Shipping Spuffy ....whys and wherefores

[shadowkat]

After scanning Mark Watches ...picked up on a random comment about Spike and Buffy. I'm guessing he's spoiled on this relationship, because he feels the need to state that he can't see the two characters together and is really turned off by the pairing every time it is even remotely teased at in the series. Which oddly, grates on my nerves. Oddly, because what the heck do I care what this guy thinks?? This has resulted in a spate of navel gazing regarding ships and shipping and my own rather reluctant habits regarding both.


First off? I don't really actively ship relationships in TV series or books. And by "actively", I mean I generally don't read fanfic, get involved in fandoms, or write meta about them. Often I just go wherever the story takes me. Rarely disagree with it. Oh, I may ship the relationship or characters for a bit...but it passes. Generally speaking. The closest I came to writing fanfic prior to Buffy was an original story inspired by the Indiana Jones films, where I flipped the gender of the character. I entitled it Flight of the Falcon. The lead character was a female adventurer named Jade Falcon and it took place during WWII. Didn't read any fanfic or write any meta until Buffy. Of course I didn't know it existed either. The show started pre-internet in 1997. The internet in the late 90s was pretty much in its rudimentary stages.

While reading Mark's blog, I found myself thinking...okay how did I view the series back then? I only vaguely remember. It was to be fair over ten years ago. Almost 15 by my count. I know I was shipping Angel and Buffy. That I hung around during the first season for Angel primarily - I found him interesting. And during the second season for the Angelus storyline which blew me away at the time. I know this because I actually sought out websites to get spoilers back then. Bored at work and dissatisfied...it's what people often do, whether they want to admit it or not, and if their workplaces permit it. I also am pretty certain, not absolutely, that I did not become a Spike/Buffy shipper until long after the S5 episode Intervention. And I certainly didn't see that ship happening until Once More with Feeling when she literally shoves her tongue down his throat in perhaps the hottest kiss that I'd seen on the show. I was, however, a Spike shipper prior to that point. Spike interested me from day one. Just not a Spuffy one. As far as I remember. It's hard to know for certain. It's sort of like lovers trying to pin-point the exact moment they fell in love. Okay, that may not be the best analogy.

As near as I can figure there are about four or five different types of Spuffy shippers. Possibly more. I won't bore you by attempting to categorize all of them, hard to do in any event, people aren't as easy to categorize as one might think. The vast majority...tend to be female, between the ages of 30 and 60, identify more with Spike than with Buffy, and feel dis-enfranchized by the mainstream media who has basically told them since the get-go that their ship can't sail, is the abusive bad boyfriend, and is either deranged or not the one that the creator intended. In short, Buffy's one true love is Angel, case closed. And they are nitwits for wanting otherwise. Get on the Twilight band-wagon, already, the media seems to be stating. Not that I necessarily think Bangle and Twilight are the same, but they are a specific trope - that is popular with mainstream readers and watchers. The trope is older/experienced guy, powerful, knowledgable, wealthy and a control freak with either a dark secret, a dark past, or an abusive childhood - seduces younger girl, who is less experienced, and not wealthy and who saves him or heals him in some way. It's a partriachial trope for a patriachial world. Examples? Stefan/Elena, Angel/Buffy, Christian Grey/Anatasia, Edward/Bella, Dracula/Mina, Mr. Rochester/Jane Eyre, Cordelia/Angel, Fred/Wesely, Fred/Gunn, Echo/ What'shisname who played Helo (Ballard?) there are others. It's an old trope. I'm not belittling the trope. I liked it at one point. It's popular for a reason. I like to call it the Beauty and the Beast complex. It sort of goes back to that fairy tale, I think. Very popular with the 18-24 set. Also for some reason with successful career women and mothers in their 40s, if Shades of Grey is any indication.

Somewhere along the line I started shipping Spuffy. And...I'm not sure when it happened exactly, but I became weirdly obsessive about it. Like an insane NY Mets fan or Chicago Cubs fan, although I think the Cubs have actually won recently as have the Red Sox for that matter. The Met's are, however doomed. The Nationals are more likely to win at this rate than the NY Mets. Yet, at the same time, it didn't feel doomed to me. The Spuffy ship seemed to work on some level. Any more than the NY Mets seem doomed. I'm convinced they'll win someday. And damn the Yankees anyway. I keep rooting for that dumb team to lose. (It's the KC Royals and Phillies in my blood...I just can't root for those Damn Yankees. Sorry for the baseball analogy, it's really the only spectator sport outside of maybe Basketball and Soccer that I have any respect for. I don't like or understand Grid-Iron Football - its too male dominant, a sport for a patriachial world, men strategize, bash heads, go to war, while women shake their boobies on the sidelines with pom poms. Although, I would not be opposed to doing away with war entirely and just making everyone play football. At heart, I'm a baseball girl - it's how I was raised. My father raised me to love Baseball and Basketball. He routinely fell asleep or disappeared outside to rake leaves during football.)

Shipping online is a bit like rooting for sports teams or preferring one sport to another. It has that same insane loyalty to it. And I've never really been much of a strong sports fan, sort of ambivalent really. I rarely watch the games. Which is a good analogy, because I'm somewhat the same way, generally speaking about shipping. I didn't ship any of the relationships in any of Whedon's other shows. And only half heartedly did in other tv series - in that I read very little fanfic, didn't write much meta, etc. I honestly don't care who ends up with whom in TVD (Vamp Diaries) or any of the other tv series currently on. But for some bizarre reason the Spike/Buffy relationship was different. I don't know why. Was it the fandom? Was it the story? Was it the actors? Was it me? Was it how it was built up? Was it the internal dynamics of the relationship? How they wrote it?

I've lost interest in the detractors. I've heard all the arguments against the relationship. All the reasons people disliked it. I've argued it to death. And being a born devil's advocate, can argue both sides of the debate ad naseaum. I know why the relationship shouldn't work. I know why it offends people. Why it pushed their respective buttons. I know why people hate Spike or Spuffy, I know why they are offended. And I find myself at this stage incredibly bored by it all. Shoo, I think. Go away. To rain on my parade some other day. There's nothing you can say that I haven't argued myself or thought or read online in the last ten years. It's just...echoes now. And it feels at times...that's all we are doing with pop culture nowadays, just echoing each other.

How many different ways can you call the Spike/Buffy scenario the bad boyfriend or the abusive relationship? And yet, while I see that, at the same time...I don't think it quite fits inside that trope, in some respects the Angel/Buffy relationship fits it better. Because Spike unlike Angel isn't a top, he's a bottom. He's not the one in control of the relationship. He's not the one who breaks it off. And he's not the one who makes the decisions. She does. He's the femme fatale, the secret mistress, the damsel, the weaker party, not the other way around. That's why I got obsessed. They flipped it. And they NEVER do that on tv. Or if they do, it's pretty rare.

For as much as Mark and others goe on and on about how insanely cool and different Willow and Tara are, for me, at least, Spike/Buffy felt insanely cool and different, because of the weird gender flip. Whedon doesn't do this in any other series or work. So I can't quite decide if it was Whedon's idea or someone else's. Because I've never seen Whedon do it outside of Spike and Buffy. The closest he comes might be Xander and Andrew, but no they stay more or less within the trope of nerdy guy. William the Bloody...or Spike is a contradiction. He's set up as the sexual predator, the player, the guy who seduces the girl, and leaves her dead or wishing she was...yet, in S4, he's emasculated. He becomes the femme fatale. The confidante. The informer. The weaker sex. In S5, she saves him from a powerful female god, who is torturing him. A female god who in some respects represents the worst in Buffy herself - the popular, fashion obsessed, ditzy cheerleader. He can't save Buffy from Glory or herself. His role reminds me a lot of more of the bad girlfriend than the bad boyfriend. The bad femme fatale who takes the bullet for the male hero in all those pulp noir novels that I devoured as a youth. We also see him without his shirt a lot, in sexy clothes, looking like a sex kitten sprawled on his bed. He has the kinky cuffs, and the kinky candles. And on that excruciating date in Crush...he reminds me of the bad girl out of a 1940s Philip Marlow film or a Batman film...where she has a crush on the hero. Heck he reminds me a lot of Lilah in Angel S4 - who has had the ill luck of falling for Wes.

