|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 16, 2003 17:21:15 GMT -5
I think Buffy was discovering her sexuality and coming to terms with the power she had over men, too. It'a a scary thing, having someone so in love with you they are willing to die. That is an interesting thought. I had not thought of that. Now that you mention it, it is interesting idea that Buffy is discovering her sexual power over men. Who can forget how insecure she felt with Angel? ("Wasn't I good?") An insecurity that deepened because she was talking to Angelus, not Angel. Her next sexual encounter was with Parker. Doesn't Buffy infer that she wasn't 'good' enough so he dumped her? Riley doesn't neatly fit the pattern in the sense that Buffy seemed to have confidence in her ability to please Riley, but perhaps the fact that towards the end of her relationship he failed to please her quite so well made her doubt her real sexual power. (There is no merit in pleasing the easily-pleased.) I don't think that Buffy was capable of making a rational decision in season 6, but Spike is an interesting choice in terms of your hypothesis. Spike is a vampire, therefore has super strength and stamina and he witnesed her humiliating discussion with Parker. I think that Spike was chosen by Buffy because she was attracted to him, he had no moral standards to judge her and there were no other males around except Giles (her father-figure - yuk!) and Xander (her engaged, psuedo-brother - yuk!). However, Spike's presence at her humiliation with Parker may have given the relationship an extra fillip. The thought of sexual power then returns the whole issue back to the original discussion of sexual power within relationships. I think, but I am not sure, that it is a Marxist concept that women use sexual power within relationships and certainly that is what Anya does, with mixed success. I think Marx thought this was a type of prostitution which why JW was probably not so keen on the concept (judging from Anya's mixed results). I will think more on this issue. (Thanks for th thought, Karen). This is an edit: I have just re-read your message and seen the left of field comment. LOL (Sorry, I did not mean to politicise your post. It was unintentional.)
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 16, 2003 17:28:05 GMT -5
I'm reading it all now and thoroughly engrossed, not to mention awestruck at both of your (Kerrie & Spring) insights. You guys think real good. and HAPPY BIRTHDAY KERRIEThanks Deborah.
|
|
|
Post by makd on Sept 16, 2003 17:35:13 GMT -5
Just to let you all know that I have been following what you've said with much interest. I am working on a paper for presentation at a sociological conference in the spring. the topic? Love in the Buffyverse, using the theories of John Lee and Lasswell and Lobsenz. I am also working on a second paper on the same topic, using a more social-psychological approach. While my paper will not focus on the model under discussion, I am nonetheless interested in hearing all your thoughts on what's been presented. Very interesting, very thoughtful. I haven't said anything because, frankly, I don't want to muddy up the conversation with alternate theories! If I brought up more theories, we'd need a new Part to cover the discussion. Point is? Love in the buffyverse is interesting, complicated, textured, and ready for constant discussion. I think the typology Kerrie has raised has yielded a wonderful discussion, a thoughtful discussion, and I am grateful for it! God, what a wonderful group this is! I am so lucky that you have welcomed me. okay. that moment is finished. Back to discussion. More food for thought, please?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 16, 2003 18:43:57 GMT -5
Just to let you all know that I have been following what you've said with much interest. I am working on a paper for presentation at a sociological conference in the spring. the topic? Love in the Buffyverse, using the theories of John Lee and Lasswell and Lobsenz. I am also working on a second paper on the same topic, using a more social-psychological approach. While my paper will not focus on the model under discussion, I am nonetheless interested in hearing all your thoughts on what's been presented. Very interesting, very thoughtful. I haven't said anything because, frankly, I don't want to muddy up the conversation with alternate theories! If I brought up more theories, we'd need a new Part to cover the discussion. Point is? Love in the buffyverse is interesting, complicated, textured, and ready for constant discussion. I think the typology Kerrie has raised has yielded a wonderful discussion, a thoughtful discussion, and I am grateful for it! God, what a wonderful group this is! I am so lucky that you have welcomed me. okay. that moment is finished. Back to discussion. More food for thought, please? Thanks, Makd. Now you have made me mentally leave my first year psychology text-book and physically reach for the second year psychology text-book (Baron and Byrne, 1991). I have a feeling that we did not cover the chapter on relationships, but it has been awhile. Hopefully I will find the theorists that you mentioned. Otherwise I think you should do the summary of their theories. I don't think it will matter if this part is a bit long (even if it confuses the hell out of Vlad and the other technopagons). I think it is wrong to curtail an interesting discussion because it seems a bit complicated, but I could be wrong. Other S'Cubies feel free to correct me. Edit - I found the names that you mentioned and it looks like I screwed up Sternberg's triangular model of love. Who would have thought that I could make a mistake?!
