|
Post by Cheddar on Mar 19, 2004 17:48:47 GMT -5
I say Harmony is hunting, she killed the clerk at the shop where she got the shoes.
And to wander back into the drowning in footwear conversation, and I apologize to Spring Summers for taking episodes out of order, but in season 5 Spike was "drowning in" Buffy, by the end of season 7 he's "drowning in" footwear.
And welcome Sarmi. I agree with you and SpringSummers, Spike keeps denying he wants to be family, and the Scoobies keep saying he's not family, but they all act like family, even though he's not anybody's favorite relative.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 19, 2004 19:36:09 GMT -5
Been wondering...since Harmony's back and lying low, is she hunting? Is she sharing Spike's butcher's blood? Is he bringing her rats? Pity we'll never know. I would assume Harmony was doing both - I mean, we know she sired that one guy in Real Me, and she says she killed the clerk in the dress shop, as Cheddar mentioned. Though I can also easily picture her drinking Spike's butcher-shop blood as well. It's easier than hunting, and though she doesn't seem to mind hunting, she doesn't give any indication of being much "into it." She's no Drusilla - she gives the impression she did the killing of the clerk more for the free shoes than anything else. She's also really big on imitating Spike and doing what he does (trying to have minions, trying to kill The Slayer, taking up smoking), so I can see her drinking the butcher's blood if for no other reason than to share with her Blondie Bear.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 19, 2004 19:42:20 GMT -5
I say Harmony is hunting, she killed the clerk at the shop where she got the shoes. And to wander back into the drowning in footwear conversation, and I apologize to Spring Summers for taking episodes out of order, but in season 5 Spike was " drowning in" Buffy, by the end of season 7 he's " drowning in" footwear. And welcome Sarmi. I agree with you and SpringSummers, Spike keeps denying he wants to be family, and the Scoobies keep saying he's not family, but they all act like family, even though he's not anybody's favorite relative. Don't worry about taking the eps out of order . . . I think discussing some eps naturally leads to discussing others. Yep - good connection there with the "I'm drowning in you Summers" from Season 5, to the "I'm drowning in footwear" in Season 7. They really all do act like family - dysfunctional family, but heck, aren't they all?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Mar 21, 2004 21:59:29 GMT -5
I have just re-watched "Something Blue" paying careful attention to walking and shoes. I didn't get much from watching the shoes. However, the walking metaphor was more productive. In this episode Riley tries to encourage Buffy to go for a drive with him by espousing all the virtues of driving places. The biggest virtue was that it was easy - you can just "let it wash over you" (paraphrasing). This is interesting on two fronts. First the episode is about Willow wanting to take the easy path through emotional pain. By the end of the episode Willow learns that she has to go through it - there are no shortcuts. Second, it is Riley offering Buffy the easy option of driving instead of walking. Earlier in the episode Buffy felt that Riley would not cause her pain and so she couldn't love him. I think the problem was that he was too easy. In JW's world pain and love are inseperable and we are supposed to be cautious if they don't go hand in hand. In season 5, Buffy does not unload to Riley and maybe the problem is that she senses that Riley is trying to encourage her to criuse through the problems of her mother's health and her own identity issues rather than suffer the bitter journey herself. In short, Riley represents a comfortable journey by car when Buffy is "an avid pedestrian". No doubt I am incoherently repeating Spring's earlier observations in which case no doubt Spring will simply nod sagely and tell me that "yes, Riley was never meant to be Buffy's new love".
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 21, 2004 23:16:51 GMT -5
I have just re-watched "Something Blue" paying careful attention to walking and shoes. I didn't get much from watching the shoes. However, the walking metaphor was more productive. In this episode Riley tries to encourage Buffy to go for a drive with him by espousing all the virtues of driving places. The biggest virtue was that it was easy - you can just "let it wash over you" (paraphrasing). This is interesting on two fronts. Kerrie - yay! I am glad my analyses sent you back to Something Blue. I wasn't sure anyone noticed my "cars and Buffy are unmixy things" reference. Nice insight. Hadn't thought of the way that " drive" metaphor fit with the overall Willow-theme in Something Blue. Nice catch. Even nicer catch. I hadn't thought past the "unmixy things" line to notice this overview. Riley is offering Buffy a comfy cruise through life, but she is an avid pedestrian. Nicely put. I don't so much "nod sagely" as "nod enthusiastically" about your comments here. But yes, of course - Riley was never meant to be the long haul guy. But until you pointed it out, I had never noticed how his offer to take Buffy driving - in an episode that highlights the way in which Riley is relatively pain-free choice for Buffy - fit in with that.
|
|
|
Post by Cheddar on Mar 22, 2004 10:06:56 GMT -5
I like the driving angle that Kerrie brought up too. Because its not only a shortcut, but by its very nature, doesn't leave time for seeing the big picture of your surroundings outside the road, to observe small details that can clue you in to where you're at and where you ought to be going, and driving doesn't leave time for reflection on what you see. You follow the rules of the road, set your eyes on the goal, and don't learn much about the larger world. Which is also like Riley, he's been given the rules, has a mission, is hell bent on getting there, and never asks questions. Buffy's advent in his life forces him out of the car and to face some of the messy questions about "HST's" and the nature of good and evil, etc. In the end, when he chooses to leave, its not just that Buffy doesn't love him, he doesn't want to interact in the world as a pedestrian, he wants to drive (fly) past all the messy issues.
