|
Post by Sara on Jul 6, 2005 9:29:52 GMT -5
MY TAKE: If she goaded him into dusting her, I would say she did this unconsciously; that was no act she was putting on - but her final expression does suggest possible unconscious motivation along this line. Agree - also interesting to note the deliberate parallels to Joyce's death (accompanied by Buffy mentioning her mother's death, to Wood, in the ep). William comes home, expecting to find his "dead mother on the couch" but she isn't there. The actress looks something like Joyce, which I think is quite deliberate, as is the whole "mom on the couch," thing.
Like most everything else we see with these two, the deaths of their mothers are paralled - Spike's being a darker version of Buffy's: Both come home and deal with Mom's presence/absence on the couch . . . both try to get Mom back, in their fashion, but both fail in their desperate attempt . . . both go reeling from there.Exactly - and this is reinforced in the AtS finale, when we see the break includes the "hold over him" the Cecily rejection had, as well. He's begun to truly break free of the past with women - a past he perceived as full of hurt and betrayal - and moving forward. How I wish we could have seen more of him. Just as a little side note: although Spike's mother was always just "Mum" during the episode itself, in all of the written credits I've ever seen for "LMPTM" her given name is listed as Anne--which, as well all know, happens to be Buffy's middle name.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon on Jul 6, 2005 10:36:58 GMT -5
Wood has this idealized, child's version of mom still in his head, and he's avoided thinking about his doubts and fears. The "lies your parents tell you," aren't just about the way they might actively lie to you to make the world and themselves and others seem better than it is, but also about a child's tendency to idealize and hero-worship, regardless. Completely agree with your assessment, here, Spring! ;D What kind of lies? Easter bunny, Santa Claus? Dragon
|
|
|
Post by Dragon on Jul 6, 2005 10:58:48 GMT -5
We don't even know that "Aurelian" has beans to do with bloodline - as far as I can tell (unless I missed something in canon, which I could have). You don't need to be, in fact, you likely aren't, "related" to join an "Order." We do know it for those vampires we've had major exposure to, though. The Master sired Darla, Darla sired Angel, Angel sired Dru, Dru sired Spike - all four are "related" by the fact that they trace directly back to the leader of the Order of Aurelius. Which is what "Aurelian" means, in this context. Has nothing to do with any of the other vampires in the room - just those we know were sired by "relatives" of the Master. We don't, however, have any evidence that there's something special about them, just because we have nothing extensive enough to compare them with. Except possibly Harmony, and she provides evidence that there's nothing special about them. While I agree that there's absolutely no evidence in canon to say there IS anything particularly special about the Aurelians (and I personally don't believe that Joss intended there to be), we do have enough data to form a very sketchy hypothesis that something could be different about them. I can guarantee you one thing, If harmony belongs to the Order of A, they don't need to be smart. Look at Angel and Dru, Not exactly the brightest bulbs in the box when they were turned. In reality, William was the smartest of the lot, education wise. As for the fact that he was a virgin when he was turned, and a romantic innocent speaks of the other part of him that wasn't part of his schooling, but a deep seated part of his id, nurtured by his victorian upbringing, apparently without a father figure. His mother was a very important part of his life because she treated him with love and patience. Many parents do not. If she said she loved his poems, she may really have. Ladies were not well educated in those days. In fact, most were taught to run a house, needlework, and other more genteel crafts. Noticebly, most poetry of that time was by men, and also was concidered too racy for ladies to read. It was mentioned earlier that perhaps men could not love their mothers without wanting to f**k them. I hope to hell that is not the case, especially since mine love me very much and I them. Never in my life with them have I considered having sex with either of them. I find that completely wrong and disgusting. Dragon
|
|
|
Post by Dragon on Jul 6, 2005 11:35:51 GMT -5