|
|
|
Post by Laura on Sept 16, 2003 19:50:32 GMT -5
Thanks, Makd. Now you have made me mentally leave my first year psychology text-book and physically reach for the second year psychology text-book (Baron and Byrne, 1991). I have a feeling that we did not cover the chapter on relationships, but it has been awhile. Hopefully I will find the theorists that you mentioned. Otherwise I think you should do the summary of their theories. I don't think it will matter if this part is a bit long (even if it confuses the hell out of Vlad and the other technopagons). I think it is wrong to curtail an interesting discussion because it seems a bit complicated, but I could be wrong. Other S'Cubies feel free to correct me. Edit - I found the names that you mentioned and it looks like I screwed up Sternberg's triangular model of love. Who would have thought that I could make a mistake?! I don't see any reason why this particular discussion needs to be curtailed. I'm enjoying the dialogue between Kerrie and Spring, and the comments that Deborah, Eg and Makd have made only add to the discussion. If we can go on and on for 500 posts just on "stuff," I don't see why you shouldn't go on for 500 posts on something as weighty as love and sexuality.
Actually, I'll rock the boat a little here. I've never taken a particular side as a Spuffy or a Bangel -- I've believed (and I agree with Spring) that each relationship was extremely important to Buffy based on where she was in terms of her own development (and I here disclaim any "knowledge" of psychology -- never took a course in my life). And I also believe that she ultimately is not going to end up with either Angel or Spike -- she's grown past both of them (or will be by the time she's finished being cookies).
Buffy, I think, is already wise beyond her years. She has much in the way of life experience. She needs someone who understands not only her, not only who she is, but also who she can be. And, needless to say, at this point, she needs someone with a heartbeat. For those (and lots of other) reasons, I think that ultimately Buffy needs to be with Giles.
Now, I know that there have already been "yuks" and "ewwws" expressed about that notion. All I can say is, Giles is not Buffy's father -- and even though he may have been her "father-figure" for a period of time, he has not been around for a while. Things can change.
And if this world can accept Woody and Soon-Yi, there's room for Buffy and Giles.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 16, 2003 21:03:06 GMT -5
That is an interesting thought. I had not thought of that. Now that you mention it, it is interesting idea that Buffy is discovering her sexual power over men. Who can forget how insecure she felt with Angel? ("Wasn't I good?") An insecurity that deepened because she was talking to Angelus, not Angel. Her next sexual encounter was with Parker. Doesn't Buffy infer that she wasn't 'good' enough so he dumped her? Riley doesn't neatly fit the pattern in the sense that Buffy seemed to have confidence in her ability to please Riley, but perhaps the fact that towards the end of her relationship he failed to please her quite so well made her doubt her real sexual power. (There is no merit in pleasing the easily-pleased.) I don't think that Buffy was capable of making a rational decision in season 6, but Spike is an interesting choice in terms of your hypothesis. Spike is a vampire, therefore has super strength and stamina and he witnesed her humiliating discussion with Parker. I think that Spike was chosen by Buffy because she was attracted to him, he had no moral standards to judge her and there were no other males around except Giles (her father-figure - yuk!) and Xander (her engaged, psuedo-brother - yuk!). However, Spike's presence at her humiliation with Parker may have given the relationship an extra fillip. The thought of sexual power then returns the whole issue back to the original discussion of sexual power within relationships. I think, but I am not sure, that it is a Marxist concept that women use sexual power within relationships and certainly that is what Anya does, with mixed success. I think Marx thought this was a type of prostitution which why JW was probably not so keen on the concept (judging from Anya's mixed results). I will think more on this issue. (Thanks for th thought, Karen). This is an edit: I have just re-read your message and seen the left of field comment. LOL (Sorry, I did not mean to politicise your post. It was unintentional.) I don't mind that you "politicized" my post, which I'm not sure you really did anyway. I appreciate that I might have stimulated anyone thoughts at all. I hope you don't think I was referring to "left" in a political way. It's just an expression - like sort of getting off-track on the discussion somewhat. Power and sex. Very Victorian Era thinking. I think Buffy was more a modern heroine in that the sexual part of her nature wasn't "used" in that way - to gain an advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 17, 2003 0:56:15 GMT -5
I don't see any reason why this particular discussion needs to be curtailed. I'm enjoying the dialogue between Kerrie and Spring, and the comments that Deborah, Eg and Makd have made only add to the discussion. If we can go on and on for 500 posts just on "stuff," I don't see why you shouldn't go on for 500 posts on something as weighty as love and sexuality.
