Buffy season 8...

[shadowkat]

Picked up the latest Buffy issue today from my neighborhood comic shop - Rocketship, which is a pleasure to visit. It's designed more like an art gallery meets book store than your traditional comic shop. No dusty bins of old comics. Everything clearly displayed. Framed underground comics on the walls. With a chair in the corner. I can actually enter it without fear of having an allergy attack.

I ended up reading it while watching The Office (which was a hoot and a half) and 30 Rock (not as funny as usual - I think it had something to do with the added length, situation comedies do not fair well if they are drawn out too long, I've discovered. )

Mixed feelings regarding the issue. Haven't read anyone else's reviews as of yet, so this is my unaffected opinion - in that I haven't a clue what anyone else thought. I think reading others views of something before I offer my own - will often affect how I write it.



Not sure what Whedon is up to here. But he clearly plans to address the Angel/Buffy/Spike triangle of doom up front. My hunch is: Whedon will side-step the issue again, and more or less state she loves them both just differently. Either that or establish Angel is her one true love who she can never have - so as a result both characters won't ever move on or *truly* love anyone else - if he does that, then he's more or less fallen into a gothic romance by Laurell K. Hamilton or maybe Nabokov's Lolita meets Xenia Warrior Princess. Can't quite decide which. I'm admittedly biased. I want Buffy with either Xander, Spike, Faith or by her lonesome. Angel? I think his true love is either Spike or Darla. Can't quite decide which. Okay mostly joking there.

The gist? Evil Amy puts Buffy under a spell, so she's in a perpetual nightmare, and can only be woken by true love's kiss. Meanwhile the evil dead are climbing the castle walls. Xander's comments to Amy are priceless and quite funny. I adore Xander. "So, let me get this straight, it can't be a friend who loves her...it has to be someone who is passionately in love with her, and she doesn't have to love them back?" (Well, you could fix that pretty easily - just call up Angel or Spike - assuming of course this isn't taking place after NFA and they aren't dead or worse. And well that they know Spike is alive, which the jury is still out on. Problem with comic books is you never know when the stupid things are taking place in the time line. This is how writers get away with all sorts of weird stuff.) Xander's reaction to the evil dead? "Man, you're really pulling out all the classics on this one Amy." Hee.

The nightmare kiss scene with Xander was a tad confusing - I'm not quite sure when Buffy began dreaming...my guess before the conversation with Xander. Which means some of that bit, which she wasn't privy too, must have happened before she went into dream state?

Found it funny and enlightening. Yep, always figured part of Xander and Buffy's problem was they are both attracted to monsters, because they believe they are monsters themselves and fear destroying those that they are with. Can we say parental issues? Xander is attracted to Buffy because he knows he can't physically hurt her, he won't ever be his father with her. Buffy is not attracted to Xander because she fears she will hurt him, and she's attracted to Spike and Angel because she knows she can't hurt them, that they are equally matched. Plus they are older and in some ways probably represent her unresolved issues regarding her own father and his abandonment of her.

The main reason Buffy and Angel have had problems since S2, is now Buffy believes she can and will destroy Angel just as Angel believes he can and will destroy Buffy - after all that's more or less what happened in Season 2 - so they can't trust themselves with one another or for that matter trust one another period. She can't trust that Angel won't become the evil Angelus and destroy her entire world as he attempted to do and almost accomplished and Angel can't trust that Buffy won't send him to hell. Sort of takes the whole notion of star-crossed to the extreme. Those two get together? The world ends. Or we all die of boredom a la Veronica Mars S3. It's complicated and very psychological. Whedon likes psychological issues - sometimes I think he's a frustrated psychology major, since he seems to dwell on them more than anything else. Whedon's characters spend more time contemplating their own and each others navels than any superheroes I've come across to be honest - which may explain why I enjoy them.

Then there's Dawn. I'm enjoying Dawn. Even though some of the lines regarding her seem odd.
"The feminine hygiene product called Kenny"??? Uhm okay. Maybe my brain is just too fried to read this? But her talk with Xander - was great.

Also enjoyed Giles...even if we saw far too little of him. Whedon seems to use Giles sparingly for some reason. Giles struggling with the tables being turned, now slayers are in the majority, with watchers in the minority.

The central mystery is intriguing. I'm becoming more and more convinced that Amy's boyfriend is a sewn together Caleb. I *really* hope I'm wrong about that. If Spike hadn't ended up on Angel, I would have been worried it was him.



Okay must go to bed now.