So, now I'm thinking back to all sorts of car issues too, in other episodes, Band Candy where driving the car takes more time (and causes some extra trouble) than if they'd just walked, Spike's arrivals and departures in the DeSoto, the stakeout of the vamp nest in Crush, which was all "fake" so why not take place in a car, Gile's new car, I'll have to go look at some of this. Of course, there's always the danger of reading too much into all this, but its fun.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 22, 2004 12:05:52 GMT -5
I like the driving angle that Kerrie brought up too. Because its not only a shortcut, but by its very nature, doesn't leave time for seeing the big picture of your surroundings outside the road, to observe small details that can clue you in to where you're at and where you ought to be going, and driving doesn't leave time for reflection on what you see. You follow the rules of the road, set your eyes on the goal, and don't learn much about the larger world. Which is also like Riley, he's been given the rules, has a mission, is hell bent on getting there, and never asks questions. Buffy's advent in his life forces him out of the car and to face some of the messy questions about "HST's" and the nature of good and evil, etc. In the end, when he chooses to leave, its not just that Buffy doesn't love him, he doesn't want to interact in the world as a pedestrian, he wants to drive (fly) past all the messy issues. So, now I'm thinking back to all sorts of car issues too, in other episodes, Band Candy where driving the car takes more time (and causes some extra trouble) than if they'd just walked, Spike's arrivals and departures in the DeSoto, the stakeout of the vamp nest in Crush, which was all "fake" so why not take place in a car, Gile's new car, I'll have to go look at some of this. Of course, there's always the danger of reading too much into all this, but its fun. Huh. This is good stuff. I particularly like the comparison of the way Riley " drives" through life, while Buffy walks. I don't think this particular metaphor is going to be in play everytime we see a car or shoes, because well - they are such common items. But I think that anytime we see these items emphasized ( all the shoes in Family, the talk about both unmixy things and driving in Something Blue) we are likely to be hitting on that "how you make your journey" metaphor. Giles did not like his new car because it was too easy to drive (an automatic, rather than stick shift), and made him feel useless - less control, more like an observer than an active agent in his own journey. Lots and lots of driving imagery in Who Are You?, which was all about Faith's unsuccessful attempt to "magic" her way into a better life.
|
|
|
Post by Cheddar on Mar 22, 2004 12:15:31 GMT -5
the shoes in Family, I meant to go back and watch the magical floating scene again to check my memory, but as I recall it, Willow and Tara aren't wearing shoes while dancing in the air. Maybe because shoes wouldn't film well in that kind of scene, but it could have been a comment about magic again, the false nature of the happy outcome, etc.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 22, 2004 12:19:57 GMT -5
the shoes in Family, I meant to go back and watch the magical floating scene again to check my memory, but as I recall it, Willow and Tara aren't wearing shoes while dancing in the air. Maybe because shoes wouldn't film well in that kind of scene, but it could have been a comment about magic again, the false nature of the happy outcome, etc. They are definitely wearing shoes, I checked that. But their feet are off the ground, and I think that gives the ending that extra bit of "over the top" wonderfulness that emphasizes the fairy-tale, highly idealized nature of what we are seeing.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Mar 25, 2004 0:46:19 GMT -5
Wow...you know, Spring, I never spent any time looking at shoes. How you find these things, I will never know. Which, by the way, is a compliment. One thing that you mentioned about the episode that stirred some thoughts...when you said Mr Maclay, though misguided, was right about the association with magic. I agree that if Tara had acquisced and trundled back to the old homestead, she would most likely still be alive. On the other hand...would she really be among the living, or merely existing in a completely artificial world, with no opportunity to better herself or those around her? If Tara were given a chance to rewind and make that choice over again, I wonder if it would have been different. Yes, she went through some terrible things during her all too brief period among the Scoobies...but Tara was a vital member of the team. She mattered. I realize you weren't specifically making the point that Mr Maclay had Tara's best interests at heart, because that obviously wasn't the case. He cared about himself more than anything else. It just made me think about those big decisions in life when we weigh safety and security against excitement and challenge. Most people would SAY they prefer the latter...but do they actually follow through on it? On BTVS, the heroes follow through. Willow could go anywhere she wants after high school, but she chooses a lesser university...in retrospect, she clearly would have been much safer at Harvard. But if she were given the choice again, would she leave Buffy behind? It's an interesting question....one that I just realized has nothing to do with your review. Sorry about that. The point is, I think both Willow and Tara would opt to do the exact same thing again...because it's worth the pain to be relevant. Anyway, you've managed one again to stimulate a lot of thoughts. Nice work.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 25, 2004 10:55:08 GMT -5
