Spontaneous Musings

Read the following essay today :

Here's the link to the essay in case you are interested - http://amberbenson.yuku.com/topic/2516. (It's on a Tara fanboard)

The essay basically states that Tara should not have been killed. Her death did not further Willow's emotional arc in any way. The magic as crack or addictive substance metaphor does not hold up or make any sense, since prior to that it had only been used as a metaphor for "romantic" love and Giles never ever mentioned that it could be additictive or used for dark purposes. And killing Tara off was just lazy writing, as was the build up to it. Also, they go on, to add, in detail, how it supports the Lesbian Cliche (ie. the lesbian in films is killed off). Yes, I know, we've all read this before, one too many times, and by a lot better essayists - there was one on ATPO Board way back in 2002, who did a rather in depth analysis of the whole thing that was quite convincing at the time - referencing several films and documentaries along the way - at least I think it was ATPO, it may have been BC&S. If you were on any spoiler boards or Buffy fanboards in 2002-2003, you have already heard this argument ad naseum. Not only did you hear it? You probably discussed it. Although many of us, myself included, veered sharply away from it - because emotions were high and one risked being called nasty names. At this point, to those of us who were fans of the show and online in 2002, it is bit like flogging a dead horse. So why, you ask, am I bringing this up again?

Because - I noticed something in my own re-watch of the series regarding magic, metaphors, and Willow - which more or less pokes holes in the entire argument detailed above and changed my mind regarding the weakness/confusion/inconsistency of the "magic as crack" metaphor in S6. I don't believe it is a weak metaphor - never really did, to be honest, and I don't believe it is a sloppy one - if anything, my only quibble is that they got a bit, shall we say, didatic regarding it in 6 and 7, while in earlier seasons they erred on the side of sublety.

The problem with addiction storylines on television is they have a tendency to come across like Afterschool Specials if you aren't careful. Afterschool Specials for the uninitiated are preachy movies of the week that aired on ABC or CBS during the 1970s and early 1980s, before cable existed and just after school - a la, 3 or 4pm, between cartoons and news. They were hour long morality plays about a kid in trouble. There were a couple of good ones - such as one that was based on the memoir Go Ask Alice, and another based on A Separate Peace. But most were sort of like the flicks we see now on Lifetime or Hallmark channels. Heavy-handed morality tales. I think in a way, the writers were making fun of these "specials about addiction" in season 6. They do go a bit over the top at times - in a way that is almost comical (specifically the removal of all magical perpherinal from the house including candles in Gone - a sort of homage to out of sight out of mind pov. Gone is in a lot of ways a homage to that S1 episode, Out of Sight Out of Mind - about a nerdy girl who disappears, and is literally out of sight and out of mind. Then seeks vengeance on all who made her that way.)

While I may not be fond of certain aspects of the magic arc - from a purely objective pov it does work. The writing is tight, layered, and furthers the arcs of all the characters. Actually Willow's entire arc makes sense, Whedon clearly knew ahead of time what he wanted to do with Willow, and why, because he starts building up to it as far back as Season 1. He just changes a few particulars here and there.

( In Defense of Willow's Magic Arc and why Tara's Death was necessary )

A while back, can't remember when exactly, I watched an old interview with Audrey Hepburn during the interview she said a lot of things, but the statement that stuck with me was this:

"When you are young you want wild passionate love, where you can't stop thinking about the other person, you become lost in them, and you fight and have wild love at night...but it gets tiring. You can't sustain it. After a while...you find you are just tired. Later, when I got much older...I realized that I didn't want that. I wanted someone I could just sip tea with, talk to, sleep with, go on walks, who was a companion, and we didn't necessarily have sex all the time, but we loved and it was deeper and lasted longer." I wish I could remember her exact words.

Been rewatching Buffy the Vampire Slayer, S1-S3 at the moment, and have just completed the first five episodes of Season 3. What I've become struck by this go around, which I didn't really notice before, no idea why - is the deft critique of romantic love and in particular the gothic romance trope, with all of its horrific consequences. Joss Whedon and his writing team are deft satirists of the horror and in particular gothic horror/gothic romance tradition. Not surprising, considering the name of the series is Buffy the Vampire Slayer - that alone, just screams satire.

There's a great line in the fourth episode of S3, the episode in which Angel returns from hell, entitled Beauty and the Beasts:

"It's okay to get lost in love. There's nothing wrong with that. But sooner or later you have to get un lost, see what is going on around you and take part in it. Because if you stay lost...then love becomes your master, and you - its dog."
( spoilers for BTVS, mostly just S1-S3, first six episodes or thereabouts )