|
Post by LadyDi on Oct 1, 2004 23:26:08 GMT -5
Two words: Devistating(ly) Accurate
I only wish I could refute your assertion that this is not a True Love - or at least modify it with a "yet." These two have such a tremendous impact on each other, I don't know how else to categorize it. Joss himself has called it a Great Love, but viewed the AR as too much of an obstacle to overcome. I wonder sometimes what he must think of those of us who are more forgiving. I never watched General Hospital, so I can't comment on the Luke & Laura situation other than to say that GH is a soap opera, so of course they're gonna do all kinds of outrageous "that would never happen" kind of stuff. I definitely agree that Spike's lack of a soul is a kind of immaturity. Still, it doesn't keep him from changing. Is Spike a "more evolved" demon, or is it his lingering humanity?
Back in s2, Spike was Buffy's darker side and Angel her light. So can we infer that she is as blind to her own darkness as she is to Angel's? In s4, Riley is Buffy's lighter side, then Dawn in s5. According to Joss, what Buffy's missing in s6, she finds thru Dawn. After her integration, she no longer needs anyone to represent pieces of her, yet the affinity (mutuality) remains btwn her and Spike. She had to go thru her own struggle first to understand and empathize with his. I think it also leads her to finally finding some much needed perspective on her relationship with Angel.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2004 6:19:33 GMT -5
Agreed. The crypt scene very much forshadows the attempted rape. I do agree the the univite mirrors when she uninvited Angel, except that univiting Angel occurred to her in direct response to him being in her house leaving pictures and didn't appear to love her at all. Univiting Spike was directly in response to him trying to be nice, more or less successfully, and revealing that he was in love with her. It's easy to forget that in the way that the episode is constructed. After the times when she caught him in her house while she "thought" he hated her, she did nothing. Of course, she was distracted each time, but she appeared to take it as out of sight, out of mind sort of thing and not something of extreme importance. So maybe thats more of a contrast than a comparison. Or something. Of course the crypt scene debacle only proved that Buffy was justified in her decision (again forshadowy of the AR scene.) That comment that Buffy makes when she's talking to Warren always jumps out at me too. Thanks I will. Love the comments on the uninvite. I do think that over and over, Buffy's actions toward Spike are deliberately shown as "exactly opposite" as they were toward Angel - most notable in the overall "blind to anything bad" and "blind to anything good" approach. But it is in the details also, and I hadn't really noticed it here - but it is here. Buffy uninvites Angel because he begins to express hatred; Buffy uninvites Spike because he begins to express love. (She does make that decision prior to when he chains her up, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2004 6:35:32 GMT -5
Two words: Devistating(ly) Accurate Thanks so much for the feedback, LadyDi. I wondered how you would react to my slicing and dicing. Definitely, I am speaking "in the Crush present" when I say it is not true love. The potential is there and they seemed headed that way at the end - I mean, toward being open to finding out just what, if any, continuing role they are meant to play in each other's lives. But BtVS had to end, and then AtS had to end, and though I liked that both Buffy and Spike wanted time to "bake," it was disappointing to know we aren't likely to ever see the fully baked versions, and the results of that. You mention below that they each have a tremendous impact on each other, and I agree. People who have that kind of impact on you . . . you never forget them, and you always love them, they are always in your heart . . . but they are not necessarily always in your life, or meant to be. It is a Great Love - it becomes truly a thing of beauty, at the end. Love is never perfect. I don't know that I agree that Joss saw the AR as too much of an obstacle to EVER overcome, but I agree with the way he handled it in Season 7 - as something that had created a huge obstacle for both. I pick #2. I think it fits with the constant reference to Spike as a "freak." Agreed all around. Buffy's final discussion with Angel is amazing - Buffy has begun to allow, into her conscious mind, the idea that maybe, just maybe, her relationship with Angel was not the height of perfection. Buffy is through being a martyr - on the altar of love, or the altar of her Slayerhood.
