|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 12:46:29 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. Makd, you have my sympathies. That is so very frustrating. Don't you just want to scream? Don't you just want to vent your rage in an outpouring of physical violence against the moniter? Not that I'm advising it but if you do, let me know if you feel guilty afterwards and if so why. It would help me gather my thoughts together. Anyway, been there, done that, got the T-Shirt. I'll look forward to reading your post later. In the mean time I have to re-read Spring's last response to me and consider at least partially reversing my opinion because a lot of what she says makes sense (as usual).
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 14:05:33 GMT -5
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. But consider the dialogue that preceeds that: TARA Buffy, I promise there's nothing wrong with you. BUFFY There has to be! Tara's shocked by the intensity of that. BUFFY (cont'd) This isn't me. It can't be me. Buffy starts to cry, the emotions she's been desperately holding in finally spilling out. BUFFY (cont'd) Why do I feel like this? Why do I let Spike do those things to me? TARA You mean hit you? Buffy's shame is overwhelming. She can't even look at Tara. Tara starts to understand. TARA (cont'd) Oh. (really getting it) Oh. Really? BUFFY He's everything I hate. Everything I'm suppose to be against. But the only time I feel anything is when we... Don't tell anyone. Please. TARA I won't. BUFFY The way they would look at me... I couldn't. TARA I won't tell anyone. I wouldn't do that. BUFFY You don't know how hard it is. Lying to everyone you love about who you're sleeping with. TEXTTARA (smiling kindly) Sweetie, I'm a fag. I been there.BUFFY Why can't I stop? Why do I keep letting him in? So, I think her cries to Tara about wrongness apply at least if not more to her deep sense of shame about being with a creature she views as contemptible and who she knows her friends all loathe. I agree that she is also insisting that using him is wrong but I believe that here she is concerned with her own self image. She wants to be a good person. She knows that good people don't selfishly use others. But I see no regard for Spike's feelings here. I agree. Good point. Yeah, I think you're probably right here too. Buffy's appalled at the realization that she had been capable of of unleashing such a violent and prolonged attack against someone not even trying to defend himself. But I really believe that again, she is more concerned with her own self image than with Spike's safety and condition. But everything you say here rings true. Thanks for your insightful and thoughtful response. You did broaden my perspective about this a bit. I know we've had this discussion on the board before but I gotta say again how much I miss all the dialogues that were so conspicuous by their absence. All the things that needed to be said to resolve past hurts and misunderstandings, to heal wounds left open or badly scarred, that were left unsaid. And one of the discussions I miss most would have been Buffy telling Spike what she told Holden. That said, Joss/ME did a beautiful job of slowly and realistically rebuilding Spike and Buffy's shattered relationship over the course of the S7. The passing of the flashlight in "Beneath You" compared to the passing of the flashlight in "Potential" are among favorite images, symbolic of Buffy's progression from suspicious and wary to unreserved trust. My only complaint was not what we saw but what was ommitted, including but certainly not limited to an apology from Buffy to Spike. But I also realize that Spike would very likely have refused it, that he would have denied that he deserved it. If she had insisted that she owed him an apology I can easily imagine him saying "No you don't. But thanks for saying it." I wonder why.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 14:36:31 GMT -5
<snip> TEXTTARA (smiling kindly) Sweetie, I'm a fag. I been there.BUFFY Why can't I stop? Why do I keep letting him in? So, I think her cries to Tara about wrongness apply at least if not more to her deep sense of shame about being with a creature she views as contemptible and who she knows her friends all loathe. I agree that she is also insisting that using him is wrong but I believe that here she is concerned with her own self image. She wants to be a good person. She knows that good people don't selfishly use others. But I see no regard for Spike's feelings here. First, thanks for the laugh on the "textara." And - oh right - I definitely agree. I never said she had regard for Spike's feelings at this point. Just that she was feeling guilty and knew what she was doing was just plain wrong, wrong, wrong. She was ashamed of the whole ugly thing. She does begin to show regard for his feelings when she breaks up with him. I couldn't help but notice how she prettied up for him and seemed