Comments

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Of course, The nightmare isn't about her romantic choices. Actually her romantic choices weren't ever about romance, so much as metaphors for Buffy's current emotional state/journey. The point of the romance was solely where does this take the character and what does it reveal about her. Whedon may be many things, but a romance writer isn't one of them. And don't misunderstand me - that really does not bother me. I'm actually glad he isn't. Because if he was Buffy would have trotted off into the sunset with a Shan-shued Angel by now.

That said, Whedon does have a tendency to travel the same ground repeatedly or rather obsessively. And while it's sort of interesting to explore Buffy's general feelings of guilt, shame, and darkness - it doesn't give me any new insight into the character and still leaves certain items a tad ambiguous.

In short, the writing feels a tad on the lazy side at the moment. He's just going over old ground.

Pt 1

[arethusa2.livejournal.com]

Whedon has a very good grasp of psychology; it's probably what I like best about him. Yes, the funny and the rest, but it's the psychological issues that keep me coming back. He understands how one's childhood affect the development of personality, and how personality shapes our choices. And we do indeed do the same thing over and over and over, until we learn to recognize and break that pattern.

I totally agree that many of Buffy's issues with men go back to her parents. Going back to the movie, Buffy had little contact with her social, successful parents growing up. That craving for attention and affection and the shallowness of her parents' lives contributed to her own shallowness, desire for approval, and underlying anger at them, turned to herself. She is a success by their standards, popular, pretty and social, and then everything changes, and she must ask herself if her parents would still accept her if she is unkept, unlady-like, and solitary. She hides all the changes as much as she can, and when she can't handle the contradiction between her two lives any more she tells her parents, who institutionalize her until she recants her stories about vampires, violence and death.

Fortunately for Buffy the changes in her life end up making her closer to her mother, and she discovers that for all her mother's failings, her mother loves her beyond words, and that gives her some confidence, although not enough during the worst times she goes through. When her mother dies and her father abandons her she becomes utterly overwhelmed by her new responsibilities, that she doesn't have the self-confidence and self-respect to overcome. She instigates a relationship with the one man--much older--who she knows will never reject her, who is obsessed with her. And that helps for a while, but the underlying issues are still there and still reoccur whenever something new comes up.

With Spike she has the approval and love she craves, but it's deeply unsatisfying for several reasons. First, it is not the love of her father. She's an adult and can never go back and get the love she needed as a child. Even if Hank did come back and did everything she wanted, it wouldn't change the past, or eradicate the hurt of his neglect. Secondly, she knows his approval and love are at least partially illusions, based not on her personality but instead on his needs. His love isn't real, his approval worthless, and in the end she is left with the same fears and longing for love. Thirdly, Spike is an eternal adolescent, a vampire, and will never change himself. (Of course he did, but for psychologically sound reasons. It would be impossible for him to decide to change his motivations (he is unaware of them), but he could change for other reasons--the same reasons he became obsessed with her in the first place, a need for a strong woman.)

Re: Pt 2

[arethusa2.livejournal.com]

So over and over, Buffy seeks love and approval. Angel loves her but must abandon her too for practical reasons. (And Angel has issues too, that make him repeat his own patterns.) Parker is a pig, leaving her questioning herself instead of giving him the beating he needed. (Although Cavewoman!Buffy did the job--no emotional conflicts there.) Riley, like her parents, is not quite able to accept her as she is, strong and vulnerable both, leading to their eventual break-up. Then Spike, who is unsatisfying for reasons already mentioned. In the comic, she is post-Season 7 and has resolved many of her old issues. She's accepted the past, forgiven those who've harmed her (I think), and now must figure out what to do, and how to do it, while mothering Dawn.

What now? Learning how to apply the lessons life's taught her, trying to overcome old habits, which is terribly difficult and usually involved much back-sliding, and trying to learn how to live up to her potential, now that some of her old barriers are gone. Now is when she learns what she is capable of, how far she can go. And what is in her heart, suffocated for so long by her fears and needs.

I am so looking forward to more of this comic. I don't think she'll revert or reverse much--Xander is her friend, Spike and Angel are in the past, at least for a little while, and she's ready to move forward, wherever that goes. I agree that it's fabulous to be able to hear her thoughts. Season 7 was so tough because her thoughts had to have been very much at odds with what she was actually doing.

Re: Pt 2

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I don't know, on the fence.

Will wait and see. The good bit is that Buffy is only six issues, then we switch to Faith for six issues, and maybe another character.