Nikki said something about "don't go home go to Crowley's house," which makes me think that Spike had accidentally gotten an invite to their place. And Crowley wasn't taking care of Robin while Nikki was patrolling because...? We're never given any explanation, so any number of things are possible. Agree. We just don't have enough to pass judgment on her mothering abilities, just because she happens to have the little guy with her that night. I do think that Wood's mother loved him, but Spike hits the nail on the head (or rather finds the exact right knife to twist in Wood's gut) when he suggests otherwise. Wood has this idealized, child's version of mom still in his head, and he's avoided thinking about his doubts and fears. The "lies your parents tell you," aren't just about the way they might actively lie to you to make the world and themselves and others seem better than it is, but also about a child's tendency to idealize and hero-worship, regardless. The problem I have with Nikki having her son with her is this. If she was slaying, why in God's name would she take him on such a dangerous mission? If she was just out, why, with her knowledge of vampires and demons would she take him out at night where she could be attacked by a vampire. Surely she could take him someplace safer for both of them. Especially if she knew a master vampire was out to get her. I never understood that scenario. Dragon
|
|
|
Post by Dragon on Jul 6, 2005 11:47:20 GMT -5
Hmm. But, as far as we know, Harmony wasn't of the Aurelian bloodline, and she was exactly the same person after she was turned as she was before. With a little more murderousness. I've never liked the Aurelian bloodline explanation, partly because, in my opinion, every vampire we've ever had prolonged exposure to (and witnessed their human lives, as well) turned out to be very similar, at least at first, to the person they were in life. With the possible exception of Spike's mum. The fact that almost all the vampires we've seen extensively have been Aurelian doesn't help to lend evidence for or against the hypothesis, unfortunately - we need more vamps who weren't to compare with. We don't even know that "Aurelian" has beans to do with bloodline - as far as I can tell (unless I missed something in canon, which I could have). You don't need to be, in fact, you likely aren't, "related" to join an "Order." If the Order really meant anything, then all the minions sired by any of them would have been in the same order. But obviously, they were just minions. Darla being sired by the Master and having sired Angelus, was just smarter when she was turned. the Master part comes from having survived a long time. she kept Angelus from getting dusted, and he must have been out getting into trouble just like William or he couldn't have given so much time to Dru. Angelus liked to torture his victims before eating or turning them and Spike went for the joy of the fight . Both actions would call attention to the vampires' presence, and would be dangerous to the four of them. I don't think it has been noted whether they had minions at the time or not. Dragon
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Jul 6, 2005 13:00:05 GMT -5
We don't even know that "Aurelian" has beans to do with bloodline - as far as I can tell (unless I missed something in canon, which I could have). You don't need to be, in fact, you likely aren't, "related" to join an "Order." If the Order really meant anything, then all the minions sired by any of them would have been in the same order. But obviously, they were just minions. Darla being sired by the Master and having sired Angelus, was just smarter when she was turned. the Master part comes from having survived a long time. she kept Angelus from getting dusted, and he must have been out getting into trouble just like William or he couldn't have given so much time to Dru. Angelus liked to torture his victims before eating or turning them and Spike went for the joy of the fight . Both actions would call attention to the vampires' presence, and would be dangerous to the four of them. I don't think it has been noted whether they had minions at the time or not. DragonThe whole minoin thing is interesting in itself. I mean, Harmony had minions! Which is just . . . well, doesn't seem real likely. I mean, I really understoon why everyone laughed at the idea. Also, something else struck me, 'cuz you and others were talking about mum not having to dig her way out of a grave, being on the sofa, etc. I mean, looking at this ep, William must not have been found dead and buried by his family either, right? Because mum wants to know where he’s been, what's going on, etc. - not why he’s not in his grave. But when Buffy comes back from the dead, he does talk about having the experience of digging out of a grave. So, I wonder if there were later times when he perhaps had to play dead, let himself be buried then then dig out? Or something?
|
|
|
Post by Moscow Watcher on Jul 6, 2005 13:51:58 GMT -5
According to the commentaries, writers were looking for an actress who looked like older Buffy This is an excerpt from the beginning of the third act (transcribed by DeborahW, BAPS)
DG - Goddard DF - Fury DB - D.B. Woodside (Principal Robin Wood)
DG I love this scene right here
DF I think I had the best time ever shooting this scene because of James and oh my God I wish I could remember her name
DB was her name Anne?
