By this point, it's (nearly) impossible to tell what was deliberately written in at the time (but not stated explicitly, for fear of losing audience/hurting the show), what was deliberately written in in later episodes to look back on it, and what are just happy accidents as the show and characters grow up.
Which is why a Doylist analysis often falls apart...because we really can't know what happened behind the scenes, so much as speculate. Also how television is created...it's such a weird art. Most of it is happy accidents. Little can be pre-planned. Even the WIRE - which was pre-planned, had happy accidents, things that weren't planned or changed half-way through - due to outside issues, deaths, etc. When working in a collaborative environment - you can't predict what someone will do. Will they get pregnant? Will they quit in a huff? Will they get a better job? Will they cut their hair? Or die? You also don't know what the network or studio will do. No one has a crystal ball.
To say it's all Whedon is a bit silly too. While you can do that to a degree with writers like Moffat and RT Davies - who have small writing teams and less episodes, or a writer like Rod Serling. Not so much with Whedon - who only wrote about two-three episodes each season. He edited a lot and rewrote a lot of his writing teams stuff, but we don't know what he took out or left in. Also, most of the really good ideas were pitched by other people. The whole Spike being in love with Buffy bit - was James Marsters idea not Whedon's - it never occurred to Whedon until Marsters voiced it. So in TV? There really are no genuises - so much as a team that either works or doesn't.
Far better to take the Watsonian approach and go by where the characters appear to be going. I've done both, obviously, but I think the Watsonian is easier to back up - where you go by what is in the show and what you see in the script and not what you think the writers may have intended via commentary or isolated interviews.
I agree with what you wrote above. And rather like your take on the Angel episode. It's not clear from the episode that he intended to kill Darla, but it can be read either way. Angel the series...particularly the episode Darla...does lead me to think he may well have done that. It's why you really can't just watch Buffy, you sort of have to watch Angel too...to get the full picture.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2012-02-22 11:41 pm (UTC)Which is why a Doylist analysis often falls apart...because we really can't know what happened behind the scenes, so much as speculate.
Also how television is created...it's such a weird art. Most of it is happy accidents. Little can be pre-planned. Even the WIRE - which was pre-planned, had happy accidents, things that weren't planned or changed half-way through - due to outside issues, deaths, etc. When working in a collaborative environment - you can't predict what someone will do. Will they get pregnant? Will they quit in a huff? Will they get a better job? Will they cut their hair? Or die? You also don't know what the network or studio will do. No one has a crystal ball.
To say it's all Whedon is a bit silly too. While you can do that to a degree with writers like Moffat and RT Davies - who have small writing teams and less episodes, or a writer like Rod Serling. Not so much with Whedon - who only wrote about two-three episodes each season.
He edited a lot and rewrote a lot of his writing teams stuff, but we don't know what he took out or left in. Also, most of the really good ideas were pitched by other people. The whole Spike being in love with Buffy bit - was James Marsters idea not Whedon's - it never occurred to Whedon until Marsters voiced it. So in TV? There really are no genuises - so much as a team that either works or doesn't.
Far better to take the Watsonian approach and go by where the characters appear to be going. I've done both, obviously, but I think the Watsonian is easier to back up - where you go by what is in the show and what you see in the script and not what you think the writers may have intended via commentary or isolated interviews.
I agree with what you wrote above. And rather like your take on the Angel episode. It's not clear from the episode that he intended to kill Darla, but it can be read either way. Angel the series...particularly the episode Darla...does lead me to think he may well have done that. It's why you really can't just watch Buffy, you sort of have to watch Angel too...to get the full picture.