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Oct 2, 2004 11:11:04 GMT -5
It's also intriguing to me what exactly inspired Buffy to uninvite him. She's caught him lurking outside her house once and in her house twice, when theoretically in her mind she believed that he still hated her and would kill her if only he had the chance. In this episode he tries to socialize with her and socializes with Dawn and Joyce. She asks Willow to univite him _before_ the whole crypt scene debacle. That she makes the decision when she does seems to indicate that she feels threatened most of all by Spike lounging comfortably in her kitchen with her family and being nice to her. What kind of message does this send? "Love is dangerous, don't want any of that in my house, unh unh, no way." Yes, I've always wondered about Buffy's seeming lack of thought about the initial invitation in "Becoming 2". After the very recent problems with Angelus and the need to disinvite him, she goes and, despite saying she doesn't trust him, invites Spike, her heretofore mortal enemy, into her house, leaves the dangerous killer alone with her mother without hesitation, and never even seems to think about the open invitation again. Granted, she skips town very hastily and, after a summer away, may not be thinking clearly enough to address this in early Season 2, but Spike's return in "Lover's Walk" and easy access to her mother should have been a wake up call. Yes, Spike's cocoa-fueled teary confessional not leading to any actual harm to Joyce, but again, no action is taken to disinvite. Once more in "Harsh Light of Day", an acrimonious and potentially deadly encounter with the returning and, as we are intentionally reminded by the writers, evil Spike does not cause Buffy or Giles or any of the other Scubbies to think of the still open invitation to the Summers home - and Joyce all alone with Buffy away at the dorm. So it takes Spike being in love with Buffy to scare her into taking precautions? Interesting! Just plot holes, or something else going on in Buffy's unconscious mind? Spring, although I've just registered to reply, for a long while I've enjoyed your Spikecentricity analyses and have gained a deeper perspective of the Spuffy I still love as I watch their journey through your eyes. Thank you for your insight!
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 2, 2004 20:48:14 GMT -5
Yes, I've always wondered about Buffy's seeming lack of thought about the initial invitation in "Becoming 2". After the very recent problems with Angelus and the need to disinvite him, she goes and, despite saying she doesn't trust him, invites Spike, her heretofore mortal enemy, into her house, leaves the dangerous killer alone with her mother without hesitation, and never even seems to think about the open invitation again. Granted, she skips town very hastily and, after a summer away, may not be thinking clearly enough to address this in early Season 2, but Spike's return in "Lover's Walk" and easy access to her mother should have been a wake up call. Yes, Spike's cocoa-fueled teary confessional not leading to any actual harm to Joyce, but again, no action is taken to disinvite. Once more in "Harsh Light of Day", an acrimonious and potentially deadly encounter with the returning and, as we are intentionally reminded by the writers, evil Spike does not cause Buffy or Giles or any of the other Scubbies to think of the still open invitation to the Summers home - and Joyce all alone with Buffy away at the dorm. So it takes Spike being in love with Buffy to scare her into taking precautions? Interesting! Just plot holes, or something else going on in Buffy's unconscious mind? ehills, leftlady - great discussion. Never realized it before it was brought up here, but it is so true: Buffy uninvites Angel because he STARTS wanting her dead; She uninvites Spike because he STOPS wanting her dead. She even mentions this to Willow right before she asks her to do the uninivite - I mean, she says something about "maybe he will start wanting me dead again" and Willow jokes, "Here's hoping!" I didn't give that little exchange much thought. Interesting that Spike's declarations of love feel like more of a threat to Buffy, than his death threats. You're welcome - and thanks for the feedback and adding to my perspective as well. Please come back anytime!
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Oct 3, 2004 14:55:08 GMT -5
Thanks! How lame am I?