I've never seen anyone in any tv series flip a hot male character, a villain, a bad guy, and turn him into, well, the bad girl with a heart of gold. He's the girl in Angel too, by the way. He takes over Cordelia's role in that series with Angel. That entertained me as well. Although it is admittedly more subtle. You see it in his relationship with Illyria - who treats him like her pet as does Angel.

So the point that I became a shipper of the Spike/Buffy relationship may well have been when I picked up on the fact that Spike was playing the girl from the wrong side of the tracks. He is a lot like Faith in the series. That's why the two characters play off of each other so well. They are both the bad girl from the wrong side of the tracks. The misunderstood hooker with the heart of gold. Note he's not the misunderstood rouge, but the misunderstood hooker.

The only other series that I've seen flip gender roles this neatly was BSG with Kara Thrace who is the misunderstood rogue pilot with the heart of gold. Which is why I liked the Apollo/Starbuck relationship. Apollo plays the wholesome girl who desires this rogue pilot who won't settle down. Apollo in BSG2 is basically Athena from BSG1 with the hots for Starbuck, who is busy playing the field. So gives up finally and marries someone else, but still can't get over Starbuck. If Starbuck had been male and Apollo female? I wouldn't have been interested. Same with Spike and Buffy, if Spike had been female and Buffy had been male? Yawn. (Which by the way was what Angel the series did, they went the traditional route. As did Firefly. Mal was male, Inara was female. It worked better and was lot more interesting the other way around. Same deal with Dollhouse, Echo was female,
and the savior, the guy agent, was male. More interesting the other way around. It's why neither of those series grabbed me, they didn't really do anything interesting or new with gender.)

I was surprised by Spike and Buffy. I didn't think they'd go there. And they almost didn't.
James Marster prodded Whedon. As did Marti Noxon. I seriously doubt from everything I saw before and since that Whedon came up with it on his own nor do I think he knows what he did. Or why it was so damn interesting. Or why so many fans went nuts over it.
But I could be wrong about that. We don't know what lies in another's mind and heart, after all, we can only speculate. Also what appeals to one person, another may never even see or for that matter want to see. I get that. I may not like it, but I do get it.

Did I want Buffy to end up with Spike or vice versa? To this day I really don't know.
I jump back and forth on the issue. I've read fanfics and written them that go both directions. I have friends online who see them together, have in fact written whole verses with them together, and others who don't. You can't really generalize too much about shippers by the way. Oh you can try...but you'll run into a brick wall eventually.

While most Spuffy shippers tend to be women. They aren't all heterosexual. There are oddly enough quite a few Spuffy shippers who are lesbians. Lesbians, I might add, that did not like Willow and Tara and found the coupling to be borderline offensive. Oddly, I've found men to like that pairing better than many women do. Which I always found interesting. I don
why that is. By men - I mean both heterosexual and homosexual men. There are a lot of homosexual men who loved Willow and Tara and identified, but a lot of lesbians who did not.
Although I know of a lot of lesbians who loved them as well. So you can't generalize.

So I can't really speak to why others loved or hated Spuffy. And to be honest, I'm no longer interested in why they hated the ship. The tv series is over. And I no longer read the comics, any of the comics - so really can't comment on them at this point. Most likely for the best.

As for what happened after the final episode of Angel or Chosen? That's open to interpretation. I'm not sure you can realistically call the comics canon since they do not follow a logical trajectory from the end of the series. Too many plot inconsistencies even for the best spackler and wanker on the planet. Also the team that wrote the comics bares little to no resemblance to the television series writers. Even the actors have changed.
But I'm clearly of two minds regarding this, and go back and forth all the frigging time.
I don't like the comics. So I choose to ignore them. For me, the Buffy series ended at Chosen. The Angel series ended at Not Fade Away. Everything after that is speculation.

What surprises me is that part of me, even after ten years, still wants a satisfying ending for Spike and Buffy. And I've no clue what that ending is. It's not what I saw on screen. It's not in the comics. And to be honest? I don't think Whedon is capable of writing one that would satisfy me. What satisfies me most likely won't satisfy someone else. And I'm moody so that often changes with the wind anyhow.

What also surprises me is that part of me still loves that ship, is still fiercely protective of it. And still gets riled up at the detractors. It is a small part. Barely noticeable. Like an old scar that aches on occasion. That type of Love fades it does not quite disappear.

I wonder why I care what others even think of it. It's not like the show will continue.
And the comics...well...I've given up on. I know others haven't. But I have. Lost interest finally. And may never forgive Whedon for a five year tease and no deliverance on the goods.

Oh well it's late...I'm tired. Foggy in the brain and I'm not even sure any of this makes sense. I do know that the trope Spike/Buffy fell under continues to interest me - to the extent that I find myself obsessively searching out similar pairings (harder to find then one would think, Twilight this ain't). And I'm not sure we're all on the same page as to what that trope is or rather what it was about that trope that turned me on and why I shipped it as hard as I did. I do not and never really have viewed Spike as the bad boy. So no, it's not the bad boy trope. That's not it. The strong heroic woman, and the hot, guy, who looks like he can take her, but in reality is subordinate to her? Sort of. The fact that they keep switching roles. One day she's on top, the next day he is. Neither is fully dominant, neither is fully submissive. Partially. The fact that he is in the traditional female role and she's in the traditional male one, definitely. She controls the relationship not him. She breaks things off for his own good, not him. She agrees to help him, but is careful not to touch, not him. She saves him. He's the victim, mostly.

It's rare to find this in fiction. When you do, it's usually the victimized little girl, or adolescent. Such as Lisbeth Salander and the much older Blomkvist from GWTDT, or River and Mal from Serenity (although that at least wasn't sexual), or Nikita and Michael from La Femme Nikita. It's very rare to have the woman be a fully grow woman who is not a victim, not abused as a child, not raped, be in the lead here. Very rare.

Most of our tropes and ships - the man holds the reigns. In Spike and Buffy's relationship - the woman held the reigns. I liked Zoe and Wash, because that relationship to a degree was similar. As was Adelle/Topher in Dollhouse. In books? I haven't found it that often, it's in His Dark Materials - Lyra and the little boy she falls for, she holds the reigns in that relationship. And in Hunger Games - with Katniss and Peeta, she's the one in control there as well, much to Peeta's frustration as well as Gale's. In fact the trope in the Hunger Games is the opposite of the one in Twilight. The girl is in control. Same with
The Fault in Our Stars, Hazel Grace holds the reigns. Although actually in that novel, it's more equal. As it is eventually in all the others. Equality is easier to find, I think, when the woman can be on top and on bottom.

All of this is obviously my own point of view. Mileage I know varies. I'm certain many of you will vehemently disagree with all or most of what I've said above. But it is late on a Saturday the night before Easter Sunday, and this is what I'm thinking...

Comments

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

It is a really interesting point, and I think I really agree: Buffy remains the center of the story, the important one, and Spike is content to assist her, without thinking he knows what is best for her (without trying to manipulate her emotionally or dominate her).