Actually, I'll rock the boat a little here. I've never taken a particular side as a Spuffy or a Bangel -- I've believed (and I agree with Spring) that each relationship was extremely important to Buffy based on where she was in terms of her own development (and I here disclaim any "knowledge" of psychology -- never took a course in my life). And I also believe that she ultimately is not going to end up with either Angel or Spike -- she's grown past both of them (or will be by the time she's finished being cookies).
Buffy, I think, is already wise beyond her years. She has much in the way of life experience. She needs someone who understands not only her, not only who she is, but also who she can be. And, needless to say, at this point, she needs someone with a heartbeat. For those (and lots of other) reasons, I think that ultimately Buffy needs to be with Giles.
Now, I know that there have already been "yuks" and "ewwws" expressed about that notion. All I can say is, Giles is not Buffy's father -- and even though he may have been her "father-figure" for a period of time, he has not been around for a while. Things can change.
And if this world can accept Woody and Soon-Yi, there's room for Buffy and Giles. I like your reasoning and will agree with Buffy probably needing someone as old/wise as Giles, but I am still going yuk to Giles being 'the one'.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 7:22:43 GMT -5
I like your reasoning and will agree with Buffy probably needing someone as old/wise as Giles, but I am still going yuk to Giles being 'the one'. GILES: Well, I too get a kind of "ewww" reaction, but putting that aside, I still put Giles in the "no way" category. Anything remotely "father-figure" like would be out for "fully-baked" Buffy. Ending up with Giles doesn't fit the plan as I THINK Joss has set it up, anymore than being with Angel or Spike would. She's not moving backward, and certainly not toward selecting a "fatherly" mate.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 7:26:10 GMT -5
That is an interesting thought. I had not thought of that. Now that you mention it, it is interesting idea that Buffy is discovering her sexual power over men. Who can forget how insecure she felt with Angel? ("Wasn't I good?") An insecurity that deepened because she was talking to Angelus, not Angel. Her next sexual encounter was with Parker. Doesn't Buffy infer that she wasn't 'good' enough so he dumped her? Riley doesn't neatly fit the pattern in the sense that Buffy seemed to have confidence in her ability to please Riley, but perhaps the fact that towards the end of her relationship he failed to please her quite so well made her doubt her real sexual power. (There is no merit in pleasing the easily-pleased.) I don't think that Buffy was capable of making a rational decision in season 6, but Spike is an interesting choice in terms of your hypothesis. Spike is a vampire, therefore has super strength and stamina and he witnesed her humiliating discussion with Parker. I think that Spike was chosen by Buffy because she was attracted to him, he had no moral standards to judge her and there were no other males around except Giles (her father-figure - yuk!) and Xander (her engaged, psuedo-brother - yuk!). However, Spike's presence at her humiliation with Parker may have given the relationship an extra fillip. The thought of sexual power then returns the whole issue back to the original discussion of sexual power within relationships. I think, but I am not sure, that it is a Marxist concept that women use sexual power within relationships and certainly that is what Anya does, with mixed success. I think Marx thought this was a type of prostitution which why JW was probably not so keen on the concept (judging from Anya's mixed results). I will think more on this issue. (Thanks for th thought, Karen). This is an edit: I have just re-read your message and seen the left of field comment. LOL (Sorry, I did not mean to politicise your post. It was unintentional.) Definitely, there are things being said about sexual power in Season 6 - witness all the back and forth on the "who's on top" and who's slamming who against the wall, and who's doing the . . . pumping. Power, power, power, power - control, power. There's a lot going in with that Spuffy-sex stuff. It's hard to get very analytical when I am actually watching it, since I find that my thinking gets a bit cloudy - it should be a challenge to truly dig in and analyze it objectively. I mean, how do I keep the blood flowing adequately to my brain? Sex - that's another thing explored in Season 6 of course, the way it interferes with brain function.