to be wearing something kind of "Victorian" looking, as if she had chosen something she thought he would like. And she choses her words carefully and is gentle, etc. I agree she's not concerned with Spike's safety. And she is concerned with her self-image, but I think it is more than that. She has a strong sense of right and wrong that she's been supressing, and it is starting to hit her right between the eyes how very very WRONG this is. I do hate to get my hopes up, but I kinda think that we might see a little of that if SMG guest stars on AtS. I mean, Buffy being very good to, and very appreciative of Spike. I doubt they will go back and rehash old arguments or pick at old wounds, but still, we might see some good stuff. Maybe. I don't plan to count on it, but . . . maybe. Buffy may not have apologized to Spike in so many words, but her actions and her words of trust and support nevertheless acted as an apology. What do you need with an apology when someone has just told you they "believe in you" despite your incredibly checkered past, and then rescues you, etc? Also -remember how Spike tells Buffy that he can't say he's sorry for trying to rape her, he can't ask her to forgive him? I think there is something of that going on here too. Some things are just beyond asking for or expecting apologies or giving apologies. I think that both Buffy & Spike know that. They are extremely blunt with each other in Season 7 ("you tried to rape me," "you used me," etc), and they do clear the air. They apologize with actions, not words. Think how much better the Buffy & Spike's history and problems were dealt with than Buffy & Willow. They never even had those blunt conversations - really disappointing. I think a lot of "what was omitted" was due to time and plot constraints. So much to do, so little time, so much confusion about the next season or spinoff - and Joss too distracted elsewhere. Sigh. But it's done now.
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 15:10:55 GMT -5
<snip> She does begin to show regard for his feelings when she breaks up with him. I couldn't help but notice how she prettied up for him and seemed to be wearing something kind of "Victorian" looking, as if she had chosen something she thought he would like. And she choses her words carefully and is gentle, etc. Yeah. She gets all dressed up in a fetching costume he's quite likely to favor, fixes her hair and makeup real pretty so she'll look her best for him while she proceeds to break his heart. Presenting herself for the occassion in such a pretty package was more of a declaration that she was ready and resolved to be good to herself and to take care of herself from then on rather than out of any desire to win Spike's admiration. 'Cause rather than softening the blow wouldn't that be kind of mean or vindictive? Sort of like Harmony in "Crush" sticking her tush out at Spike and telling him to take a good look because he wouldn't be seeing it anymore. I do agree that she handled the break-up in a thoughtful and gentle manner though. I don't dare to hope out loud but I'm hoping in my heart. <snip>
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 17, 2003 15:20:53 GMT -5
Yeah. She gets all dressed up in a fetching costume he's quite likely to favor, fixes her hair and makeup real pretty so she'll look her best for him while she proceeds to break his heart. Presenting herself for the occassion in such a pretty package was more of a declaration that she was ready and resolved to be good to herself and to take care of herself from then on rather than out of any desire to win Spike's admiration. 'Cause rather than softening the blow wouldn't that be kind of mean or vindictive? Sort of like Harmony in "Crush" sticking her tush out at Spike and telling him to take a good look because he wouldn't be seeing it anymore. I do agree that she handled the break-up in a thoughtful and gentle manner though. I don't dare to hope out loud but I'm hoping in my heart. <snip> No, I really saw Buffy dressing up as a gesture of respect for Spike. I just try to imagine myself in her position. I am going to go break up with a guy, and I know it is going to hurt him, so I think up words that are gentle but firm. I dress up nicely, in something he will think of as very nice, rather than just wearing old jeans and a ratty sweatshirt - to show him I understand that this is a significant event - not something casual and meaningless to me. She just doesn't come off as trying to be thoughtless in that break-up scene. It seems like she has put a lot of thought into how she is going to handle it, and there is no indication that "deliberately more hurtful than in needs to be" is part of the plan. I don't think she is trying to taunt him with "look at what a tasty morsel you are losing" ala Harmony. The outfit isn't particularly sexy. It just shows she put thought and care into it. I think it is saying, "this isn't a casual thing I am doing, and I know that."