Zoe and Wash definitely had that element to it: Zoe was the warrior woman and Wash was (mostly) content to admire her and follow her lead.

And I did think that Hunger Games had a lot of that in Katniss and Peeta's relationship (Gale wanted to make decisions for Katniss, but Peeta seemed to be willing to be lead by her). Of course it was more complicated than that, but that element seemed to be there....

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I think Wash and Zoe were more equals than that. He was a pilot, wickedly smart. Zoe was a fighter, great in field work. She followed him when he flew, he followed her when she fought. We often put too much on importance on fighting. In some respects the Zoe/Wash relationship reminds me of Amy/Rory in Doctor Who.

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

Wash and Zoe definitely respected each other... but I never think of any couples as being really equals (cynical as I am about love)... Seinfeld described it as 'hand' (who has the upper hand in a relationship) and How I Met Your Mother has described it as 'reachers' and 'settlers' . I just don't believe the any relationship is truly equal, there is always one who loves more, and one who is willing to be loved more than they actually love. Just my opinion (based on my experience & observations) of course.

I was glad that Rory was made a stronger character, and that Amy was shown to value him more (the first season they were on it wasn't clear that he was important to her at all). I'll be interested in seeing how that couple continues to evolve (I understand they are returning this Fall).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh...I think we may have different definitions of equality? I don't know.

I can say that I definitely know of at least 20 different relationships of various ages and orientations that are "equal" - where the people love one another "equally" and support each other "equally" and have equal power. Including my parents, my brother and his wife, and various couples at church as well as various relationships online. And I've noticed that Relationships that don't have that...tend to fail or be miserable. Not all, but most. Mustn't generalize. Because I have seen relationships succeed which were unequal. It depends on the people involved and people well are unique individuals and do not fit neatly into cubby holes.


I also think the problem with making broad statements based on one's own personal experience...is well, our experience is extremely limited isn't it?

This happened to me at work today. Actually it happens all the time at work. I am working on a project that doesn't quite fit anyone's experience. So I went around to various people and got conflicting opinions. They were all adamant about their view. Certain their way was the ONLY way. Yet, their situation was ever so slightly different and mine well just didn't quite fit.

The problem with life is it is not one size fits all. And you really can't say that you know anything at the end of it for certain.

The truth is? Just because you haven't experienced it? Doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And perspective...lies. So you go with your gut. And hope for the best.

Anyhow, we may have to agree to disagree on this. ;-)

[snickfic]

It occurs to me that what you say here about the genderswap component is a big reason why I find very early Spuffy fic so unsatisfying. I hadn't pinned down for myself before exactly what I didn't like about (many of) them. I'd blamed it on the characterization in the fics, but I think it's more fundamental than that: it's because the fics I'm thinking of tend to keep Spike as the manly hero figure and therefore put Buffy as the damsel in distress. They totally lack that genderswap quality that manifested in the Spuffy relationship in canon. (I'd argue that all the foundation for it was already there in the Spike/Dru relationship, but that's an argument for another day.)

All of which is not to say that all very early Spuffy fic does this, or that there isn't plenty of later Spuffy that does it as well. But that's what your post made me think of.

(Also, hi! I friended you recently for the cool meta posts, like this one.)

[liliaeth]

Agreed a lot of people, even Spuffy shippers seem to miss the point of what made Spuffy so exceptional on TV. I think it's why I got tired with Spike/Xander, because they basically aren't writing Spike, not the one we got on screen. They're writing a version of Angel who just puts on a Spike costume. The same problem occurs in early Spuffy, in that Buffy just accepts that Spike is a 'master vampire', which honestly, he rarely was in canon, even if he played the part for Dru's sake.

A lot of people seem to want to make Spike more 'dominant' ignoring that that just puts him in the nice comfortable role of gender conformity. I think it also explains why so many people hate Buffy, because she doesn't fit the role of the female, that they want her to.

She's not an alpha bitch like Cordelia, she's an alpha, pure and simple.

She's not Darla who manipulates her man and gains control through men. She's the one in charge and if a man can't accept that, then he's not right for her. It's why B/A doesn't work for me longterm because Angel would never be able to accept the position as her follower longterm, he'd never be able to back her up, always wanting to tell her what to do, to control rather than advice...

And that just doesn't work with Buffy, it's why the Buffy/Riley relationship eventually ended, because Riley couldn't accept that he wasn't the hero in their relationship, he couldn't be the back up, he needed to save her, and she didn't need that, she needed someone to catch her when she fell, not to save the day for her.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

I like what you said here. Alpha Buffy and Beta Spike. (I know, you didn't exactly say that.) Amy and Rory. Zoe and Wash. Those relationships work better for me than a lot of the more traditional ones.

I have seen Spike/Xander fic where they are more equal and that can work quite nicely. There are a lot of Spike pairings that I prefer, but when the good stuff is good, I appreciate it.

[liliaeth]

nah, you just describe it better*g*

The thing is, Spike isn't lessened because Buffy's in charge and that's what makes him perfect for her.

I mean, take Cordelia and Angel, I may not like their chemistry, but I do like their interaction, because even if it is a bit more mainstream, she really is his equal, even if he's the one in charge. Just like Spike is Buffy's equal, it's just that their role in the relationship is different.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

The thing is, Spike isn't lessened because Buffy's in charge and that's what makes him perfect for her.

Exactly this. I liked the fact that they are allowed to be equals. I'm not sure I'd agree that one is Beta and one is Alpha...it's more Alpha-Beta/Alpha-Beta. They flip back and forth. You watch them fight and they are poetry in motion, dance partners, neither quite gets the upper hand.
She can't kill him and he can't kill her. Both are masters at what they do, he kills slayers, she kills vampires.

And it's similar to Amy and Rory in a way...both are equals, one isn't stronger or smarter than the other.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

(Also, hi! I friended you recently for the cool meta posts, like this one.)

Thank you.

I'd blamed it on the characterization in the fics, but I think it's more fundamental than that: it's because the fics I'm thinking of tend to keep Spike as the manly hero figure and therefore put Buffy as the damsel in distress.

I've read some of those as well. They don't quite work for me either. Spike feels all wrong somehow.

Of course there's the other extreme that makes Spike almost too weak, too
much of a damsel. They don't quite work either.

Spike's odd because he's both Beta and Alpha. He's a Beta male who has constructed an Alpha persona that is not real or false bravado. Basically we have a lovelorn poet who has created the alpha male persona that he believes he should be. Rory - the Last Centurion in Doctor Who reminds me a little of Spike in some respects. Buffy is equally interesting in this respect because she...is both Beta and Alpha. She's both the girly girl, the
one who wants to feel protected, and the fighter who saves the day. I like the fact that the show allows them to be both. Too often, as we see in most fanfic, the characters are either beta or alpha, either this or that, when in reality we are both, not one or the other. If that makes sense?

[liliaeth]

I think that a main issue of mine is how many people say that spuffy in s6 is the bad boyfriend troope, while ignoring one major point. Spuffy genderflips the bad boyfriend trope. Because the bad boyfriend in their scenario isn't Spike, it's Buffy.

She's the one who controls him, manipulates him, abuses him, takes advantage of him, and like many battered spouses, he'll let her, because he keeps hoping that things'll change for the better, if only he hangs on. That it isn't her, it's her depression, that if she just accepts herself, she'll heal and their problems'll fade and they can play footsie in the rubble.