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 9:10:26 GMT -5
<snip> I don't think that Buffy was capable of making a rational decision in season 6, but Spike is an interesting choice in terms of your hypothesis. Spike is a vampire, therefore has super strength and stamina and he witnesed her humiliating discussion with Parker. I think that Spike was chosen by Buffy because she was attracted to him, he had no moral standards to judge her and there were no other males around except Giles (her father-figure - yuk!) and Xander (her engaged, psuedo-brother - yuk!). However, Spike's presence at her humiliation with Parker may have given the relationship an extra fillip. <snip> I know other people have covered this but I just wanted to say anyway that besides her undeniable sexual attraction to Spike and the benefits of his vampire strength and stamina I think there were other good reasons why Buffy chose him as a sexual partner. His love for her, his outsider status and her ambivilance toward him meant that she felt free to be herself without any sense of obligation to protect or spare his feelings. She could take out her all self hatred, vent her repressed anger against her friends and unleash all the venom she felt inside without tarnishing her sister or the Scoobies. In that light I guess he was convenient. And Laura, sorry. I'm firmly in the "ewwww" camp when it comes to envisioning any future romantic involvement between Buffy and Giles. To me it feels utterly incestuous.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 9:37:01 GMT -5
I know other people have covered this but I just wanted to say anyway that besides her undeniable sexual attraction to Spike and the benefits of his vampire strength and stamina I think there were other good reasons why Buffy chose him as a sexual partner. His love for her, his outsider status and her ambivilance toward him meant that she felt free to be herself without any sense of obligation to protect or spare his feelings. She could take out her all self hatred, vent her repressed anger against her friends and unleash all the venom she felt inside without tarnishing her sister or the Scoobies. In that light I guess he wasconvenient. And Laura, sorry. I'm firmly in the "ewwww" camp when it comes to envisioning any future romantic involvement between Buffy and Giles. To me it feels utterly incestuous. Yeah - huge ewwww factor with Giles for me too. But even if you can get past that, I can't see it fitting into the "Buffy continues her journey of growth" scenario. I agree with all you say here, deb, about Spike being someone Buffy could "vent on" guiltlessly - or at least she thought he would be - but I think she ended up feeling some major guilt over her relationship with Spike - for many reasons, including her abuse of him. That was part of the reason she broke up with him. As she realized when she saw Spike's beaten, human face, and later as she cried with Tara, as she sobbed while filled with guilt and self-loathing, she was using him, and it was wrong. I think the word "convenient" for Spike is just not the right word here . . . I mean, he's such a very very inconvenient choice in so many many ways . . . when it comes to sex, anyhow. If Buffy had just been looking for sex, picking up some guy at The Bronze now and then would have been much, much simpler and more convenient. But I see what you're getting at, deb. Buffy was never looking for "just sex." She was looking to "feel" again, and to release her pent up feelings. And Spike was a great punching bag/scapegoat. As he sings to her - he's her "willing slave." Season 6 was all about Buffy exploring her darkside - and ultimately, learning to love and accept it an integrate it, etc. It was such a great and brilliantly done Season. The flack Joss knew he would take, and was willing to take, for going ahead with it just as he did makes it all the more remarkable to me. Brilliant and gutsy and the best thing on TV.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 17, 2003 9:39:24 GMT -5
I don't see any reason why this particular discussion needs to be curtailed. I'm enjoying the dialogue between Kerrie and Spring, and the comments that Deborah, Eg and Makd have made only add to the discussion. If we can go on and on for 500 posts just on "stuff," I don't see why you shouldn't go on for 500 posts on something as weighty as love and sexuality.