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 17, 2003 16:31:53 GMT -5
In addition to all the other reasons advanced for why Buffy and Giles would be wrong the other reason is that Giles has shown himself to untrustworthy - he left Buffy in season 6 and left her emotionally in season 7. Buffy may forgive Giles, but she would be silly to forget it. Especially as Giles seems to think that Buffy is his superior and so lets her make hard/difficult decisions alone. This is not a relationship I would like to see. Giles is not mature enough for Buffy anymore. Vampires have an age/wisdom advantage that cannot be denied. (I have reviewed my decision about Giles being the appropriate level of wisdom for Buffy.)
I love all the other discussion regarding Buffy's guilt for her treatment for Spike. I agree with Spring and add that people in a general way don't usully have important conversations except in television. Actions speak louder than words.
|
|
|
Post by deborah on Sept 17, 2003 16:34:28 GMT -5
No, I really saw Buffy dressing up as a gesture of respect for Spike. I just try to imagine myself in her position. I am going to go break up with a guy, and I know it is going to hurt him, so I think up words that are gentle but firm. I dress up nicely, in something he will think of as very nice, rather than just wearing old jeans and a ratty sweatshirt - to show him I understand that this is a significant event - not something casual and meaningless to me. She just doesn't come off as trying to be thoughtless in that break-up scene. It seems like she has put a lot of thought into how she is going to handle it, and there is no indication that "deliberately more hurtful than in needs to be" is part of the plan. I don't think she is trying to taunt him with "look at what a tasty morsel you are losing" ala Harmony. The outfit isn't particularly sexy. It just shows she put thought and care into it. I think it is saying, "this isn't a casual thing I am doing, and I know that." No way did I think that Buffy was trying to taunt him by dressing up, looking her best, and then breaking up with him. I didn't think she was pulling *a Harmony*. As you say she was going about it gently but firmly. But for me I saw the care she'd taken with her appearance as a reflection of her new found or at least newly sought self respect rather than out of consideration for Spike. But you could well be right. Or, we may both be right.
|
|
|
Post by Laura on Sept 17, 2003 16:58:13 GMT -5
In addition to all the other reasons advanced for why Buffy and Giles would be wrong the other reason is that Giles has shown himself to untrustworthy - he left Buffy in season 6 and left her emotionally in season 7. Buffy may forgive Giles, but she would be silly to forget it. Especially as Giles seems to think that Buffy is his superior and so lets her make hard/difficult decisions alone. This is not a relationship I would like to see. Giles is not mature enough for Buffy anymore. Vampires have an age/wisdom advantage that cannot be denied. (I have reviewed my decision about Giles being the appropriate level of wisdom for Buffy.) I love all the other discussion regarding Buffy's guilt for her treatment for Spike. I agree with Spring and add that people in a general way don't usully have important conversations except in television. Actions speak louder than words. I'm certainly not going to try to convince anybody here that Buffy belongs with Giles, but in his defense, I'll say that his leaving her in S6 was equivalent to Angel's leaving her in S3. Both Giles and Angel thought that they would do her more harm than good by continuing to stay -- whether you agree that either one of them acted "nobly" in doing so, or whether they were both making decisions involving Buffy's life without consulting her, you'd still have to concede that their "intentions" were good.
I don't understand S7 Giles at all -- I've said before and I'll say again -- he wasn't the same character in the later episodes that he was at the beginning of the season. I don't think that his actions in S7 can be held against him as "untrustworthy," any more than the actions of any of the other Scoobies were.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 17, 2003 20:38:06 GMT -5
I'm certainly not going to try to convince anybody here that Buffy belongs with Giles, but in his defense, I'll say that his leaving her in S6 was equivalent to Angel's leaving her in S3. Both Giles and Angel thought that they would do her more harm than good by continuing to stay -- whether you agree that either one of them acted "nobly" in doing so, or whether they were both making decisions involving Buffy's life without consulting her, you'd still have to concede that their "intentions" were good.
I don't understand S7 Giles at all -- I've said before and I'll say again -- he wasn't the same character in the later episodes that he was at the beginning of the season. I don't think that his actions in S7 can be held against him as "untrustworthy," any more than the actions of any of the other Scoobies were. It was probably wrong to use season 7 Giles when he was so obviously "off". In any case I will change my earlier wording from "untrustworthy" to "ill-judging". I still wouldn't want to see Buffy with Giles, even outside the story arc problems, because of personality incompaibility issues. I don't mean the arguing - I mean the capacity of both to let the other deal with problems instead of working on joint solutions.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 17, 2003 20:54:12 GMT -5
I think this is the model that I was thinking of when I talked about the text definitions of love. I can't draw a triangle so I will have to describe it.