He wants the relationship, he wants the love, and she just wants someone to forget her pain in while her friends are abandoning her. And it isn't until s7 when she's finally healing from her depression that they finally have a chance to start healing from that on both sides.

It's one of the reasons why it annoyed me so much that the s8 ocmics ignored Spike, and started focusing on B/A, because there was no relationship there, no character development for Buffy beyond a backward slide. Whereas there was a story to deal with in Spuffy that dealt with Spike finally stepping out of the battered spouse part he'd been trapped in in s6, and the healing from s7, into becoming her equal and her back up.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

True it does genderflip the bad-boyfriend trope. You literally can see bad behavior from both sides. Normally I only see this done in noir fiction with the guy and the femme fatale. Example Wes/Lilah. She's his dirty secret, he abuses her, but is the big hero, she's a thief, or a hustler.

But in Buffy, Buffy was the hero, she was the one who beat him up, who didn't tell anyone she was dating him - he wanted to tell the world about them, she didn't.

Yet, you can see it from her side as well...he is manipulative. He does manipulate her sexually. He does bad things. He has a loan shark after him. He is dealing in illegal weapons. He's making deals on the side. And outside of the Scoobies, he doesn't really care if hurts someone. And he can be a jerk. He reminds me a lot of the female fatal or bad girl in many male noir comics, movies and books. He reminds me a lot of Lilah in Angel or for
Inara in Firefly. Or even Adelle in Dollhouse.

It's so wonderfully complicated. I've argued both sides.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's the genderflip in Spuffy that hits my buttons too. With Mark I'll find it interesting if he's going to be able to see what is done here in S5.

Although what made it so interesting to me was that I did not only get the sense of exchanged gender roles, but also a sense of actual equality. If Spike had shown up first in S5 I think the relationship would not have been half as interesting. But he was a character in his own right, long before he fell for Buffy that gave him an independence Riley or Angel never had (well Angel did, but only after he left and then it turned out that Buffy does not fit at all with independent Angel). Spuffy was two fully formed people meeting and bouncing off each other.

[jaymi-leaf.livejournal.com]

Great point and something I'd never really considered before. Having these two fully-formed characters falling for each other does feel a lot more satisfying to me and it's rarely something you see because so often characters are designed as being the 'love interest' even if they have other roles as well.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Spuffy was two fully formed people meeting and bouncing off each other.

Yes. This. I think that's why it worked so well. He wasn't introduced as her love interest. The love interest bit was completely unplanned. So they had developed him more fully. The writers had not intended on putting them together. This makes their relationship in some respects more realistic, because it wasn't intended. We don't plan who we become friends with, who we fall in love with, who we gravitate to. It just happens organically. When writing a story...particularly a love story ...that's the hardest thing to do, to create a romance that organically comes from the characters, that is not pushed on them or pre-planned, but just happens.

Buffy/Riley was clearly planned. Riley brought in as the new romance. And same with Angel, he was written into the tale as the romantic love interest.
But Spike was written into the tale as the bad guy, then later as a replacement for Cordelia, than comic relief, they didn't know where to put him...and as result he got more fully developed, because they had to explore him to figure him out. So both Buffy and Spike got to be independent characters who grew to depend and eventually trust and respect each other.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

Well, what you say makes a lot of sense to me. The Hunger Games movie has been making me think a lot about how media enforces a "normal" that isn't. Most of the successful relationships I see, including my own, are very much female-driven. So many men are happy to pair up with women that they admire and follow their lead. Where will we go on vacation? Where will the kids go to school? What car will we buy? Logistics are largely the female realm. Yet that story isn't the one being pushed down our throats. Instead we get (in THG) "I loved him so much I'd rather die than live without him" in the media rather than the truth that Katniss would rather die than kill her own soul. Why does the media keep lying?

I'm glad you mentioned Zoe and Wash, because I do think that was a more realistic relationship.

I actually really like the Beauty and the Beast story, but not for the "rich older man and poor-but-beautiful young girl" part, but for the "can you love someone even when they change in a significant way" element. I've always felt that was a potentially interesting part of later Spuffy, one that isn't often explored. It certainly wasn't on the show or in the comics, so far.

I'm a multi-shipper, with Spike as half of many equations. His character is so interesting and faceted, and I just don't understand how people can watch even "School Hard" and peg him for the simplistic bad boy. He was already incredibly fluid (Who do you want me to be?) and focused on his paramour. Are people really fooled by the cosmetics that much? He looks like a bad boy and so that's all there is? If so, I'm clearly watching things differently from the people who took that away. I do think that the majority of people (at least those that watch the show) are looking deeper, though.

As for Mark, the last I heard is that the "Who Are You?" warm champagne scene actually made him see the point of Spuffy, even though he didn't really want to go there. I think he might come around, as you did. He enjoys Spike as a character, at any rate. That's promising.

[ms-scarletibis.livejournal.com]

Instead we get (in THG) "I loved him so much I'd rather die than live without him" in the media rather than the truth that Katniss would rather die than kill her own soul. Why does the media keep lying?

If you're talking about the film (cause um...haven't read the books yet :P), then I'd politely disagree. I think the message in that moment was Katniss coming up with a solution to give those guys a gigantic "Fuck you" for changing the rules yet again to suit their own purposes. Now, if that had happened before they said there could be two winners, then...okay. But since they went into it thinking they could both go home, and that option was taken from them, I get it. They basically broke the rules throughout the entire game by helping and saving each other. And not just them--Rue too, and perhaps that red head girl. They all had the opportunity for an easy kill at some point, and they all said no.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

That was the intent in the books as well. It was two-fold actually. Katniss wasn't going to kill for the Capital, she wouldn't be their tool, but she would do whatever it took to survive. She manages to figure out what the Capital's weakness is halfway through and uses it. The Games are largely about out-maneuvering the Capital. Not so much the other tributes. The true opponent is the Capital. This was true in the book as well as the film.

[ms-scarletibis.livejournal.com]

Would you say the film is a good interpretation of the book? And yeah, I can see that about the Capital...looking forward to reading the books :)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yes. It follows the book almost exactly. With just a few items changed here and there. Not that many.

Suzanne Collins, the author, co-wrote the screenplay adaptation. She came from children's television and is a screenwriter first, a novelist second.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

If you're talking about the film (cause um...haven't read the books yet :P), then I'd politely disagree.

It doesn't sound to me like we are disagreeing. What you call a "fuck you" is what I call not killing her own soul. It's a refusal to play by their rules, to keep them from changing her, to die on her own terms, not theirs. She comes around to Peeta's way of thinking, in a way, but takes it a step further. The only way to win is to change the rules.

(I haven't read the books, either. I think I'd be too gutted. I'm a sensitive type. Heh.)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

The books follow the film fairly closely. In some ways I found the film more moving than the books. We're outside Katniss' pov and allows us to see the character and the others more fully. Cato's demise in the books is more grisely, here...it is more tragic.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

The Hunger Games movie has been making me think a lot about how media enforces a "normal" that isn't.

Yes, the relationships that work appear to be...more equal. Like Zoe and Wash. (Which is notably the only successful relationship Whedon ever wrote. So perhaps he agrees?) The media for some reason is pushing a fantasy that doesn't work...people who marry that fantasy either end up divorced or dead in a domestic violence scenario gone hellishly wrong. When the relationship is unbalanced, it can't work...I don't think.

Hunger Games is fascinating because it is in a way a commentary of the how the media enforces an unrealistic and harmful fantasy onto the populace.
Katniss is the girl, Peeta is the strong boy. She would die if she couldn't be with him. The other reason - the real one, for why she chose to commit suicide as opposed to kill Peeta, they can't broadcast. We can't broadcast to the world that she would rather die than lose her soul, then be a murderer. It has to be "romantic".