Actually, I'll rock the boat a little here. I've never taken a particular side as a Spuffy or a Bangel -- I've believed (and I agree with Spring) that each relationship was extremely important to Buffy based on where she was in terms of her own development (and I here disclaim any "knowledge" of psychology -- never took a course in my life). And I also believe that she ultimately is not going to end up with either Angel or Spike -- she's grown past both of them (or will be by the time she's finished being cookies).
Buffy, I think, is already wise beyond her years. She has much in the way of life experience. She needs someone who understands not only her, not only who she is, but also who she can be. And, needless to say, at this point, she needs someone with a heartbeat. For those (and lots of other) reasons, I think that ultimately Buffy needs to be with Giles.
Now, I know that there have already been "yuks" and "ewwws" expressed about that notion. All I can say is, Giles is not Buffy's father -- and even though he may have been her "father-figure" for a period of time, he has not been around for a while. Things can change.
And if this world can accept Woody and Soon-Yi, there's room for Buffy and Giles. Giles and Buffy? Well, I guess an argument can be made that they have now established a relationship which is equal. That would lead to a stable working partnership. And if the show was to go on, maybe their relationship might have turned into and "office romance". Whether or not it progressed would depend on whether or not JW felt that Buffy had "baked" enough. Or he could have her progress into a marriage and then divorce - following the dark side of life he likes to explore.
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 11:50:24 GMT -5
<snip> I agree with all you say here, deb, about Spike being someone Buffy could "vent on" guiltlessly - or at least she thought he would be - but I think she ended up feeling some major guilt over her relationship with Spike - for many reasons, including her abuse of him. That was part of the reason she broke up with him. As she realized when she saw Spike's beaten, human face, and later as she cried with Tara, as she sobbed while filled with guilt and self-loathing, she was using him, and it was wrong. <snip> Well, I kinda havta respectfully disagree about Buffy's guilt over using and abusing Spike. Not that didn't she didn't ultimately feel it, at least to some extent, but I disagree about the timing. My impression has always been that when she finally stops pummeling Spike's face into jelly it isn't out of any sense of guilt but because she is appalled at the sudden realization that her blows against him are really an expression of her own self hatred and fear over what she has become. I dunno, you've described that beating far better than I can, Spring. But I believe that if she'd felt any guilt about unjustly beating up Spike then she wouldn't have abandoned him in that alley with no thought or concern for his condition. Again, my take on her tearful confession to Tara was that her sobs were due to her own self loathing. She felt so dirty and disgusted with herself for sinking so low as to engage in relations with Spike that she couldn't bear the idea of Tara's condoning the relationship or forgiving her for it. She couldn't forgive herself. As for the break-up, I'd always seen Buffy's motives as entirely selfish. Not that being selfish was a bad thing in that situation. As she said to Spike, she needed to be strong. I agree that for the sake of her own mental health and recovery she did indeed need to be strong and end their abusive and dysfunctional relationship. But in telling him that she's using him and that it's killing her she is merely recognizing and citing the damage their relationship is causing her. Never once does she acknowledge or voice any concern over the damage it's causing Spike. The first and only expression of remorse I've ever seen Buffy express over her mis-treatment of Spike during their torrid affair was addressed to Soon-to-be-reduced-to-big-pile-of-dust Holden Webster. Yes, I understand and appreciate that Buffy came to recognize Spike's worth, to trust, respect and to care for him deeply and to defend him against her friends. I'm just saying that except for that secret confession to Holden pile-of-dust Webster I never saw Buffy express any guilt, whereas Spike was for a long time consumed with it. Remember that scene in the school basement when Buffy came down asking if he knew anything about who or what was threatening Cassie? And he tells her that he's a bad man because he hurt the girl, he hurt her. But Buffy, although she did come to acknowedge the guilt she felt in her heart never expressed it to Spike or any of her friends. She kept that secret.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 12:14:15 GMT -5
