|
Post by Kerrie on Apr 21, 2004 18:17:19 GMT -5
I have been thinking about it some more and I realise that I don't really understand the link between the timing of Spike being turned into a vampire and his failure to move on from Cecily's rejection of him. I have heard this theory before (at BAPs or Tabular Rasa), but whilst it makes sense at some level it doesn't at another level.
I assume that the significant factor that prevents learning is that William loses his soul. I don't understand how losing one's soul prevents learning some things but not others. For instance William/Spike fails to learn from Cecily's rejection, but learns from Buffy's rejection (i.e. he learns to approach Buffy a different way).
Or is it more linked to the lack of introspection (lack of self-reflection?) which means that a soulless vampire can not develop their identity any further? For instance William/soulless Spike cannot learn that one's love can be unrequited, but he is still a worthwhile person.
I know I am not being very clear here, but I am actually trying to locate the mechanism for how being turned inhibits personal growth. I suspect it will probably muddy the waters still further, but I think the answer lies in a Charlotte Bronte quote:
"His natural attitude was not the meditative, nor his natural mood the sentimental; impressionable he was as dimpling water, but almost as water, unimpressible: the breeze, the sun, moved him - metal could not grave, nor fire brand." (Villette
Using this idea, vampires are impressionable (they change their externals), but they are not impressible (they cannot change their internals).
If I have understood this properly, then it raises questions about what the two souled vampires are learning about themselves now.
|
|
|
Post by Cheddar on Apr 21, 2004 18:35:22 GMT -5
here's a quick run down on the cups in tarot, its also known as hearts.
The suit of Cups can be known as Cauldrons or Hearts. Cups represent the feminine energy of water and emotion. They are associated with the Zodiac signs Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces. Cups show serenity, wisdom and intuition. Cups are associated with fish. They can be associated with moodiness and excesses, but their strengths are wisdom and imagination
King of Cups The King of Cups is an honest man, responsible and creative. He suggests a learned person - a professional, perhaps a businessman, lawyer, scientist or religious man. He is kind, reliable, generous, artistic. Reversed, he is of an artistic temperament, but is unreliable, double-dealing, scandalous. Suggests loss, ruin, injustice, an inveterate swindler or sinner.
This is the first place I have seen cups and fish together, so I guess maybe we can now get an acceptable fix on the fish. ;D
I would say that Spike is the king of cups, and he was definitely provoking a fight and enjoying it, but it was not his birthday, (day to be indulged?), Angel backed off. Its been years since I read any tarot, I knew it was hearts and never thought too much about the line because it actually made sense to me. But finding the fish thing makes Drusilla's earlier speech perfectly clear too, the imagination, wisdom, heart were what drew her to William, turned, the inverse card characteristics become an important part of Spike's personality. With a soul, the card reverts to the correct position.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Apr 22, 2004 7:23:19 GMT -5
I have been thinking about it some more and I realise that I don't really understand the link between the timing of Spike being turned into a vampire and his failure to move on from Cecily's rejection of him. I have heard this theory before (at BAPs or Tabular Rasa), but whilst it makes sense at some level it doesn't at another level. I assume that the significant factor that prevents learning is that William loses his soul. I don't understand how losing one's soul prevents learning some things but not others. For instance William/Spike fails to learn from Cecily's rejection, but learns from Buffy's rejection (i.e. he learns to approach Buffy a different way). <snip> My feeling from what we see is that losing the soul severly stunts/limits emotional and spiritual growth. It doesn't curtail learning otherwise. I mean - it doesn't mean that you will sit on a hot stove twice, or you don't gain any knowledge and know-how from experience.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Apr 22, 2004 7:25:52 GMT -5
here's a quick run down on the cups in tarot, its also known as hearts. The suit of Cups can be known as Cauldrons or Hearts. Cups represent the feminine energy of water and emotion. They are associated with the Zodiac signs Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces. Cups show serenity, wisdom and intuition. Cups are associated with fish. They can be associated with moodiness and excesses, but their strengths are wisdom and imagination King of Cups The King of Cups is an honest man, responsible and creative. He suggests a learned person - a professional, perhaps a businessman, lawyer, scientist or religious man. He is kind, reliable, generous, artistic. Reversed, he is of an artistic temperament, but is unreliable, double-dealing, scandalous. Suggests loss, ruin, injustice, an inveterate swindler or sinner. This is the first place I have seen cups and fish together, so I guess maybe we can now get an acceptable fix on the fish. ;D I would say that Spike is the king of cups, and he was definitely provoking a fight and enjoying it, but it was not his birthday, (day to be indulged?), Angel backed off. Its been years since I read any tarot, I knew it was hearts and never thought too much about the line because it actually made sense to me. But finding the fish thing makes Drusilla's earlier speech perfectly clear too, the imagination, wisdom, heart were what drew her to William, turned, the inverse card characteristics become an important part of Spike's personality. With a soul, the card reverts to the correct position. Very nice - thanks for sharing that. Sounds like a definite connection was being made - the fish mention was a surprise to me. I appreciate everyone's input. Helps me see even more in that wonderful ep.