To add to your analysis - you left out or skimmed over Angel, who was the stand-in for Hank not Spike. Spike was basically the person who she felt would never reject her and in S7 - unconditional love. But unsatisfying for many of the reasons you mention. I think he grows more than Angel does or can, because of the two Angel is forever trapped by his own Daddy issues. It's what Buffy and Angel have in common Daddy issues. Both need Daddy's approval. Both can never achieve it of course, which is symbolized partly by their attraction to each other and inability to ever be together.

The problem with Angel was he represented for Buffy all her issues with Hank. Re-watch the scene from Nightmares and compare it to the scene from Innocence - Hank and Angel more or less say some of the same things. Then compare - Buffy's birthdays with Hank - going to ice capades to her ice skating date with Angel, because Daddy is no longer there. She retreats to LA - where Daddy is, but not to Daddy, when Angel is sent to Hell.

I always find it odd that Angel fans don't see that. It's so obvious.

Re: Pt 2

[arethusa2.livejournal.com]

Yes, Spike could and did change. It's his saving grace, in a way, something Angel's not as good at. Angel goes on repeating his own patterns endlessly, but Spike was able to do what others couldn't; he forgave his mother for what she said as a vampire, and implicitly what she did as a human, smothering him yet giving him the attention he craved, after all he didn't have a father. And that's another essay, to figure out Spike's feelings towards his father. But to do that we'd only need to see his relationship with other men, and especially how he treated Giles in Tabla Rasa. Back to his mother--in Season 5 Angel he seemed to have settled that problem to an extent. Spike was able to change because he was able to forgive his mother and accept himself. He might, ironically, be able to do that because of his mother. The more sensitive a child is, the harder he'll try to adapt to please others, thereby forcing the child to squash his own needs to satisfy the emotional needs of his parent(s). Even having one sympathetic parent makes a difference, and for all of her problems Spike's mother was very sympathetic to him. She gave him enough love to create a core of self-confidence in himself.

I could write pages on Angel's father issues and how it affected his relationships. I agree, it's very obvious that Angel stands in for Buffy's father emotionally, that her interest in an older man is no coincidence; she's looking for the love and attention she didn't get as a child. Every child who's even somewhat unloved and/or neglected goes through this, although they can't admit it because then they would be admitting they were unloved. And if they admit that they'll have to give up on getting that love, a terrible and terribly hard thing to do. But adults can't ever go back, and have to let that go (as your earlier poem said). You just have to let it go, mourn the loss, and move on. People who identify with that need for parental approval that they'll never get in the way they want might have a hard time admitting to themself that Buffy's relationship with Angel, as special as it was, was built on need as much as love.

I didn't know that about the comic. Faith, huh? That'll be so cool. She *really* has issues!

Re: Pt 2

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yes. The comics are split into segments or mini series arcs. Whedon is writing the first 6 or 8 issues. Then Brian K. Vauhn takes over and writes a six comic arc for Faith - including the same characters, with Faith journeying from Cleveland to England and it's supposed to be very dark, since that's Vahn's style. Next up I think is Espenson and Goodard.
Each arc will focus on a different character. It will run for 30 issues.

Then Whedon is co-writing/co-helming this summer an Angel S6 with Brian Lynch, who is currently writing some amazing Spike comics - Spike:Asylum
and Spike:Shadow Puppets - the art in those puts the above comic to shame.
It's *really* good and the writing - perfect. Lynch nails the noir aspects of the Angelverse.

People keep saying Spike had no father. How do you know? It's never really stated one way or the other. He could have had one and the guy just wasn't around very much or died before his mother did. His mother was hardly young and was sick with TB, dying from it. More than likely his father did as well. We aren't told. Outside of that one quibble, I agree with your analysis of Spike.

I also agree - one of the reasons I read Whedon is I like the psychological analysis. Am a frustrated psychology major myself...sometimes I think. Stories that focus on the psyche's of their characters or explore the psychological bits - intrigue me more than those that don't. Yep, I Could write reams on both Angel and Spike (wait, I already have, haven't I? LOL!).

No, I like the comics more or less. Have really low expectations...which helps. Sorry if any of this came off snarky, been irritible today. It was a good analysis - I enjoyed reading it.

Re: Pt 2

[arethusa2.livejournal.com]

Thanks. :) We've written a lot, but there's more to write, lol.

Yes, I have pretty low expectations too, simply because comics are so short.