Imagine an equalateral triangle.
The three corners of the triangle represent liking (true friendship), infatuation (true passion) and empty love (true commitment).
The three sides of the triangle represent other forms of love. The side linking infatuation and liking is romantic love (i.e. intimacy plus passion, eg. summer romance). The side linking passion and commitment is fatuous love (eg "whirlwind courtship"). The third side is companionate love which is intimacy plus commitment (e.g. marriage where the passion has faded). (Gee, I flippersmacked that one up! Who would have thought I would forget something like that after 10 years of not thinking about it?)
In the center of the triangel is Consumate love (i.e. the ideal combination of intimacy, passion and commitment).
The triangels vary in 2 ways. First, the size of the triangle increases with intensity. Second the shape of the triangle changes according to the balance of the components. The strength (intensity) of one component distorts the triangle in that direction. (I hope you can understand what I mean - it is hard to describe without a knowledge of different shaped triangles and no diagrams.)
Definitions.
Intimacy is defined as "the closeness that two people feel and the strength of the bond holding them together. Parrtners are high in intimacy to the extent that each is concerned with the other's welfare ad happiness. Each values the other, and they regard one another highly, count on each other in times of need, and possess mutual understanding. They share their selves and their possessions, give and receive emotional support and engage in intimate communications."
Passion is defined as "romance, physical attraction, and sexual interactions. Sternberg suggests that other needs - such as self-esteem, affiliation, dominance, and submission - may contribute to passion."
Commitment is defined as "cognitive factors and has a short-term and a long-term aspect. In the short-term, a person decides that he or she loves someone. The long-term aspect involves the commitment to maintain a loving relationship."
How does this relate to BUffy and her partners?
I will start thinking about this, but at the moment I have to say that whilst there is some overlap between JW and Sternberg there does seem to be some differences between the two about what constitutes consummate (dare I say "true"?) love.
|
|
|
Post by Laura on Sept 17, 2003 20:55:03 GMT -5
It was probably wrong to use season 7 Giles when he was so obviously "off". In any case I will change my earlier wording from "untrustworthy" to "ill-judging". I still wouldn't want to see Buffy with Giles, even outside the story arc problems, because of personality incompaibility issues. I don't mean the arguing - I mean the capacity of both to let the other deal with problems instead of working on joint solutions. That's a fair assessment.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 18, 2003 7:21:31 GMT -5
I think this is the model that I was thinking of when I talked about the text definitions of love. I can't draw a triangle so I will have to describe it. Imagine an equalateral triangle. The three corners of the triangle represent liking (true friendship), infatuation (true passion) and empty love (true commitment). The three sides of the triangle represent other forms of love. The side linking infatuation and liking is romantic love (i.e. intimacy plus passion, eg. summer romance). The side linking passion and commitment is fatuous love (eg "whirlwind courtship"). The third side is companionate love which is intimacy plus commitment (e.g. marriage where the passion has faded). (Gee, I flippersmacked that one up! Who would have thought I would forget something like that after 10 years of not thinking about it?) In the center of the triangel is Consumate love (i.e. the ideal combination of intimacy, passion and commitment). The triangels vary in 2 ways. First, the size of the triangle increases with intensity. Second the shape of the triangle changes according to the balance of the components. The strength (intensity) of one component distorts the triangle in that direction. (I hope you can understand what I mean - it is hard to describe without a knowledge of different shaped triangles and no diagrams.) Definitions. Intimacy is defined as "the closeness that two people feel and the strength of the bond holding them together. Parrtners are high in intimacy to the extent that each is concerned with the other's welfare ad happiness. Each values the other, and they regard one another highly, count on each other in times of need, and possess mutual understanding. They share their selves and their possessions, give and receive emotional support and engage in intimate communications." Passion is defined as "romance, physical attraction, and sexual interactions. Sternberg suggests that other needs - such as self-esteem, affiliation, dominance, and submission - may contribute to passion." Commitment is defined as "cognitive factors and has a short-term and a long-term aspect. In the short-term, a person decides that he or she loves someone. The long-term aspect involves the commitment to maintain a loving relationship." How does this relate to BUffy and her partners? I will start thinking about this, but at the moment I have to say that whilst there is some overlap between JW and Sternberg there does seem to be some differences between the two about what constitutes consummate (dare I say "true"?) love. Yowza. You is too akademick for the likes of me. Seriously - I can't think in terms of trying to make what I see fit into predetermined categories. I mean . . . I guess I could, but . . . I can't. Flippersmack! I make no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Patti - S'cubie Cutie on Sept 18, 2003 18:10:21 GMT -5
And many thanks for acknowledging the highbrow nature of my admiration for Spike's tight pants JM. As far as Patti goes - Yes, I think she is just using him. *yawns and stretches contentedly*...your jealousy is a sad thing to see ladies.....you need to put this all behind you and move on. There are other men out there. Not like MY man, but probably more suited to you...less...demanding, less inventive...less creative... Have you thought about that fellow with the lifts, and the hair that sticks up funny? I understand his last girlfriend is in a coma, he's probably going to be easy to please....