|
|
|
Post by Cheddar on Apr 22, 2004 9:11:33 GMT -5
Just for fun, and definitely off topic, I went back and tried to pigeon hole Angel in the tarot, decided he'd fit well enough in Swords:
Swords are associated with the masculine energy of air and thought. They are sometimes known as Spades or Blades. Sword are associated with Gemini, Libra and Aquarius. They can be savage and hard to understand, but also have associations with justice, determination and intellectual inspirations. Swords are associated with butterflies
The King of Swords is an active and determined man, experienced, intelligent, authoritative, controlled. He is just and commanding, a professional man, an analytical mind. He has many thoughts and designs, not necessarily in your favor. Reversed we see a man who will pursue a matter to ruin; cruelty, conflict, selfishness, sadism, unnecessary disturbance, perversity
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Apr 22, 2004 14:04:12 GMT -5
Excellent analysis, Spring. My favourite Buffy episode of all time. JM's acting is amazing in this episode. I love every little thing about it. His face when Buffy tells him that he is beneath her.......the scene on the porch steps (that scene gets me every time), the scene's in the Bronze. There are just so many good things about it, I can't possibly write them all down. As usual, your analysis makes me enjoy and appreciate the episode even more than I did already. Which is an amazing achievement, considering how much I love Fool For Love anyway. Thank you, Spring. Cal I know how you feel, cal. I just couldn't begin to write all my impressions down. I would have to take every line and every scene . . . And James? He's so good it hurts. Thanks for the feedback. It helps to motivate me when I look at my DVD collection and think: Let's see . . . one more ep on this CD, then 3 more CDs in this Season, then Season 6 & 7 to get through . . .
|
|
|
Post by Cal on Apr 22, 2004 14:35:11 GMT -5
I know how you feel, cal. I just couldn't begin to write all my impressions down. I would have to take every line and every scene . . . And James? He's so good it hurts. Thanks for the feedback. It helps to motivate me when I look at my DVD collection and think: Let's see . . . one more ep on this CD, then 3 more CDs in this Season, then Season 6 & 7 to get through . . . And I can't wait to read them all..........no pressure or anything
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Apr 22, 2004 15:24:59 GMT -5
Just for fun, and definitely off topic, I went back and tried to pigeon hole Angel in the tarot, decided he'd fit well enough in Swords: Swords are associated with the masculine energy of air and thought. They are sometimes known as Spades or Blades. Sword are associated with Gemini, Libra and Aquarius. They can be savage and hard to understand, but also have associations with justice, determination and intellectual inspirations. Swords are associated with butterflies The King of Swords is an active and determined man, experienced, intelligent, authoritative, controlled. He is just and commanding, a professional man, an analytical mind. He has many thoughts and designs, not necessarily in your favor. Reversed we see a man who will pursue a matter to ruin; cruelty, conflict, selfishness, sadism, unnecessary disturbance, perversity This is most excellent, Cheddar; if I'm not mistaken (and I cannot recall the source) but James Marsters once commented that Drusilla has her own internal logic that makes perfect sense to her, and, if you dig enough, makes perfect sense to anyone. There's just too much of a communication barrier between her and everyone else in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Sarah on Apr 22, 2004 16:16:10 GMT -5
Despite my terror of being spoiled (I was afraid you might have found some amazing link to one of the last AtS episodes - I'm up to Hole in the World), I couldn't resist reading your FFL analysis, and wanted to say thank you for a wonderful discussion of one of the all-time best episodes.
I also have a question about Cecily. The fact that the same actress turned up as Halfrek (and was recognised by Spike) obviously caused much confusion as to whether she was meant to be the same character, which I think was confirmed by the commentary on one of the DVDs - is that right? Now, in Lessons Halfrek refers to her and Anyanka as having been in the Crimea together (predating FFL), indicating that Cecily was already a vengeance demon when she rejected William, not that she was turned into one later. I imagine this was dreamt up long after FFL was written, so there weren't any implications intended at the time, but I'm just wondering whether this development of the canon has any backwards significance (especially as Spike's response to seeing Halfrek doesn't suggest any great resentment or surprise, just a kind of mild embarrassment). I can't, myself, really see that it does - it's the rejection itself that matters - but perhaps someone else can make more of it.
Maybe Spike ran into her in St Petersburg in 1905?
On the edge of the Cotswolds here and getting a bit nervous about what's out there ...