About Spike, I assume his father hasn't been around for a while because Spike is so close to his mother. Of course he'll have had a father in the social circles he moved in. I like the idea that he died of tb, that makes sense, but who knows? But you're right, that's just an assumption that I haven't thought about a great deal. It's worth figuring out, though.

Re: Pt 2

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I'm hoping the writers will reveal it at some point.

My theory? I think he had a father and possibly a few siblings. Just because he's devoted to his mother, does not mean the others don't exist. Whedon after all was completely devoted to his mother, a real "momma's" boy and had a couple of brothers and a father.

Also Angel - remember had two parents, but we get almost no information on his mother. She's barely seen or referenced. Any more than Wesely's is for that matter. He also had siblings. We only see his little sister who names him. His focus was on pleasing his father - so we dwell mainly on that.
Whedon sort of split the two issues between Spike and Angel. Spike = Mother issues. Angel = Father issues. But at the same times, did explore via their relationships with other characters - mother, sibling, father issues. Their relationships with each other - Dru and Darla - are very telling and the fact that both vampires stayed in that group as long as they did does reveal something.

So I think his father could have done one of the following:
1. Died of a disease or even abroad - it is the Victorian Age, he could have been an officer in India for all we know. Or died of TB for that matter - which would have been ironic.
2. Divorced his wife and married someone else - also possible during the Victorian Age. And fits what happened to Buffy. Buffy after all had a father - he just left her.
3. Just left.

As for sibilings?
They could have died of disease. They may not exist (we don't know - nothing concrete on that). Or they could be much older and elsewhere. If brothers - would make sense they aren't around.

Re: Pt 2

[arethusa2.livejournal.com]

And sisters could have married and left home. In fact, men who grow up surrounded by sisters tend to feel very at home around women, and understand them better than men without sisters. Sisters wouldn't change the dynamic between Spike and his mother, who is dependent on him in many ways.

If I remember correctly, one had to apply to the government (state religion, after all) to get permission to divorce, and that would have been a great scandal. Anne didn't strike me as strong enough to do that. Of course her husband could have just left her, as men often did in those times. And that might explain why Anne clung so much to Spike, better than death even. Plus Spike's reaction to the idea that Giles was his father was very negative. He assumed Giles was going through a mid-life crisis, complete with shiny car and young girlfriend. His father could have gone to India as an officer or to run a tea plantation or work for the British governemt there, or ru noff to Paris with an opera singer, for all we know, lol. Or just died of a disease. Based on his reaction to Angelus, I'm guessing Spike didn't have brothers, though. He was very enamoured of Angelus' manliness, and that might mean he wasn't accustomed to having a man to look up to. (Pure specualtion,of course.)

Re: Pt 2

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

What you stated above seems to be the general consensus. Most if not the majority of Spike fanfic writers and essayists have determined he had sisters (possibly three - no idea why that number) and a father who either left them or died.

There is evidence in the series that leads one to believe this was the case. His relationship with both Dawn and Willow. How he handles women. Men raised with sisters - tend to be better with women for some reason or more comfortable with them, I've discovered. Also it fits with the fact that Buffy got involved with Spike after Dawn's entrance into the plot. Whedon has a tendency to like to parallel character relationships.

So I think you're theory above is probably what happened.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

Probably should apologise first for starting off on a contrary foot yesterday but I can't seem to get off it. A lot of people were commenting below about how dificult to read Buffy was in S7 but the only ambiguity I could see related to her feelings for Spike. If Spike's your character I can see how that might be frustrating but it was never that bothersome to me. I found the relationship fascinating but never needed to know how it might end.

I think Whedon is setting up something new about the "darkness." I don't think it's interesting that Buffy has a dark side per se but have always been fascinted by the way the series explored the specific forms that darkness took, instead of leaving it as some kind of Jungian black box. In S7 her darkness wasn't her guilt so much as her being disconnected, unique, alone. Now she's changed all that but still has to cope with the consequences, she changed the world along with her own position in it. I'm interested in seeing how that responsibility affects her.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Buffy was harder to read in S7 - but not impossible to read. But harder. I more or less knew what she was feeling - wrote five essays on it. All of which were more or less in line with the writers views according to interviews and commentaries. (What can I say? I had way too much time on my hands in 2002 and 2003.)