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Oct 9, 2004 2:03:04 GMT -5
You know, I had always taken this to be a positive comment, and that he was simply identifying with Dawn as something not quite human, but I think you are absolutely right. I think this is the kind of thing Giles is talking about in "Lessons" when he says, "In the end, we all are who we are, no matter how much we may appear to have changed."
|
|
|
Post by Cal on Oct 9, 2004 21:26:54 GMT -5
I loved this analysis, Spring. Another one of my favourite episodes that you've made even more enjoyable for me to watch. Thank you.
Even though Spike deserves the disinvite, his face at the end gets me every time. JM's acting in this episode is outstanding...maybe too good at times. Should I really be feeling so much empathy for a soulless vampire? Shouldn't I be sympathising with Buffy? But no...Spike makes me feel more than any other character I've ever known.
Thanks for continuing to write these analyses for us, Spring. I haven't been able to comment as much as I'd like, but I wanted you to know how much I enjoy reading them.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 10, 2004 0:01:56 GMT -5
You know, I had always taken this to be a positive comment, and that he was simply identifying with Dawn as something not quite human, but I think you are absolutely right. I think this is the kind of thing Giles is talking about in "Lessons" when he says, "In the end, we all are who we are, no matter how much we may appear to have changed." I had the same feeling - I mean, that Spike's conscious purpose for the comment is a positive one - it's meant to reassure Dawn and to suggest she'll be fine. But underneath that, we're also learning that Spike isn't consciously aware of the way his past continues to affect him - even though we can see that "how he started out" does matter for him.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 10, 2004 0:06:40 GMT -5
I loved this analysis, Spring. Another one of my favourite episodes that you've made even more enjoyable for me to watch. Thank you. Even though Spike deserves the disinvite, his face at the end gets me every time. JM's acting in this episode is outstanding...maybe too good at times. Should I really be feeling so much empathy for a soulless vampire? Shouldn't I be sympathising with Buffy? But no...Spike makes me feel more than any other character I've ever known. Thanks for continuing to write these analyses for us, Spring. I haven't been able to comment as much as I'd like, but I wanted you to know how much I enjoy reading them. Thanks so much for the feedback, cal. I love to hear from you on these, but I understand about being busy. I agree with you that James' portrayal of Spike just wrings the sympathy out of the viewer. But honestly - even though I know James has made comments like this himself - I don't think his acting is "too good." I think it is just right, and just as Joss wanted it to be. By the time we get to Season 5, everyone was well acquainted with James and his acting style and abilities, and - well, I can't help but believe the finished product is exactly what it is meant to be.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Oct 10, 2004 0:38:31 GMT -5
Thanks so much for the feedback, cal. I love to hear from you on these, but I understand about being busy. I agree with you that James' portrayal of Spike just wrings the sympathy out of the viewer. But honestly - even though I know James has made comments like this himself - I don't think his acting is "too good." I think it is just right, and just as Joss wanted it to be. By the time we get to Season 5, everyone was well acquainted with James and his acting style and abilities, and - well, I can't help but believe the finished product is exactly what it is meant to be. I think I'd have to second this. Spike is endearing and sympathetic in this episode, but he's also evil, creepy, and pathetic at the same time. So the audience roots for Spike in all his efforts and also roots for Buffy to reject him. Even if JM or others feel that the character is "too" anything, what we actually see in the episode is what's important, not what the original intent was or what so and so thinks should have happened. On a completely unrelated note, I've always wondered when exactly Spike came up with his plan to chain Buffy up so he could talk to her. Since Dru's psychic, I'd think that he wouldn't be able to fool her, but I have a real hard time believing that he ever considered killing Buffy and changed his mind at the last minute. Does anyone have any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Cal on Oct 10, 2004 8:53:32 GMT -5