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Apr 23, 2004 7:24:41 GMT -5
Despite my terror of being spoiled (I was afraid you might have found some amazing link to one of the last AtS episodes - I'm up to Hole in the World), I couldn't resist reading your FFL analysis, and wanted to say thank you for a wonderful discussion of one of the all-time best episodes. I also have a question about Cecily. The fact that the same actress turned up as Halfrek (and was recognised by Spike) obviously caused much confusion as to whether she was meant to be the same character, which I think was confirmed by the commentary on one of the DVDs - is that right? Now, in Lessons Halfrek refers to her and Anyanka as having been in the Crimea together (predating FFL), indicating that Cecily was already a vengeance demon when she rejected William, not that she was turned into one later. I imagine this was dreamt up long after FFL was written, so there weren't any implications intended at the time, but I'm just wondering whether this development of the canon has any backwards significance (especially as Spike's response to seeing Halfrek doesn't suggest any great resentment or surprise, just a kind of mild embarrassment). I can't, myself, really see that it does - it's the rejection itself that matters - but perhaps someone else can make more of it. Maybe Spike ran into her in St Petersburg in 1905? On the edge of the Cotswolds here and getting a bit nervous about what's out there ... Glad you liked the analysis, Sarah - great to hear from you, and thanks for letting me know you liked it. I don't think any of my analyses so far have anything AtS spoilery in them - though I guess they could in the future. Feel free to IM me and ask if you are worried about reading any particular analysis. I've not been very inclined to stretch foreshadowing talk into Season 5 AtS.
On the subject of Halfrek - here's my take: Halfrek looks just like Cecily. She recognizes Spike, calls him "William," and fluffs her hair as if she's expecting a bit of male admiration. He recognizes her and looks uncomfortable and covers up the fact. So to me, that says she is Cecily. I mean, what else could it mean? I know people debate this, but it has always mystified me. What else could it mean, except that she is Cecily? I thought this implication was deliberate in that particular episode - Spike and Buffy, trapped in a house with demon, they can't get out, all because of a spell cast by "Cecily?" Seems kinda deliberate, metaphor-wise. But there were no plans to do anything much with the character, or the long-ago relationship, so it was more or less dropped and then she was killed. That ended that, completely. The Crimea thing, as you said, would predate FFL, suggesting Cecily was already a vengeance demon when she rejected William. Whether that was deliberate or just not really considered is hard to say. We see Anya as a vengeance demon, interacting with Cordy and insinuating herself into the lives of the Sunnydale HighSchoolers. I suppose Halfrek could have done the same to the London crowd back in 1880, looking for a vengeance opening, and William happened to get googly-eyed over her. I may see this all differently once I get through analyzing both Season 6 & 7, because I haven't given it a lot of thought. But that's my take on it presently.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Apr 23, 2004 14:09:43 GMT -5
We see Anya as a vengeance demon, interacting with Cordy and insinuating herself into the lives of the Sunnydale HighSchoolers. I suppose Halfrek could have done the same to the London crowd back in 1880, looking for a vengeance opening, and William happened to get googly-eyed over her. Yet another parallel drawn between Spike and Xander.
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on May 3, 2004 12:34:37 GMT -5
Spring - what a great commentary. There's just so much that can be said about this ep, I am amazed you were able to organize it all so well. (And can well imagine all the additional notes that you had to edit out.) In particular, I was struck by two main things. The theme of identity and your use of Spikes two lessons. Odd that for as many times as I have watched this ep - and it's been a bunch of times - I still had stuff to learn. While I had obviously seen that this ep shows us Spike's background and how he became the vamp he is now, I had never really seen how we are shown him accumulating all his important bits of Spike-ness. It's like I had seen it and yet not seen it. Loved you using the two lessons as an organizing framework and the points you make about how they are used multiple ways in the episode. They seem very key to me for this whole 5th season too. A slayer will learn that sometimes, she doesn't have to reach for her weapon - sometimes it's just her, throwing herself off a tower to save her sister and the world. And, in order to deal with Glory, she's really gonna need to ask the right questions - starting with "what is this chick, anyway?" (Not to mention her somewhat shaky ability to ask Spike the right questions and her near perfect ability to avoid asking herself the right questions.) I found it interesting when listening to Doug Petrie’s commentary on the DVD when he says that this ep is filled with people asking questions and not liking the answers. It was so fun to re-watch Fool for Love looking for little gems, little somethings that I had let slide by me before. Because there's always something new to spot. Like when William is looking for his perfect word, he looks up and sees Cecily, and that is when he "finds" his perfect word. Like Dru’s sexy, sort-of crouch as she says “Don’t need a purse”. For whatever reason, I never got the double entendre on that before. Like really noticing how happy and perky Spike is at first at the Bronze – he’s acting like he’s having fun and being all “date-y” – until Buffy cuts him off with “we’re not here to discuss hops” and then his face just kind of crumples a bit and he’s all snarky again. Like how totally cute Xander (all the scoobies, really) looks when out patrolling and how much that is contrasted to Riley and his dark Initiative connections. Like how we are shown how good Riley is at hiding something. How he just casually is smiling and talking and putting the bandages and so on away after Buffy got injured. We’re being given a subtle clue here to his soon-to-be big deception as well as another nice reminder of his covert ops background. Even if it’s just being used to fool “mom”. Just love love love this episode. Can you tell? And loved reading your commentary on it. **Sigh** OK, enough babbling from me. Lola