Also Katniss can't win in this romantic love triangle. On the one side she has Gale who is dictating what she should do, who wants to control the relationship, and on the other, Peeta who is the media darling, who she has to play the romantic lead to. Who has blind-sided her with his love. I adore the scene in both the book and movie, where she literally smacks him upside the head for telling the world that he harbors a secret crush for her and is deeply in love with her. The Hunger Games feels a bit like a critique of Twilight - of the traditional view of romance and to an extent a woman's options.

I actually really like the Beauty and the Beast story, but not for the "rich older man and poor-but-beautiful young girl" part, but for the "can you love someone even when they change in a significant way" element. I've always felt that was a potentially interesting part of later Spuffy, one that isn't often explored. It certainly wasn't on the show or in the comics, so far.

Oh, I feel the same way more or less. I was just hunting a fairy tale that fit...Cinderella was my first choice, but it seemed off somehow. ;-)

I'm a multi-shipper, with Spike as half of many equations. His character is so interesting and faceted, and I just don't understand how people can watch even "School Hard" and peg him for the simplistic bad boy. He was already incredibly fluid (Who do you want me to be?) and focused on his paramour. Are people really fooled by the cosmetics that much? He looks like a bad boy and so that's all there is? If so, I'm clearly watching things differently from the people who took that away. I do think that the majority of people (at least those that watch the show) are looking deeper, though.

I can't remember how I first viewed it. I think I saw Spike as a sort of
take off on Billy Idol meets Sid Vicious at the time, fun Punk vampire, actually he reminded me a great deal of Kiefer Sutherland's vampire in The Lost Boys, and the Vampire Lestate in Rice's novels. I know the Spike/Dru bit blew me away and pulled me into the series. I was thinking of giving up on it...until School Hard. The high school as hell bit didn't really do that much for me. And after a while, Buffy/Angel, got old. I didn't really start shipping them hard until Angelus popped up.

Now? I see it the same way you do. But I've also watched the series so many times now that I practically have it memorized. I have not however watched it recently. My last re-watch was in 2009.

[ciardhapagan.livejournal.com]

Spuffy fan who always liked Spike and Buffy equally. That's what I loved about spuffy- it was an equal partnership. I wouldn't say "most" Spuffy fans like and identify with Spike more than Buffy, I'd say it was an even split between those that were strongly pro Buffy but liked Spike and Buffy equally like me and a number of others, and those like you who preferred Spike. I think it depended on what kind of feminist viewpoint you had. More second wavish- you like Buffy and saw her journey as one with some resonance with yours but loved Spike as her equal partner. Buffy and Spike both become more than they were before as partners- in all senses of that word. If you are more Third Wavish type feminist then you came to Spuffy like you did.

And the model you are looking for- not from the west, but from the east- anime and manga to be exact. The tsundere girl and the boy who falls for her. In anime and manga the girl always ends up with that boy in the end.

It goes back to the early 1970's in Japan, just as the Japanese second wave feminists were starting to fight hard for change in gender roles. Interestingly enough it emerges in both shoujo (girls) and shonen (boys) manga at the same time- 1972 (May in the shoujo, October in the shonen). In shoujo manga the proto tsundere character is Lady Oscar of Riyoko Ikeda's "Rose of Versailles"
http://www.ex.org/4.3/36-manga_versailles.html

In shonen manga it's Sayaka Yumi of Go Nagai's "Mazinger Z"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayaka_Yumi

But the character who is considered the first full blown version of the tsundere type is Akane Tendo of Rumiko Takahashi's comedic "Ranma 1/2". "Ranma 1/2" was the first anime and manga to become so wildly popular in the US that it's anime and manga character types had some small influence on US popular culture in the late 80's-early 90's.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Be careful about categorizing here...I'm actually second wavish, in that I did ship Buffy first and Spike second. And ended up loving them as equals, I think to a degree flake_sake above may express my take on the relationship best.

Admittedly the above meta may not have been very clear about that. I sort of wrote it half-distracted last night. And mind wandering...;-)

Thank you for the magna references.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

I don't know if I agree that it falls along 2nd/3rd generation lines, either. I'm sort of in-between, so could go either way, and have always been a Buffy girl, but care much more about Spike's love life. I identify with Buffy quite a bit, and if it weren't for the feminist edge I doubt I'd be as interested in the show. But all her romances seem quite boring to me, except with Spike. Spike, on the other hand, is always fun to watch, even with Harmony — his worst relationship ever.

I'm interested by your manga references. I know there's a lot of genderswap in the medium, but hadn't grokked how that might be filtering into western media.

[elisi]

Lots of nodding along to everything here.

Equality is easier to find, I think, when the woman can be on top and on bottom.
This especially is key, I think. Equality. Mirroring - as in, despite being different, the characters understand each other. Buffy is drawn to Spike's darkness, Spike is drawn to Buffy's light. And the switch places and change around and help each other grow. To quote Anna (just ONE quote, I could have a hundred):

I think what I love most about Season 7 is that over the course of it, Buffy and Spike become stronger and more dependent.

In a world that loves to tell us we should all be strong and independent there's something very extraordinary about that.

Most of the time, relationships make people weak - the girl is the male hero's weakness. He has to leave, because he puts her in danger. But some relationships (very very few), like Spuffy, subvert that. The couple are equals, may take turns to be the damsel. And they gain strength from each other - together they're stronger. The more they trust each other, the better and stronger and more powerful they get.

Which is one reason Doctor/River is the only other couple to rival Spike/Buffy. It is in so many ways the same dynamic, although with everything even more shaken up. River is Spike (I really ought to write that meta), and the Doctor is Buffy... Yet River is the warrior, and their dynamic is one step further along, in that it's a married couple interaction at the heart of things, which Spike/Buffy mimicked, but never got to. But I see in Doctor/River what Spike/Buffy could become. They're the endgame. Look at, for example, Spike being held captive by the First, and believing, 100%, that Buffy will come for him. It's the same faith that make River jump out of spaceships & off buildings, secure in the knowledge that her love will be there to catch her. Ditto Buffy and the Doctor know that they can ask their partner to do anything, and they'll be there, backing them up (You're the only one strong enough to protect them/River, have you got my scanner working yet?). It's an irresistible dynamic (IMHO *g*).

Darn, must run. Could talk about this all day...

ETA: One more thing! Not Holding Back. This is one of the keys.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

While I mainly agree with Doctor Song and Doctor Who, I honestly think Amy/Rory
works better as a comparison.

The problem with Doctor Who and Doctor Song, is it is still the much much older and wiser guy and younger gal, who he has to guide and teach.
I think the Doctor Who/Doctor Song bit would have worked even better for me if it was the opposite, a female Doctor Who and a male Doctor Song. As it is?
It's not really that innovative. Which may explain why I didn't fall as deeply in love with it?

What I'd love is a female Doctor Who romance with say Captain John (Marsters character)...or Captain Jack (John Borrowman). That would be interesting.

[elisi]

The problem with Doctor Who and Doctor Song, is it is still the much much older and wiser guy and younger gal, who he has to guide and teach.
You think so? Technically he's older, of course, although even the first time they meet she's in her 50s (at least), and she's always ahead of him. She has - until LKH/TWoRS) constantly been the one teaching him (heck, the first time she kisses him he acts like a flustered virgin). She tells him off, teases him, refuses to be intimidated, and shakes her head over his silliness. Like any wife. (Wives always wear the trousers, and the Moff is very aware of this. Actually - watch Jekyll. Moffat's Jekyll has a wife and DAMN does she get him in line.)

