Buffy is a very heroic, and believably portrayed, character, and I identify with her a lot, especially in the later seasons. However, I have problems with her authority. When Willow, Spike, Faith, Xander, or Dawn (for starters) criticize Buffy's authority, I'm usually at least a bit sympathetic. Buffy is benevolent, but she is in some senses a monarch -- she earns her leadership role through constant sacrifice and through hard work, but at the same time her strength is no guarantee that her decisions will be the best of anyone's.
Part of her problem is her leadership role models have been less than stellar. Giles - is a decent educator, but not much in the authority/leader department - and a wee bit too machiavellian for his own good. Robin Wood? Ditto. And he has massive mother issues, plus trained by a Watcher. And the Watcher Council? Oh dear. Then there's Professor Walsh, Riley, and Angel - who well...tend to also be a bit too machiavellian for their own good.
She has had no good role models to follow. (From a Doylist perspective, I think it's a nice metaphor for Hollywood and the Entertainment Biz.)
In short she's making it up as she goes and following what Wood and Giles have more or less dictated. It's not until she throws out the rule book in End of Days/Chosen and lets everyone make their own choices that things begin to work. But even then - you basically have a lone wolf personality attempting to lead people. It's not as easy as it looks - and she's not charismatic.
t's not that Buffy doesn't question herself -- she does. She does think hard about how to use her power, especially as time goes on, but the deck is still somewhat stacked until the "Chosen" spell changes the fundamental arrangement -- Buffy ultimately makes the final call, and is it fair for any person, no matter how virtuous, to be always the one to make that last call?
And...sometimes, there's no right or wrong answer. No matter what you do, you're screwed. Buffy does however at least take full responsibility for her actions, which makes her more admirable than most.
I think with Buffy, the narrative sort of shows the problems with having a sole leader, even when that sole leader is near the best she can be. With Angel, the more nihilistic take is showing what happens with a much worse leader -- one who trades in his team.
Angel is a fascinating character who I like a lot. But I agree - his story is the negative take on heroism. Or how it can go wrong. He is the typical noir hero - the ends justify the means, tries to do the right thing but inevitably does the wrong one and ends up falling into the abyss.
I thought the series did a good job of depicting how easy it is to make these types of mistakes, yet think you are doing the right thing - that you are making the world better.
Angel was complex - his heart was in the right place, he wanted to save people, he wanted redemption, he wanted to be a hero - but he was his own worst enemy. He kept making the same mistakes - hunting the approval of an absent father figure, or trying to redeem himself through a son that shouldn't even exist.
He wanted to be superman, but ended up being batman. Ultimately making his world worse than better - which is in keeping with the gothic genre.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2014-10-19 02:28 am (UTC)Buffy is a very heroic, and believably portrayed, character, and I identify with her a lot, especially in the later seasons. However, I have problems with her authority. When Willow, Spike, Faith, Xander, or Dawn (for starters) criticize Buffy's authority, I'm usually at least a bit sympathetic. Buffy is benevolent, but she is in some senses a monarch -- she earns her leadership role through constant sacrifice and through hard work, but at the same time her strength is no guarantee that her decisions will be the best of anyone's.
Part of her problem is her leadership role models have been less than stellar. Giles - is a decent educator, but not much in the authority/leader department - and a wee bit too machiavellian for his own good. Robin Wood? Ditto. And he has massive mother issues, plus trained by a Watcher. And the Watcher Council? Oh dear. Then there's Professor Walsh, Riley, and Angel - who well...tend to also be a bit too machiavellian for their own good.
She has had no good role models to follow. (From a Doylist perspective, I think it's a nice metaphor for Hollywood and the Entertainment Biz.)
In short she's making it up as she goes and following what Wood and Giles have more or less dictated. It's not until she throws out the rule book in End of Days/Chosen and lets everyone make their own choices that things begin to work. But even then - you basically have a lone wolf personality attempting to lead people. It's not as easy as it looks - and she's not charismatic.
t's not that Buffy doesn't question herself -- she does. She does think hard about how to use her power, especially as time goes on, but the deck is still somewhat stacked until the "Chosen" spell changes the fundamental arrangement -- Buffy ultimately makes the final call, and is it fair for any person, no matter how virtuous, to be always the one to make that last call?
And...sometimes, there's no right or wrong answer. No matter what you do, you're screwed. Buffy does however at least take full responsibility for her actions, which makes her more admirable than most.
I think with Buffy, the narrative sort of shows the problems with having a sole leader, even when that sole leader is near the best she can be. With Angel, the more nihilistic take is showing what happens with a much worse leader -- one who trades in his team.
Angel is a fascinating character who I like a lot. But I agree - his story is the negative take on heroism. Or how it can go wrong. He is the typical noir hero - the ends justify the means, tries to do the right thing but inevitably does the wrong one and ends up falling into the abyss.
I thought the series did a good job of depicting how easy it is to make these types of mistakes, yet think you are doing the right thing - that you are making the world better.
Angel was complex - his heart was in the right place, he wanted to save people, he wanted redemption, he wanted to be a hero - but he was his own worst enemy. He kept making the same mistakes - hunting the approval of an absent father figure, or trying to redeem himself through a son that shouldn't even exist.
He wanted to be superman, but ended up being batman. Ultimately making his world worse than better - which is in keeping with the gothic genre.