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on May 3, 2004 14:36:29 GMT -5
Spring - what a great commentary. There's just so much that can be said about this ep, I am amazed you were able to organize it all so well. (And can well imagine all the additional notes that you had to edit out.) In particular, I was struck by two main things. The theme of identity and your use of Spikes two lessons. Thanks, for the positive feedback. This one was really a bear. I mean . . . there was so much to say. So it was a challenge to organize and a challenge to boil it down. Also - there's the fullfillment of her "death wish." Definitely a Season-long theme. Checkpoint is the one I think of - the ep where the Council of Watchers comes to town - for emphasizing the importance of asking yourself the right questions. Buffy essentially asks herself, "why is everybody always picking on me?" And in the answer, she finds the key to taking control of the situation. Nice, hadn't even thought of that. How about the way she touches his chest and head saying his glory is in his heart and mind. And then when she says it is also in his "imagination" you don't see her touch anything - her hands are off screen, but he reacts as if he's been rather intimately touched. It might me wonder just where William kept his imagination. I noticed that one too. Spike is just really happy to being out with Buffy, but when she levels him with the comment about how it is all business, he acts like he feels the same way. Hadn't even thought about that angle. So true. Nice observation. Glad I could add to your love, love, love of this ep. I love it too. Maybe if I ever get through to the end of Season 7, I'll go back and write more on this one. (geez! it seems so impossible! one ep at a time, one ep at a time . . . . your comments help keep me going though, so keep 'em coming!)
|
|
|
Post by Joshua Adams on May 8, 2004 17:29:11 GMT -5
Analysis great, you are a goddess, blah blah blah...
HOWEVER, You are totally wrong about what Spike told Buffy at the Bronze. Okay, maybe not, but I think the story could have been told (dorky poetry and all) with Spike's general sense of bravado and maybe some pant-stuffing lies about how he handled the rejection, but the way we cut back to him and Buffy talking suggests he is very into the telling of the story and really opening up emotionally quite a bit (he's very offended by Buffy's characterization of vampirism). Plus, as a ploy to get closer to Buffy (we're not far from their little "date," right?) a sob story (even evil Spike's idea of one) is a good try.
Buffy simply isn't one to cut most vampires a lot of slack; I could see her hearing the story and feeling plenty of sorry for William the human, and disgusted with the vampiric shell remaining. Buffy calls him William after all when she's trying to appeal to his better nature. Also, she says "you're beneath me" right after Spike has just launched a very insightful, very disturbing, malicious attack at the core of her person. Buffy is definitely a person who would come back with something just as devestating.
Of course, assuming Buffy meant to be that extra level of cruel is what allows me to get behind William and his new found motive to kill the slayer. 'Cuase I mean crossbows, stakes, and shotgun's are one thing, but words are just so mean.
|
|
|
Post by Linda on May 8, 2004 18:47:12 GMT -5
My feeling from what we see is that losing the soul severly stunts/limits emotional and spiritual growth. It doesn't curtail learning otherwise. I mean - it doesn't mean that you will sit on a hot stove twice, or you don't gain any knowledge and know-how from experience. Hi Spring! First of all: Thank you for your absolutely wonderful analysis! I can think of no higher praise than that it does justice to this episode, to Spike & to JM. Your analysis has added even more depth to the story for me. Secondly, re: fish. I've come to think that the "burning baby fish swimming all 'round your head" was Dru's way of seeing William's soul. The Jossverse has made the fish=soul analogy canon with the goldfish thing in AtS' Soul Purpose. Also, burning is painful/dangerous to vampires, the same way souls would be? And "baby" = not fully grown. William was/is a work in progress. Not-quite-relevant aside: that would make Spike the Mr. Fish & Chips mentioned in Smile Time that was damaging Angel's self-esteem. Thirdly, re: lack of development of soulless vampires. My theory: Kerrie said I believe Kerrie's wording hits the metaphorical/psychological key -- the vampires cast no "self-reflection", just like they cast no actual reflection in mirrors. Without self-reflection, how can you grow? When Spike falls in love with Buffy, she becomes the mirror by which he is able to see himself. When he sees (reflects on) the consequences of his actions through his Buffy-mirror, he changed the actions and therefore himself. Once he decided that Buffy is what he wanted, he couldn't help it. Linda, who is now forced to watch the episode all over again -- to check her facts, of course (poor me... ;D )
|
|