Wow...you know, Spring, I never spent any time looking at shoes. How you find these things, I will never know. Which, by the way, is a compliment. One thing that you mentioned about the episode that stirred some thoughts...when you said Mr Maclay, though misguided, was right about the association with magic. I agree that if Tara had acquisced and trundled back to the old homestead, she would most likely still be alive. On the other hand...would she really be among the living, or merely existing in a completely artificial world, with no opportunity to better herself or those around her? If Tara were given a chance to rewind and make that choice over again, I wonder if it would have been different. Yes, she went through some terrible things during her all too brief period among the Scoobies...but Tara was a vital member of the team. She mattered. I realize you weren't specifically making the point that Mr Maclay had Tara's best interests at heart, because that obviously wasn't the case. He cared about himself more than anything else. It just made me think about those big decisions in life when we weigh safety and security against excitement and challenge. Most people would SAY they prefer the latter...but do they actually follow through on it? On BTVS, the heroes follow through. Willow could go anywhere she wants after high school, but she chooses a lesser university...in retrospect, she clearly would have been much safer at Harvard. But if she were given the choice again, would she leave Buffy behind? It's an interesting question....one that I just realized has nothing to do with your review. Sorry about that. The point is, I think both Willow and Tara would opt to do the exact same thing again...because it's worth the pain to be relevant. Anyway, you've managed one again to stimulate a lot of thoughts. Nice work. Thanks, Rob. Yes, I think the points you bring up - about safety vs "really living," and about having a person's safety (not necessarily their "best interests" though) at heart - are exactly what we are meant to think about in this episode. And definitely, the episode is about the need to let go of the old and get on with the new. There are always risks involved. Tara had to move on. Parents do that all the time though - they have a hard time letting go, they try to keep their children from doing things they really need to do for their own fulfillment, because they are so very scared for them. Like Buffy, telling Dawn she couldn't go across the street for dinner at a friend's house. That was part of what was going on with Mr MacLay - the natural desire to protect Tara. The other part was not so noble - the desire to use Tara to take of house and home, keep her serving the family in a pre-designated role, regardless of what she needed for her own growth and happiness. Tara makes much the same decision she did when she leaves her family here, as she will make when she leaves Willow in Tabula Rasa.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrie on Mar 25, 2004 16:47:56 GMT -5
Thanks, Rob. Yes, I think the points you bring up - about safety vs "really living," and about having a person's safety (not necessarily their "best interests" though) at heart - are exactly what we are meant to think about in this episode. And definitely, the episode is about the need to let go of the old and get on with the new. There are always risks involved. Tara had to move on. Parents do that all the time though - they have a hard time letting go, they try to keep their children from doing things they really need to do for their own fulfillment, because they are so very scared for them. Like Buffy, telling Dawn she couldn't go across the street for dinner at a friend's house. That was part of what was going on with Mr MacLay - the natural desire to protect Tara. The other part was not so noble - the desire to use Tara to take of house and home, keep her serving the family in a pre-designated role, regardless of what she needed for her own growth and happiness. Tara makes much the same decision she did when she leaves her family here, as she will make when she leaves Willow in Tabula Rasa. I agree. I think this is a recurring theme throughout BtVS that risk and excitement mean living fully whilst safety and self-interest does not. I think this gets back nicely to what was wrong with Buffy and Riley as a couple. Riley was not exciting or risky.
|
|
|
Post by thelittlestvampire on May 8, 2004 21:47:18 GMT -5
Hey Spring,
As I read about the Spike harmony sex scene I couldn't help thinking, "Hey, that's what I think about when I have sex, too!"
Luckily my dh has the sense not to ask.
|
|
|
Post by fredspuffed on Jul 30, 2004 11:20:05 GMT -5
this got me thinking about what giles said in restless about the movie something in the sense of "oh i get it know its all about the journey"--- i suppose hes cluing us ihn on whats to come ands stuff and to go forward and not wallow in the past cause we goto get mocving --- ow i think im rambling sorry just had to get it out and just for tyhe he** of it spike pretty your analyes is amazing just thought i shouod remind you!
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Aug 2, 2004 6:04:03 GMT -5
this got me thinking about what giles said in restless about the movie something in the sense of "oh i get it know its all about the journey"--- i suppose hes cluing us ihn on whats to come ands stuff and to go forward and not wallow in the past cause we goto get mocving --- ow i think im rambling sorry just had to get it out and just for tyhe he** of it spike pretty your analyes is amazing just thought i shouod remind you! Thanks, fredspuffed. I appreciate all such reminders! And I think all those shoes are meant to get us thinking about the "all about the journey" thing.
|
|