier . . . she's needs to bake into a fully baked cookie, then she'll be better at loving and understanding love. In Crush Buffy didn't feel Spike really loved her as she defined love, because he didn't have a soul, and that has limited his ability to love and understand love. In Chosen, Spike doesn't feel Buffy really loves him as he defines love, because she's cookie-dough, and that limits her ability to love and understand love. At this point, Spike is literally fully-baked. Practically burnt to crisp, even!  Well, that's off topic, but that is my take on the "No you don't, but thanks for saying it." |
|