The only two times I'd describe her as 'young' and him as 'old' (just in their interactions) are LKH/TWoRS, and there the dynamic is even more interesting. Firstly she is never in awe of him - indeed, in both cases she goes against all his expectations, in LKH *killing* him (with no effort at all), and in TWoRS *refusing* to kill him (and then stopping time, before organising a way of getting the whole *universe* to back her up, pretty much). In both cases he is left utterly helpless, and has to resort to literally begging her to help him. The power balance between them is very much skewed in her favour (and she knows it and uses it - she always has handcuffs...). Actually the *only* time she's in [what on the surface] looks like a traditional companion role (First Night, when he whisks her away to show her incredible things), she's flattered, but far more interested in getting him naked.

The dynamic is perfectly illustrated at the end of LKH when he leaves her in the 51st Century. On her own. With no guidance or advice, except 'Rule One: the Doctor Lies'. He absolutely expects her to find her own way, as well as work out how to find him. Actually, First Night is a LOVELY example of him not guiding (and when he tries, she takes it completely different to how he intends it):

Re. diary:
Doctor: River, from now on there are rules.
River: Oh, you've gone all strict! Not that I mind...

Re. prison:
River: Put what in the diary? Sweetie, I'm in the highest security prison in all of the known the universe!
Doctor: River Song could walk in and out of that prison as if the walls aren't there.
River: I'm River Song.
Doctor: Then you should be fine.

But even these instances are... anomalies? S6 was very much filling in River's story/changing the Doctor (love how they tie together), and we won't see 'young' River again - she'll now go back to her role as the Doctor's guide/storyteller, because that is very much what she is. (Look at all the complaints about her smugness. Also, the first time he meets her she declares him young, immature and is clearly very much not impressed. And pretty much everything she says/does is an attempt at teaching him, which he does NOT appreciate, because she sees straight through him. He learns though, and from then on - despite grousing - tends to pay attention, even though it initially grates that she is *better* at everything than he is. And keeps being so, of course.) Also there's the part where she's part metaphor, being a River (= water = time). She is the very thing that moves his story forward, and indeed (as in S6) pivotal to his life. His very existence and self image turn around her.

It's not really that innovative. Which may explain why I didn't fall as deeply in love with it?
As you can see, we obviously get different things from it. I have to squint REALLY HARD to see where you're coming from.

What I'd love is a female Doctor Who romance with say Captain John (Marsters character)...or Captain Jack (John Borrowman). That would be interesting.
I would love a genderswap thing, absolutely, but not with Capt Jack. a) River is already very much a femme!Jack, and b) Jack hero-worships the Doctor to a painful degree, something River is thankfully free from. She loves him, but she has no illusions. (What I WOULD love, is what The Curse of Fatal Death gave us a snippet of: femme!Doctor/Master.)

HEY LOOK AT ME WAFFLING. Didn't we start out with Spike/Buffy? *g* Love Spike/Buffy. <3

[elisi]

Actually, I want to make a distinction... Spike can be said to go on a quest to win Buffy's approval. She's his moral guide, the one who (inadvertently) inspires him to reach for redemption. She is the one who leads, and he follows (except for S6, when everything gets in a terrible muddle). He wants to be worthy of her, before beginning to understand that being a hero can be an end in itself.

River, OTOH, is more like a Watcher. She generally lets the Doctor do the legwork, as it were - her role is different:

Giles: A, a Slayer slays, a Watcher--
Buffy: Watches?
Giles: Yes. No! He trains her, he prepares her--

RIVER: Father Octavian, when the Doctor is in the room, your only mission is to keep him alive long enough to get everyone else home.

River's story isn't one of redemption (the redemption part is blink-and-you'll-miss-it in LKH, and really, it's more about changing priorities/breaking her programming, then *redemption*. She's the victim, after all.)

River's basic concern isn't about being a hero, it's about keeping the Doctor safe. She's not overly bothered about morals (and indeed he likes her dangerous), and leaves all that to him.

For Spike & Buffy, we see this briefly during the second part of S5, but then it all goes pearshaped...

ETA: 'I'm not good, but I'm OK' could be River's tagline. And the Doctor never asks, nor expects, (nor wants) her to change - he loves her just as she is.

Form First Night:

River: But I haven't changed.
Doctor: And you never will.

(Hope you don't mind me rambling on. I usually only inflict this on Promethia.)

[jaymi-leaf.livejournal.com]

Agreeing with most of what you've said here, especially about being tired of the fan-battling/anti-Spuffy arguments. We've both been around this fandom for a long time I think... most of the arguments are out there and have been had ad nauseam. Also playing devil's advocate I think I've argued on both sides over many issues but now I'm pretty secure in my own Spuffy shipping... that isn't to say that I don't still bristle sometimes when the relationship is attacked, it's hard to realise that someone else isn't coming from the same place of lengthy years long discussion that you are. I'm kinda dreading Mark's reactions to the later seasons and the comments that he gets.

For the Spuffy ship itself. I came into it identifying with Spike the most. The gender-flip was one reason - it's different from 'forbidden love' but more like unrequited love, you know the other person will drive whatever happens in the relationship and you are powerless to make it happen/move it forward no matter how deeply you feel. I also seem identify more with the person who is not the 'first true love' of the other person (I kinda love Kara/Sam), who feels like there is no way they can live up to that first romance and accepts that but keeps trying anyway...

On rewatches I was surprised to find that I actually identified with Buffy more. Maybe it was the events of Seeing Red that forever clouded my feelings towards the 'ship, or perhaps it was going through depression myself but I found myself coming more at the relationship from a Buffy POV and suddenly the things that I was annoyed at Buffy for in S5 onwards were suddenly understandable.

Now I sit more in the middle and just tend to enjoy both characters, which is a place I like to be in because so many times when you're watching/reading something you end up siding with just one of the characters in a 'ship (e.g. A wants B, B doesn't want A... that's fine, but most shows are A wants B, B secretly wants A but various different circumstances and people get in the way all the while A is still pining away after B and probably doing lots of nobel acts that make A look better and better and B look worse and worse until you realise that although you're rooting for A and B to get together you actually hate B quite a lot by this point). With Buffy and Spike I now find I like them both and can see both of their POVs and because of that as said in Touched 'they've seen the best and worst of each other' and so have we and though Buffy is still the dominant one in their relationship they end the series a lot more equally. (I'm not much of a meta writer, more of a reader, but I'd love to do something about how in S7 Buffy is all about empowering Spike and how this plays a big part in the finale - both with Spike's role and with Buffy's decision to empower the Potentials)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

For not being much of a meta writer...you write wonderful responses. I find myself nodding along with a lot of what you stated here. Particularly identifying with one character, then upon re-watch the other, then back again.
I think in part the reason this ship works so well is you can do that. Both characters are so fully formed, and relatable, that you can shift back and forth between them. We get to be inside both their points of view at different segments in the story.

And..the struggle to live up to that first great love...yes, I identify with that. Because many of us don't have a "first great love" or the one we do end up having that first great love with - we end up being their second love.
Kara/Sam is a good example. She was his first great love, while he's her second. With Buffy and Spike though, it's almost more equal, Dru was Spike's first great love, while Buffy is his second, and same with Spike...demonstrating that sometimes it's the second more mature love that works better. Not always, sometimes. There's no rule really.

