(no subject)

[shadowkat]

Anyone who still finds Whedons' works interesting and is interested in how the author sees his own works and what his intent may or may not have been in them - with some really interesting questions regarding philosophy and religion - go here:

http://forum.wgbh.org/lecture/joss-whedon-cultural-humanist

Warning it's a bit long. But fascinating.


Also a couple of teasers:

Great throw-away line, which only Whedon can do:

It's in response to several questions he's gotten over the hour, which he clearly thinks the answers to are obvious, but is politely not saying os. And he knows time is short so he covers all of them.

"DVR, River, She loves Spike...or occassionally Satsu, and yes the first is incompetent."

(People asked how he wanted us to watch, and who would win in a fight, Buffy or River. Along with the other two questions obviously.)

He also answers questions regarding whether Angel and Angelus are meant to be one entity or two, and if two separate entities how does that address the redemption issue. Whether Fred's soul was completely destroyed and why.
What is meant by redemption. Oh and he was asked a very interesting question about the difference between telling a story and didactism. Or using a story to moralize or give a speech on a topic.

Comments

[frenchani.livejournal.com]

I bookmarked it but haven't watched it yet.

[hankat.livejournal.com]

Thankyou!!!!!!!

Rufus

[shapinglight]

Thanks for the link. I must listen to it. I really want to know what Joss said about Angel/Angelus.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

really want to know what Joss said about Angel/Angelus.

You should hear it for yourself and watch his face.
But it was...if memory serves: "Well, the mythology is structured in such a way that they are two different moral structures. The vampire is the human entity removed. But you are right - where does that leave redemption. David Greenwalt and I had numerous discussions about addiction, specifically alcoholism, and how people we and if you live in Hollywood or any profession really but especially this one, you know a lot of people like this - they are two people. The horrible drunk, where they do these horrible things. The demon in the bottle. And the sober person. So we wanted to address that in the series. That you have to deal with what you did while you were "under the influence" - because that person is you too, in a way.
You are both people...pauses, so to answer your question? We meant both."

Explains the confusion online. We wanted one or the other, the writer was doing both simultaneously regarding vampires.

[shapinglight]

Thank you for precis-ing that. I think he is basically saying that Angel and Angelus are two faces of the same person rather than two different people, but unfortunately, it's vague enough that those who espouse the differing view could still insist they were right.

I shall listen to the whole thing myself when I can.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree. He is saying that they are basically two faces of the same person, not two separate entities. Otherwise redemption is well not an issue.

He says something else that I found rather interesting which is that he doesn't know the answers...each character is another voice in his own head. He is figuring stuff out in his writing. That he believes we all change our minds, we evolve, that we do not stay stagnant. That we live many many different lives, not just one.

Which explains why there are no absolutes or definites in his writing and explains why of all the tv writers out there - I've only really collected his stories on DVD. This may sound strange - but I adore the vagueness. The fact that it can be analyzed or see more than one way. Stories that can't be analyzed or seen more than one way...while enjoyable, I find I'm less...invested in? For example Six Feet Under? I grew bored of after two seasons. Sopranos? Three. Brilliant shows, but rather definite and clear-cut. Supernatural is a lot of fun - but it's metaphors and message are so obvious and not subversive or intricate in quite same way. It's too clear. Too easy. And I find myself uninterested in rewatching. That's part of it, I guess, the other is well what resonates inside. There is something about Spike and Buffy and Willow and Xander and Giles and Anya that resonates. Something in Whedon's writing that speaks to me. I think this Q&A and speech in a weird way sort of addresses it or explains it. Why - I find myself drawn to this writer's works over others. (shrugs)

[shapinglight]

I've watched it myself now, and very interesting it is too. Thanks for linking, as otherwise I would never have thought to.

He said a lot of very interesting things. It's no wonder people are drawn to his writing.