DG the characters name was Anne which was for those Buffy fans, it’s never mentioned in the script but it’s of course Buffy’s middle name
DB I did not know that
DF so we called her Ann to kind of because you know we wanted, there’s definitely a little bit of a Motherly, there’s a Motherly sort of a symbolic connection here between Spike and his Mother and Buffy and what Buffy’s been to Spike and you know all the oedipal issues that would be involved there it just seemed like a nice touch
DG I remember you running into my office saying we’ve found the woman, she looks like Sarah at that age
DG yeah well she had the blonde hair and she was small, and she was British which was wonderful because part of the thing is finding an actress who can do a good British accent
DF oh I love this scene, this scene our first drafts of this we didn’t push it far enough and Joss came in and said make it more twisted, more twisted. Which I hated hearing of course because I’m like very conservative
JM (laughs) Oh yeah safety first Fury
DF I had to call my Mum and say “Mum I love you very much and this whole scene about possibly having sex with you has nothing to do with it (Laughter)
JM he made me do it, he made me do it Mum
DF and the wonderful thing here is just the matter of fact ness of her cruelty
DG yes it’s beautiful
JM yeah and you worked like a long time for this one
DF she was wonderful because she totally got it, I mean even when she realised “ You know what I’m becoming too arch I’m becoming too villainous” and I’d say yep you’re right , bring it back, just be casual and when she did it was just very chilling I thought and the pain of watching you go through this pain as she’s saying these words to you that’s fascinating and it’s also offered a lot of controversy , there’s been a lot of controversy with my opinions about Spike and about his, the nature of Spike and a lot of people are concerned why is Spike, why is Spike letting her talk to him in that way? Why is he so hurt? He’s a vampire why would he, why does he seem. And I Think that was the point of this episode it was to say Spike is an anomaly in the vampire world, he has some facet of his soul even if it was removed when he became a vampire is still, he has more humanity as a vampire tan most vampires do. We haven’t explained why that is but perhaps something about the character of him as a man and he’s retained it as a vampire
JM yeah I mean it’s a kind of a technicality that you have to explain but it works as the character
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Jul 6, 2005 13:57:28 GMT -5
According to the commentaries, writers were looking for an actress who looked like older Buffy This is an excerpt from the beginning of the third act (transcribed by DeborahW, BAPS) DG - Goddard DF - Fury DB - D.B. Woodside (Principal Robin Wood) DG I love this scene right here
DF I think I had the best time ever shooting this scene because of James and oh my God I wish I could remember her name
DB was her name Anne?
DG the characters name was Anne which was for those Buffy fans, it’s never mentioned in the script but it’s of course Buffy’s middle name
DB I did not know that
DF so we called her Ann to kind of because you know we wanted, there’s definitely a little bit of a Motherly, there’s a Motherly sort of a symbolic connection here between Spike and his Mother and Buffy and what Buffy’s been to Spike and you know all the oedipal issues that would be involved there it just seemed like a nice touch
DG I remember you running into my office saying we’ve found the woman, she looks like Sarah at that age
DG yeah well she had the blonde hair and she was small, and she was British which was wonderful because part of the thing is finding an actress who can do a good British accent
DF oh I love this scene, this scene our first drafts of this we didn’t push it far enough and Joss came in and said make it more twisted, more twisted. Which I hated hearing of course because I’m like very conservative
JM (laughs) Oh yeah safety first Fury
DF I had to call my Mum and say “Mum I love you very much and this whole scene about possibly having sex with you has nothing to do with it (Laughter)
JM he made me do it, he made me do it Mum
DF and the wonderful thing here is just the matter of fact ness of her cruelty
DG yes it’s beautiful
JM yeah and you worked like a long time for this one
DF she was wonderful because she totally got it, I mean even when she realised “ You know what I’m becoming too arch I’m becoming too villainous” and I’d say yep you’re right , bring it back, just be casual and when she did it was just very chilling I thought and the pain of watching you go through this pain as she’s saying these words to you that’s fascinating and it’s also offered a lot of controversy , there’s been a lot of controversy with my opinions about Spike and about his, the nature of Spike and a lot of people are concerned why is Spike, why is Spike letting her talk to him in that way? Why is he so hurt? He’s a vampire why would he, why does he seem. And I Think that was the point of this episode it was to say Spike is an anomaly in the vampire world, he has some facet of his soul even if it was removed when he became a vampire is still, he has more humanity as a vampire tan most vampires do. We haven’t explained why that is but perhaps something about the character of him as a man and he’s retained it as a vampire
JM yeah I mean it’s a kind of a technicality that you have to explain but it works as the character Ooooh! Thanks for posting this! I love the acknowledgement that Spike retained his humanity! He was different and it was his difference that made him such a pleasure to watch! His character was so nicely layered that I found myself sympathizing with him even as early as season 2, when Angelus took Dru from him and he looked so hurt.