[jaymi-leaf.livejournal.com]

Thanks :) I remember back in the day yours were the first meta essays I ever read on any TV show on SpuffyOnline (can't remember if you posted there or if they were just linked there, I was a lurker then as I mostly am now).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Probably linked. Since I don't remember it. I only personally posted my meta to six sites: teaatheford (which drove me crazy because of the formatting), angel's soul spoiler board, buffy cross and stake spoiler board, all things philosophical about buffy and ats, and my own livejournal. Everywhere else either linked or got my permission to repost it.

I did go a bit nuts on the meta side. That relationship struck a chord in me.

[shapinglight]

Wonderful meta. Like you, I'm mostly 'bored now' with all the anti-Spuffy arguments, which is one of the reasons why I decided to give up on Mark Watches. I'm pretty sure a lot of very ugly stuff is going to surface when he gets to season 6, and I've seen it all so many times. I don't need to see it again, and it's not going to make me change my mind.

I agree the gender reversal is a huge part of what makes the 'ship interesting. I'm inclined to think Joss doesn't know what he did there to this day, and I certainly don't expect to see any signs of it in the comics.

[ms-scarletibis.livejournal.com]

I think the problem with Mark is that...he has such a strong following, that he may be mistaken as an authority on the topic? Just guessing, but that may be it. I am curious about his thoughts on some eps, but not all.

I agree with the gender swap and that Spike was made a character in his own right, and I think that's why most of Spike's fan base are female in the first place (and is further perpetuated by Marsters and his own heart of gold). Don't agree with all that you said (i.e. Angel treating Spike like a pet; I saw him more as that wife he was still in love with and fruitlessly was trying to divorce, not realizing that what they have goes deeper than a stack of signed papers), but I do agree with that.

I watched the series as it aired, and was a Spike fan long before I shipped Spuffy. I may have shipped it for the duration of "Something Blue," but didn't think about it again until Spike thought about it in OoMM. I think it's entirely possible that I classify as the fan who wanted Spuffy simply because Spike wanted it.

For those reasons, "Chosen" is a satisfying end to them, because Spike was able to let it go, but only because I think he realized, between that ep and somewhere in the first third of s5 of Ats, that it would never be how he wanted it to be. And I was okay with that. That and I shipped canon Spangel more probably helped, but yeah, in short, I wanted what Spike wanted for himself. I wanted Spuffy to work so badly in s6 because he wanted it, in spite of the fact that it was a totally unhealthy thing. But like Spike (gosh, in certain respects with Spike, since I was sixteen at the time), I grew up.

Thanks for the post!

ETA: I don't think Spike/Buffy was Joss' initial plan, and I do think a seed was planted by Marsters, as he said a few times before. Assuming that is true, I am not sure he would have come to that conclusion...I think he was more interested in the deconstruction of Spike only because he had built him up so much, and the only reason he did that was because Spike was supposed to have died and stayed that way. Funny how things work out.

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

Amazing meta.

James Marsters prodded Whedon. As did Marti Noxon.

SMG was the first. She started prodding Whedon pre-season 4.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I thought she did it in Season 4, not pre-season 4. (I thought SMG started prodding him after Something Blue?)

I know she didn't like Marc Blucas - there are horrible rumors about how cruel she was to him in the looping sessions. Marsters was one of the few people outside of David Boreanze who understood her sense of humor and gave back as good as he got. Probably a combination of age and experience. (DB and SMG were both pranksters - they'd eat horrible things to gross each other out during the kissing scenes. He'd eat onions, she'd eat pickles and garlic...etc. )

[lynnalso.livejournal.com]

You have got it exactly right as far as I feel about it. I have never ever gotten involved with fictional characters so my intense feelings about Buffy and Spike still surprise me. it was original, it was fascinating. Spike is the girl but he is very sexy in a guy way. Marsters took it out of the usual - yawn - thing, and he had good writers to help. How I still miss that today. I tried to like Bridget but SMG doesn't have the writers or director. Blah.

[local-max.livejournal.com]

I am a Spuffy fan personally for a pretty simple reason, I think: Buffy and Spike = INTERESTING. At different points of time, I have related more heavily to one or the other. I tend to relate to Buffy's closed off side and Spike's lovelorn insecurity.

Whedonverse relationships I like? Hm. I think that Wash/Zoe is the only relationship I both enjoy and think is healthy, but I enjoy watching most of the relationships unfold. I think I related a lot to Simon & Kaylee's relationship -- I felt a lot like Simon. If I had to pick my favourite (canon) pairings, aside from Buffy/Spike and Wash/Zoe, I think I would go with Wesley/Lilah, Angel/Darla, Giles/Jenny, Mal/Inara, Adelle/Dominic, Adelle/Topher or Claire/Topher -- all of which had a similar "who's on top?" element; and Willow/Tara, which stands apart a bit but which is a relationship I find interesting not because it's 'healthy' but because it captures a sort of loving codependence very well -- it reads to me as an epic, moving tragedy, where the characters don't realize it's a tragedy until the end. W/T is a little like Buffy/Angel, in that there is a nice surface with darkness underneath, but I think it's more complicated and interesting -- I think that they loved each other more genuinely than Buffy and Angel did (personally), but there is STILL all that darkness that is undealt with and that comes out at the end. (Obviously, most of the darkness that comes out is on Willow's side.)

ETA: I'm expressing myself terribly. I feel like I have a lot less energy to write these days. I hope what I said makes sense. Mainly, I think that there's a reputation for Willow/Tara shippers to be interested in it only for its sweetness and light, and I don't think that applies to me, and I feel like there's a lot of criticism of the ship, understandable, for being unhealthy, which I agree with, though I still enjoy the story and find the...sense of impending doom, of how the things that allow the two of them, both shy and desperate and unloved, to help each other grow and become better in season four and much of five will eventually destroy them in season six -- very moving.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I'm expressing myself terribly. I feel like I have a lot less energy to write these days.

Not at all.

And feel much the same way at the moment. For some reason, I've felt drained of energy the last few days...and as if my writing is akin to wading through fog.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

Mainly, I think that there's a reputation for Willow/Tara shippers to be interested in it only for its sweetness and light, and I don't think that applies to me, and I feel like there's a lot of criticism of the ship, understandable, for being unhealthy, which I agree with, though I still enjoy the story and find the...sense of impending doom, of how the things that allow the two of them, both shy and desperate and unloved, to help each other grow and become better in season four and much of five will eventually destroy them in season six -- very moving.

As a lesbian in her 40's who enjoys watching Willow and Tara and just discovered the show - not so much in S5, but in S6 when I came to love Tara as her own person (when the writers finally made her a more well-rounded character in her own right) - I had no idea that people like myself are looked down on? I've a lot of dismissive criticism online of that 'ship - and it's not all that different from those who dismiss Buffy/Spike. They are criticized for being "too sweet and cute" early on (and my experience of first "falling in love" is that we say and do things that make us cringe when we remember them later on - we turn into starry-eyed teenagers even for a moment.) Then in the next breath they are criticized for the abusive aspect, as if such things don't exist in lesbian relationships (because I've known lesbians who don't want the straight world to know and have another bad stereotype of lesbians, on top of the shame and guilt that come with being in an abusive relationship regardless of orientation.)

I know this is OT a bit, but my point is that I'm glad the show "went there" and dared to have a couple who have problems, encounter trials, have a member who has abused the other but is NOT a "bad person", etc - in other words, a real relationship between two people who both happen to be female. That, to me, is much more interesting than "let's keep it always nice so as not to offend anyone". And in a way that relates back to why Buffy and Spike fascinate me - the fact that they "went there" in showing abuse on both sides, but as others have noted start out as equals and remain so in a way that flips the construct of gender roles; and come to a healthy place with one another. (Unfortunately Willow and Tara never entirely get that chance, or perhaps one could say they do and it's abbreviated by Tara's death; but Buffy and Spike get the chance to fully work through their issues, which Willow and Tara don't for the sake of plot purposes.)