At any rate, I think most of the reactions you are seeing relating to Buffy in S7 (which by the way was amongst my favorite seasons - I prefer it to S2 and S3 which admittedly might have been tighter but were less ambiguous and less experimental, I'm amongst the very few who feel that way and I adored the ambiguos nature of the Buffy/Spike relationship in that season - it fascinated me. I preferred it to the unambiguous/anvil laden B/A romance. Give me a little ambiguity in my romances, please.) - but the people who did not like S7 aren't upset with how Spike was treated. Or how she responded to him. They missed the happy, light, Buffy. One who smiled, joked, laughed - said "Beep me - if it is the apocalypse!" They miss the humor. They also miss the emotion - the Buffy who collasped against the wall, burst into tears, laughed her head off - made the funny quips. Really had very little to do with Spike. In fact, you could easily have switched Spike with Riley or Angel - and people would have felt the same.

I don't dislike the comic. I just think it is flawed and doesn't quite work in places. Some of the dialogue throws me off - and I'm unclear right now how much of it is a dream. Ann1962 posted an interesting theory that everything after the last scene with the General is a dream, including the bedroom sequence with Xander, the slayers, Amy, and the evil dead climbing the walls. Which is actually a theory - I like a great deal. Because it would explain some of the weird inconsistencies - that jarred me while reading it. Read her post - she does a good job of pointing them out.
(And Ann1962 is *not* a shipper in any way shape or form or for that matter a Spike fan. In fact most of the critiques I've read about the comic are from non-Spike fans.)

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

I like Spike. I do. But as far as Buffy goes I paradoxically find less demonstrative characters easier to read, it's as if the big loud emotional displays blare out all the underlying subtleties. It's often hard to remember that it works differently for other people, many of whom disliked S7 as you say.

I quite liked Ann's idea although I didn't find the specific inconsistencies she cited inconsistent. But I think, as a non-comic reader, the thing I enjoyed about this one was how off kilter it made me. My problem with the previous issue was how quickly it went by, it was hard to get very invested but this one I had to keep skipping back to confirm that what I thought I was reading was actually happening and I'm still not sure. It's been such a long time the series was over that I'd forgotten the sheer excitement of not knowing what to make of things, what might happen, that Whedon is not a safe writer. It's all rather giddy making.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

But as far as Buffy goes I paradoxically find less demonstrative characters easier to read, it's as if the big loud emotional displays blare out all the underlying subtleties. It's often hard to remember that it works differently for other people, many of whom disliked S7 as you say.

It is hard to remember. I've been thinking about that a lot. How people just plain think and see things differently, no matter how many interests or values they may have in common. We all forget this, I think - assuming everyone is seeing it more or less the same way.
And it's sooo frustrating when they don't. For example - I've fallen in love with the Dresden Files and adore Paul Blackthorn's performance, but am clearly in the minority - the frustration is that I know it will be cancelled in favor of a tv show and performances that do nothing for me and do not work for me - such as Doctor Who or a series like Star-Gate.

Buffy was much the same way - I think. I remember getting into heated debates with people way back in 2003 regarding the acting. A lot of people said that the actors were phoning it in in S7. They weren't emoting as much and were more restrained. Quite a few fans in fact, believed that James Marsters was a better actor in the earlier seasons, when he was more demonstrative and less restrained. Marsters would *completely* disagree - stating he was far too theaterical and projected too much for the screen and that his performance was actually the best in S7 BTVS and S5 ATS, and that the earlier work, such as Fool For Love makes him cringe. Who's right? No one. It's what works for you. Like you state above. They are just different approachs or styles.

It becomes frustrating when the majority likes a style I don't like, because of course that's the one that will win. Usually it is the more restrained, almost stoic style - at least lately. The character barely twitchs a la Emily Deschanel on Bones or David Boreanze. I need more than a twitch, otherwise in my view I'm watching pretty statues walk across the screen. OTOH - I hate it when they ham it up or go way over the top. Balance - it's all about balance.

But I think, as a non-comic reader, the thing I enjoyed about this one was how off kilter it made me. My problem with the previous issue was how quickly it went by, it was hard to get very invested but this one I had to keep skipping back to confirm that what I thought I was reading was actually happening and I'm still not sure. It's been such a long time the series was over that I'd forgotten the sheer excitement of not knowing what to make of things, what might happen, that Whedon is not a safe writer. It's all rather giddy making.

I'd agree, it is the aspect of the story I've always liked. The ambiguity. The little touches. Makes the analytical part of me jump up and down for joy and it is one of the many reasons I'm still in love with Buffy..

The good comic books are actually like this. There's several that are not clear cut - you just need to know what to look for. It's like any medium - there's great stuff, ho-hum, and interesting. Not unlike tv in that way. ;-)