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Jul 6, 2005 14:00:39 GMT -5
Completely agree with your assessment, here, Spring! ;D What kind of lies? Easter bunny, Santa Claus? DragonThe lies are mostly about what Spring said, putting one's parents on a pedestal and having them fall off that pedestal and become human beings instead of protectors and god-like figures. They are also about how parents try to protect their children from the harsher aspects of reality in an effort to keep them young and innocent, and when we become adults, we lose some of that innocence and our eyes are opened to some of the more unpleasant facts of life.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 6, 2005 14:43:47 GMT -5
We don't even know that "Aurelian" has beans to do with bloodline - as far as I can tell (unless I missed something in canon, which I could have). You don't need to be, in fact, you likely aren't, "related" to join an "Order." We do know it for those vampires we've had major exposure to, though. The Master sired Darla, Darla sired Angel, Angel sired Dru, Dru sired Spike - all four are "related" by the fact that they trace directly back to the leader of the Order of Aurelius. Which is what "Aurelian" means, in this context. Has nothing to do with any of the other vampires in the room - just those we know were sired by "relatives" of the Master. What I'm not understanding is this: Where in canon do we learn that being "Aurelian" has anything to do with being RELATED to The Master? I'm not saying it isn't there, I'm saying I can't think of anything that has ever told us this. I always had the feeling that the "Order of Aurelius" was for followers of The Master. Whether or not they were related had nothing to do with it. Now, there's nothing in canon for that either . . . just follows, in my mind, from the name "Order of Aurelius." I mean, if I can trace my bloodline back to the leader of the Teamsters Union, that doesn't make me a Teamster. Agree completely, except to me, I'd word it: "There is no evidence in canon there is anything special about being from The Master's bloodline." Again, I may have missed a reference to it, but I can't think of anything in canon that equates being "Aurelian" with being sired (or grand, or great-grandsired, etc) by The Master.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 6, 2005 14:55:12 GMT -5
I think that she loved her son so much, that it overrode underlying, possibly totally or partially unconscious, feelings of being trapped, bored, and the like. She surely must have had those feelings at some level though - that's easy enough to believe. My take is that her negative, repressed feelings came to the surface when she became a vampire. She says something like she no longer dislikes "being cruel," suggesting kindness stayed her tongue in the past. I don't think Spike decided her demon version was "the liar" when it came to whether or not mummy loved his poems absolutely and such. But he did decide - correctly - that his mother, sans demon, would never, ever, have hurt him so cruelly and deliberately. Well - it's irrelevant in the moment, but it's not irrelevant in the long run. His mother did love him and he's not wrong though, I don't think in believing this. The fact that she likely had feelings of being trapped, bored, etc - this doesn't mean she didn't love him. All moms have these feelings sometimes. Not acting on them, and in fact, focusing on the positive and caring for your child anyhow, is part of expressing love to your child. See, this helps me put a finger on something that's been bouncing around the back of my mind - some of the lies our parents tell us are important, and the absolute truth isn't always a good thing. Lies meant to spare feelings are sometimes the "right" choice. Among the things that seem to happen when someone is turned is the loss of all their social inhibitions. Spike's mother was telling the truth, but - it was a hurtful and pointless truth, and one better left unsaid forever. As you say, many if not all parents feel trapped and bored and unsure about wanting to be parents. But they don't TELL that to their children, for the most part. Because it's hurtful and not the most important aspect of their feelings about their children by a long shot. Exactly. Why tell a truth that is hurtful, when there is no point in telling it? The only reason is to be cruel. I thought Wood's mom was trying to instill the right values in little Wood, and also trying to explain to him why Mom was gone so much - and not really thinking how it might sound to him: "My mission is more important to me than YOU." So it had a purpose, I think - wasn't pointless honesty, just to be cruel. It was thoughtless maybe, but not the deliberate, get-your-jollies cruelty that William's mom displayed about turning. So - there are degrees involved, I'd say. William's mom before turning is way on one end of the Kindness-Cruelty spectrum . . . she won't criticize William, or take the slighest chance of hurting him, even when really, it might be best to gently direct him toward finding another outlet for his creativity than poetry writing. Wood's mom is certainly on the kind end as well, but a little farther toward cruel. She isn't being pointlessly cruel, or intentionally cruel, or overly cruel. She's passing on her world-view to Robin and she's trying to explain to him, what she does, and why. William's mom after turning - she's gone completely over to the cruel side.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 6, 2005 14:57:25 GMT -5