I would also add that I identify with Buffy first or rather pretty much equally; I've seen a lot of fic that castigates Buffy, has her mourning or pining and self-flagellating, etc. I think in the show it's pretty clear that Spike wouldn't want that for her, and more to the point that the two come to a place of grace together; it's interesting to me that a lot of writers that I've seen feel the need to make Buffy suffer much more for her "Crimes against Spike".

[local-max.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the comment! pming in response

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I had no idea that people like myself are looked down on? I've a lot of dismissive criticism online of that 'ship - and it's not all that different from those who dismiss Buffy/Spike. They are criticized for being "too sweet and cute" early on (and my experience of first "falling in love" is that we say and do things that make us cringe when we remember them later on - we turn into starry-eyed teenagers even for a moment.) Then in the next breath they are criticized for the abusive aspect, as if such things don't exist in lesbian relationships (because I've known lesbians who don't want the straight world to know and have another bad stereotype of lesbians, on top of the shame and guilt that come with being in an abusive relationship regardless of orientation.)

I've never had the impression that W/T shippers were looked down on. (Spuffy fans are, and admittedly for some of the reasons Bangle fans, and well at times deservedly. Let's face it, fans can be nutty when they get obsessed.)

The ship itself pushed people's buttons - not the fact it was a lesbian relationship, but how it was handled. There were unfortunately a lot of cliches. I hate to say it, but what you saw in S6 between Willow/Tara has been done repeatedly in cinema and television - to the degree it actually has a name: The Angry Lesbian Trope - I think there's a documentary somewhere out there on it entitled the "Celluid Closet" that delves into it in detail. The writers handled aspects of the ship badly. For one thing the metaphors...they switched from magic=sex (because the WB network brass was uncomfortable showing a sexual relationship between two women on screen in the 1990s to early 21st Century - keep in mind when this aired, UPN on the other hand didn't care), to magic = drugs and insane power trip. Which is a bit dicey. Sort of similar to what Alan Ball is doing with True Blood actually - although he's doing a better job, because he has homosexual relationships amongst people who aren't supernatural and homosexual relationships amongst people who are. If Whedon had done that - had made the relationship live outside the magic metaphor, it might have worked a little better - but unlike Ball, Whedon was dealing with a prudish and homophobic network, not to mention censors, and a whole different cultural climate.

And yes, the mind rape bugged people.

But...let's not ignore fan wars. People like to bash other ships to support their own.

Example?

Willow/Tara Fan: How can you like Spike, he's a horrible rapist? OR support Spuffy? That's the most abusive ship EVeR!
Spuffy fan: So...I guess Willow's mind rape of Tara, which she never gets called on by anyone but Tara, and Tara forgive her for...is nothing? Spike never raped Buffy, he attempted it. Unlike Willow who "violated" Tara's mind for sex. Tara who had been mindraped by Glory.
And then, when Tara called her on it, Willow did it again - to keep her. Willow makes Spike look like a tame pussycat!

Sigh.

The sad thing is...I willing to bet you that the Spuffy fan liked Willow/Tara relationship, but the other fan's holier-than-thou comment pissed them off. And they went for the jugular.

It's really no different than fights over religion, politics, or two siblings fighting over who messed up the most.

ABC shipper: How can you like X he's (or she) is a (fill in the blank)
XYZ shipper: Yeah, well how can you like A he/she is (fill in the blank)

The fun bit about Whedon's shows? Both parties have a point. But the fight is sort of silly, because they are both missing what you stated above - the depth of the relationship and what the writers explored through it. They are so busy being "self-righteously indignant" they don't see the story. They also have alienated a lot of people, cool people, along the way.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I read The Celluloid Closet in college, of course (when the movie was still in the planning stages - as usual the book is superior to the movie) but I didn't need to read it to know the Dead/Angry Lesbian Trope: after I watched Seeing Red earlier this year, I remembered an episode of Northern Exposure I'd happened to see (I wasn't watching it regularly by that point) about how the town of Cecily(?) was founded by a lesbian couple (or at least named after one of the women in that couple), and in the end one of the lesbians ends up dead and the other descends into alcoholism in grief (we're told in voiceover) and I believe, wanders away from the town and eventually dies brokenhearted. Even back then I knew it was a cliche; and not meaning "anything by it" in the instance of SR doesn't mean the cliche is not put to use here. On an emotional level I got that immediately, and felt a milder version of what I might have felt if I had been watching back in the day and not spoiled ten years after the fact - disappointment, a sense of "oh no they didn't go there". (and I've read things online dismissive of even that reaction, even on sites that lean "feminist"; but I can't dismiss my own emotional reaction, it's how I felt and still feel and that emotion is valid.)

So, yeah, I know about the trope.

As to the sex/magic thing, I actually thought that was clever, to be honest, because I knew that they were dealing with censorship issues and thought that was an interesting way to work around it. (I once read someone say that before S6 they had a "chaste" relationship - really? Then what is the end of New Moon Rising all about? "Right now?" "Right now".) And they had already shown magic and sexuality being linked for Willow in that season - if the spells Tara and Willow do together are metaphors for their sexuality, then the spell Willow performs by herself in Something Blue can be read as a metaphor for masturbation (she performs it while still grieving Oz's abandonment). So I really had no problem with that, knowing the constraints ME was under at the time.

Switching the metaphor from magic=sexuality to magic=addiction was very clumsily handled, I have no argument with that.

In any case the handling and the cliches in those specific instances isn't really my point; and yes I have seen people who can't stand Willow/Tara as a couple. I was trying to use a specific instance of a ship and I think I may have got off track in my comments, as I am wont to do. I actually could have named as a better example Bangel or Riley/Buffy - abusive behavior has occured in ALL of Buffy's relationships, if you want to get down to it - but that's neither here nor there.

You're right, the fight is silly; so I generally try to stay out of the cross-hairs. I much prefer "agree to disagree". *hands out brownies* (Unless someone tells me "Buffy's a bitch and must be punished" - then I take back my brownies.)

[gingerwall.livejournal.com]

Nice post. Thanks for sharing.

As far as Mark being spoiled, I read in some rot13'd comments back he was bashing on Buffy/Spike that he is probably spoiled on the attempted rape at least, but doesn't know much about their relationship leading up to it.

In a comment on Mark Reads Twilight, when talking about why Edward/Bella sucks so much, Mark mentioned something about Angel trying to rape Buffy, and then corrected it to Spike.

There was some debate about whether or not he'd forgotten about it - My question is, if not, why didn't he mentioned it at the beginning? (Paraphrase quote: "literally the only thing I know about BtVS is that there's a musical episode, and some guy named Angel gets a spin-off show.") Maybe he was just trying to not spoil other people who didn't know about the AR. Or maybe he actually forgot.

Anyway, there's at least circumstantial evidence that he knows about the AR, and therefore would be predisposed to not like the pairing.

[green-maia.livejournal.com]

I'm too tired to be articulate, but I wanted to say that I completely agree, and thank you for posting this.

The misunderstood hooker with the heart of gold.

YES. That is Spike EXACTLY.

ruuger once argued - I must find that post of hers, it was brilliant - that Spike is a Bond Girl - the villainous female falls for the male hero and is transformed by love for said hero - except with the genders reversed. YES.

(And like you, I would have no interest in Spuffy if Spike were female and Buffy male. It's the swapping of gender tropes that is so utterly fascinating.)

Thank you for posting this!