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Sept 18, 2003 18:33:50 GMT -5
Yowza. You is too akademick for the likes of me. Seriously - I can't think in terms of trying to make what I see fit into predetermined categories. I mean . . . I guess I could, but . . . I can't. Flippersmack! I make no sense. I understood what you meant, I think. You don't want to pigeon-hole reality (in this case the buffy-verse), especially when it doesn't fit neatly making it a little on the pointless side. Luckily I am a well-educated fool so I like doing these kind of pointless tasks because of the possible insights it gives me into reality or some theory. So I will do my own task. Please tell me where I mistunderstand reality (I bow down to your superior nsight into reality - both kinds). I will start by looking at season 6 Buffy and Spike because that is the most interesting (to me). I think that we all agree that Buffy and Spike do not have an idyllic (consumate) love at that time. Passion would seem to be the biggest feature so if we look through the definitions how would it rate according to Sternberg? Intimacy is defined as "the closeness that two people feel and the strength of the bond holding them together. Partners are high in intimacy to the extent that each is concerned with the other's welfare ad happiness. Each values the other, and they regard one another highly, count on each other in times of need, and possess mutual understanding. They share their selves and their possessions, give and receive emotional support and engage in intimate communications." Buffy and Spike count on each other. Spikeis concerned for Buffy's welfare and happiness, but he has no soul so he cannot always make correct judgements about what would make her happy. Buffy is too depressed to really consider Spike at all. Thus the intimate communications, emotional support and sharing is limited. Thus Buffy and Spike would not score highly on this dimension because of their own personal limitations. This is not explicitly addressed by Sternberg but may be inferred that there is cause for a low score in this dimension. Passion is defined as "romance, physical attraction, and sexual interactions. Sternberg suggests that other needs - such as self-esteem, affiliation, dominance, and submission - may contribute to passion." Buffy and Spike have no romance. The physical attraction and sexual interaction is overwhelming. Buffy and Spike score high on this dimension. Commitment is defined as "cognitive factors and has a short-term and a long-term aspect. In the short-term, a person decides that he or she loves someone. The long-term aspect involves the commitment to maintain a loving relationship." Spike is committed to both the long term and the short term. Buffy is not committed to either. Sternberg's model does not talk aout what happens when one partner feels differently to the other on one or more dimesnions. Overall, clearly Buffy is infatuated with Spike according to Sternberg's model. Classifying Spike's love of Buffy is problematic. Without Sternberg's defnitions it would appear to be romantic. Spike sincerely wants to be intimate with Buffy (he coaxes secrets out of her.) However, according to Sternberg, Spike has a fatuous love, bordering on consumate love of Buffy. Moreover, Buffy says that the passion Spike feels cannot last - an issue not addressed by Sternberg and contentious even within the Buffy-verse. JW goes further than Sternberg by offering reasons why people fail to score highly on various dimensions and by showing that the relationship has two partners who may not view the relaionship in the same way. Reality is multi-faceted afterall.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Sept 19, 2003 7:31:04 GMT -5
I understood what you meant, I think. You don't want to pigeon-hole reality (in this case the buffy-verse), especially when it doesn't fit neatly making it a little on the pointless side. Luckily I am a well-educated fool so I like doing these kind of pointless tasks because of the possible insights it gives me into reality or some theory. So I will do my own task. Please tell me where I mistunderstand reality (I bow down to your superior nsight into reality - both kinds). I will start by looking at season 6 Buffy and Spike because that is the most interesting (to me). I think that we all agree that Buffy and Spike do not have an idyllic (consumate) love at that time. Passion would seem to be the biggest feature so if