Completely agree with your assessment, here, Spring! ;D What kind of lies? Easter bunny, Santa Claus? DragonYes, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and other things - maybe telling you that grandpa went on vacation when he really went to jail - generally the "rose-colored" glasses stuff that is told to children.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 6, 2005 14:59:38 GMT -5
Agree. We just don't have enough to pass judgment on her mothering abilities, just because she happens to have the little guy with her that night. I do think that Wood's mother loved him, but Spike hits the nail on the head (or rather finds the exact right knife to twist in Wood's gut) when he suggests otherwise. Wood has this idealized, child's version of mom still in his head, and he's avoided thinking about his doubts and fears. The "lies your parents tell you," aren't just about the way they might actively lie to you to make the world and themselves and others seem better than it is, but also about a child's tendency to idealize and hero-worship, regardless. The problem I have with Nikki having her son with her is this. If she was slaying, why in God's name would she take him on such a dangerous mission? If she was just out, why, with her knowledge of vampires and demons would she take him out at night where she could be attacked by a vampire. Surely she could take him someplace safer for both of them. Especially if she knew a master vampire was out to get her. I never understood that scenario. DragonAgree. Basically, I don't think we're told enough to understand it. We just know they were out together at night. By itself, kind of hard to judge.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jul 6, 2005 15:04:25 GMT -5
If the Order really meant anything, then all the minions sired by any of them would have been in the same order. But obviously, they were just minions. Darla being sired by the Master and having sired Angelus, was just smarter when she was turned. the Master part comes from having survived a long time. she kept Angelus from getting dusted, and he must have been out getting into trouble just like William or he couldn't have given so much time to Dru. Angelus liked to torture his victims before eating or turning them and Spike went for the joy of the fight . Both actions would call attention to the vampires' presence, and would be dangerous to the four of them. I don't think it has been noted whether they had minions at the time or not. DragonThe whole minoin thing is interesting in itself. I mean, Harmony had minions! Which is just . . . well, doesn't seem real likely. I mean, I really understoon why everyone laughed at the idea. Also, something else struck me, 'cuz you and others were talking about mum not having to dig her way out of a grave, being on the sofa, etc. I mean, looking at this ep, William must not have been found dead and buried by his family either, right? Because mum wants to know where he’s been, what's going on, etc. - not why he’s not in his grave. But when Buffy comes back from the dead, he does talk about having the experience of digging out of a grave. So, I wonder if there were later times when he perhaps had to play dead, let himself be buried then then dig out? Or something? Well - I guess Dru & Co could have buried him, or if he had been found without ID of any type, he could have been buried in a pauper's grave or something.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Jul 6, 2005 15:47:45 GMT -5
Agree. We just don't have enough to pass judgment on her mothering abilities, just because she happens to have the little guy with her that night. I do think that Wood's mother loved him, but Spike hits the nail on the head (or rather finds the exact right knife to twist in Wood's gut) when he suggests otherwise. Wood has this idealized, child's version of mom still in his head, and he's avoided thinking about his doubts and fears. The "lies your parents tell you," aren't just about the way they might actively lie to you to make the world and themselves and others seem better than it is, but also about a child's tendency to idealize and hero-worship, regardless. The problem I have with Nikki having her son with her is this. If she was slaying, why in God's name would she take him on such a dangerous mission? If she was just out, why, with her knowledge of vampires and demons would she take him out at night where she could be attacked by a vampire. Surely she could take him someplace safer for both of them. Especially if she knew a master vampire was out to get her. I never understood that scenario. DragonHmm...I never thought that she had taken Robin out on patrol. My sense has always been that Spike trailed and attacked her while she was en route somewhere else. Which is why when it came to the real knock-down drag out, she sent him home. I can see her saying, "Weird things might happen when we're out together, son. So please do exactly what I say without arguing exactly when I tell you to do it."
|
|