Well, I kinda havta respectfully disagree about Buffy's guilt over using and abusing Spike. Not that didn't she didn't ultimately feel it, at least to some extent, but I disagree about the timing. My impression has always been that when she finally stops pummeling Spike's face into jelly it isn't out of any sense of guilt but because she is appalled at the sudden realization that her blows against him are really an expression of her own self hatred and fear over what she has become. I dunno, you've described that beating far better than I can, Spring. But I believe that if she'd felt any guilt about unjustly beating up Spike then she wouldn't have abandoned him in that alley with no thought or concern for his condition. Again, my take on her tearful confession to Tara was that her sobs were due to her own self loathing. She felt so dirty and disgusted with herself for sinking so low as to engage in relations with Spike that she couldn't bear the idea of Tara's condoning the relationship or forgiving her for it. She couldn't forgive herself. As for the break-up, I'd always seen Buffy's motives as entirely selfish. Not that being selfish was a bad thing in that situation. As she said to Spike, she needed to be strong. I agree that for the sake of her own mental health and recovery she did indeed need to be strong and end their abusive and dysfunctional relationship. But in telling him that she's using him and that it's killing her she is merely recognizing and citing the damage their relationship is causing her. Never once does she acknowledge or voice any concern over the damage it's causing Spike. The first and only expression of remorse I've ever seen Buffy express over her mis-treatment of Spike during their torrid affair was addressed to Soon-to-be-reduced-to-big-pile-of-dust Holden Webster. Yes, I understand and appreciate that Buffy came to recognize Spike's worth, to trust, respect and to care for him deeply and to defend him against her friends. I'm just saying that except for that secret confession to Holden pile-of-dust Webster I never saw Buffy express any guilt, whereas Spike was for a long time consumed with it. Remember that scene in the school basement when Buffy came down asking if he knew anything about who or what was threatening Cassie? And he tells her that he's a bad man because he hurt the girl, he hurt her. But Buffy, although she did come to acknowedge the guilt she felt in her heart never expressed it to Spike or any of her friends. She kept that secret. deb - here is what Buffy says to Tara in Dead ThingsTARA: Do you love him? I-It's okay if you do. He's done a lot of good, and, and he does love you. A-and Buffy, it's okay if you don't. You're going through a really hard time, and you're...
BUFFY: What? Using him? What's okay about that?
TARA: It's not that simple.
BUFFY: It is! It's wrong. I'm wrong. Tell me that I'm wrong, please... Please don't forgive me, please... (sobbing) Please don't... Please don't forgive me...She is plainly realizing that using Spike is wrong. And here is what she says to Spike in breaking up with him: BUFFY: I'm using you. I can't love you. I'm just ... being weak, and selfish...
SPIKE: Really not complaining here.
BUFFY: ...and it's killing me. I have to be strong about this. I'm sorry ... William.She tells him "it's killing me" in response to him saying that HE is not complaining. She understands that HE doesn't mind. But telling him it's "killing" HER is a very good way to get through to him. It would have made no sense for her to say "this is bad for you" when he just finished telling her that he doesn't care about himself. But she knows that he does care about HER. So she is smart and right to make the point that it is hurting HER as well. This gets through to Spike. He may not mind, but SHE does. Also note that she does say she is sorry here. I don't think Buffy makes the "self-hatred" realization just yet, not in Dead Things. She's not that far advanced in her thinking yet. She's just appalled at herself, at what she has done to Spike - but she's still very screwed up and doesn't understand what she's done or why she's done it. Note that she's trying to turn herself in to the authorities. I agree that she's not showing concern for Spike here - of course not. She leaves him lying there. But that is different from saying she feels no guilt. Sometimes, when you are all screwed up and you feel really guilty about something, what you do is try to run away from it, not fix it.
|
|
|
Post by makd on Sept 17, 2003 12:31:00 GMT -5
I need to share this! I just finished the second version of an extremely long (and, I must say, modestly so), extremely erudite response supporting Deborah's thesis and ewwing (remarkably) the Giles/Buffy pairing. However, since I have lost each to the vagaries of this antiquated, mother!@#$%^&*()_+computer, I will try again at my computer at home. thing is, after 45 minutes of typing, then re-typing, I am so pissed.....but I had to vent. Thanks for reading the vent and being with me on this.
|
|