Thanks so much for the feedback, cal. I love to hear from you on these, but I understand about being busy. I agree with you that James' portrayal of Spike just wrings the sympathy out of the viewer. But honestly - even though I know James has made comments like this himself - I don't think his acting is "too good." I think it is just right, and just as Joss wanted it to be. By the time we get to Season 5, everyone was well acquainted with James and his acting style and abilities, and - well, I can't help but believe the finished product is exactly what it is meant to be.Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I was criticising James' performance. Quite the opposite, in fact. I agree with the bolded statement above, even if I didn't come across as though I did. I spend way too much time thinking about all this. Some wonderful discussion going on. Very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 10, 2004 9:59:18 GMT -5
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I was criticising James' performance. Quite the opposite, in fact. I agree with the bolded statement above, even if I didn't come across as though I did. I spend way too much time thinking about all this. Some wonderful discussion going on. Very interesting. You weren't criticizing James' performance? Darn it, I was hoping to report you to James, thinking this would move you (even further) down on his list of women he must hook up with. I'll have you know I was number 2,345,678 the last time I looked. Seriously, I didn't take it that way; I know of your unbridled lust admiration for James. So I figured you were referring to often repeated "JM is just too charasmatic" conjecture about why Spike came off so sympathetically. And yes, you should stop spending so much time thinking about Spike. May I suggest, perhaps the ruggedly handsome Giles? Or cute-as-a-button Xander?
|
|
|
Post by Cal on Oct 10, 2004 13:33:44 GMT -5
You weren't criticizing James' performance? Darn it, I was hoping to report you to James, thinking this would move you (even further) down on his list of women he must hook up with. I'll have you know I was number 2,345,678 the last time I looked. Seriously, I didn't take it that way; I know of your unbridled lust admiration for James. So I figured you were referring to often repeated "JM is just too charasmatic" conjecture about why Spike came off so sympathetically. And yes, you should stop spending so much time thinking about Spike. May I suggest, perhaps the ruggedly handsome Giles? Or cute-as-a-button Xander? LOL! The fact it was 4am when I posted my original comment didn't help much. I was suffering from insomnia yet again. Yes...I think about Spike way too much. But I wouldn't have it any other way.
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Oct 11, 2004 21:39:50 GMT -5
Another fabulous job, Spring. And some extremely interesting posts in response, too!
Both right and both wrong, the unconscious nature of each of their real issues, the comparison of both Spike and Buffy's "dishonesty", etc. etc. Just all such very very insightful ideas.
I have no illusion that I will be as coherent and thoughtful as you, but will attempt to post a few idle musings and see where they take me.
I loved your metaphor of the dark and the light, because it points to some a very important issue in the Jossverse. What is clearcut and what is ambiguous; what is black and white and what is gray? As you said, it is no coincidence that this episode takes place on BtVS just when things are getting very gray over on AtS. It's a wonderful commentary on the limitations Buffy creates for herself when she "backpedals" away from facing the real Angel; frankly a much more interesting person than the image she has created over time in her head. By building an imaginary perfect Angel, that neither he nor any other man can ever really hope to live up to, she continues to set herself up for disapointment.
As you said: "She can’t allow herself to believe or perceive that a soulless vampire could love in any way, or change even a teensy-weensy bit, without toppling her most prized possession: her very elaborate Angel shrine."
Another point that is very interesting to me? This is, I think, the only time that Spike introduces a comparison between himself and Angel. Usually, he is the first to scoff at and deny all suggestions of similarity. So why in the "date" scene does he do this? Because he wants Buffy to think well of him, and he knows she thinks well of Angel, so - compare. That's the easy surface answer and it's true. But also, listen to his words as he compares himself. Buffy says: "Angel was good". Spike says "I can be good." He doesn't say he is good, even though that would be the logical sentence if he really is trying to compare himself to the way that Buffy is describing Angel. He says "I can". This distinction is important to me, because I think it goes right to the heart of the matter. As you said:
I don't think (at this point in his unlife) that he really means/understands this consciously, but I think the metaphor is meant to be there. We're meant to be directed toward that idea of making choices.
Lola
|
|