we look through the definitions how would it rate according to Sternberg? Intimacy is defined as "the closeness that two people feel and the strength of the bond holding them together. Partners are high in intimacy to the extent that each is concerned with the other's welfare ad happiness. Each values the other, and they regard one another highly, count on each other in times of need, and possess mutual understanding. They share their selves and their possessions, give and receive emotional support and engage in intimate communications." Buffy and Spike count on each other. Spikeis concerned for Buffy's welfare and happiness, but he has no soul so he cannot always make correct judgements about what would make her happy. Buffy is too depressed to really consider Spike at all. Thus the intimate communications, emotional support and sharing is limited. Thus Buffy and Spike would not score highly on this dimension because of their own personal limitations. This is not explicitly addressed by Sternberg but may be inferred that there is cause for a low score in this dimension. Passion is defined as "romance, physical attraction, and sexual interactions. Sternberg suggests that other needs - such as self-esteem, affiliation, dominance, and submission - may contribute to passion." Buffy and Spike have no romance. The physical attraction and sexual interaction is overwhelming. Buffy and Spike score high on this dimension. Commitment is defined as "cognitive factors and has a short-term and a long-term aspect. In the short-term, a person decides that he or she loves someone. The long-term aspect involves the commitment to maintain a loving relationship." Spike is committed to both the long term and the short term. Buffy is not committed to either. Sternberg's model does not talk aout what happens when one partner feels differently to the other on one or more dimesnions. Overall, clearly Buffy is infatuated with Spike according to Sternberg's model. Classifying Spike's love of Buffy is problematic. Without Sternberg's defnitions it would appear to be romantic. Spike sincerely wants to be intimate with Buffy (he coaxes secrets out of her.) However, according to Sternberg, Spike has a fatuous love, bordering on consumate love of Buffy. Moreover, Buffy says that the passion Spike feels cannot last - an issue not addressed by Sternberg and contentious even within the Buffy-verse. JW goes further than Sternberg by offering reasons why people fail to score highly on various dimensions and by showing that the relationship has two partners who may not view the relaionship in the same way. Reality is multi-faceted afterall. Kerrie - I just can't comment on how Buffy & Spike fit into these descriptions. I know zippo about Sternberg. I do not think doing this kind of analysis is useless, by any means - it can provide insights and illuminations. It's not better or worse than not using pre-determined categories. It's just not my style; I can't think that way. In Season 6, I think Buffy & Spike have a very intense, very real, emotional connection and physical attraction - and the possibilities in it are severely limited by his soullessness and her severely traumatized, depressed state. Do they love each other? My answer is yes, as much as they are able. No matter what she tells herself, Buffy can't get him off her mind, she longs for him, she trusts him with all her secrets, she protects him over and over and over, and more. Spike has pretty much the same MO for Buffy. The Season is full of parallels about the way Buffy & Spike feel about each other, what they give to each other - for all the surface talk about how uneven their relationship is, underneath it all, their feelings and their actions toward each other are very much the same - intense love, intense hate, confusion, anger, victimization, protectiveness, jealousy, a feeling of ownership . . . whew. It's no wonder the sex brings the house down. The big difference between Buffy & Spike in Season 6 is not in their feelings for each other, or in the way they treat each other, it's in their approaches to reality. As usual, the observant and straightforward Spike calls it like it is, while Buffy plays "denial" games with herself about what is real and what isn't real, segmenting herself. I just can't write the 5000 word essay it would take to describe it all. But note, for one thing, that Buffy & Spike express the exact same motivation for wanting the relationship: To feel alive again.
|
|