Re: ::BuffyLovesWillow:: OT: Tempting fate, Willow

[danspector@xxxxxxxxx]

*Giggle* When I saw this one, I said "nuh-uh, not going there, larned
my lesson well." But CA's post was so darned nice I figured I should at
least try and match the tone. So this is all smile, no bile time.

Besides, anyone who remembers my stupid little jokes deserves a
response.

This topic can get spoilerific, so there'll be some space, and I'll
touch on a couple of things before then.

On Philly, Rod said UPN was showing the ep twice in two different edits.
That means two different wildfeeds, and I'd be concerned that UPN 57
would capture the second, edited one, because it will presumably be
transmitted closer to the Saturday broadcast date. Perhaps Philly fans
should contact UPN 57 and ask which version they're transmitting and
lobby for the Tuesday [long] edit. On the other hand, Kris may get the
long version in Indiana because Buffy airs on a WB station there (since
there's no UPN, the WB channel picks it up on a delayed basis). Perhaps
there is a rule that such programs, picked up from another network,
can't be shown by the competing network's affiliates on the same night.
I don't know, it just sounds like the sort of red tape that would apply
here. If so, Kris's WB station couldn't show the UPN Saturday edition
on Saturday, it would have to be the Tuesday version. But that's all
guess work.

On the OT list, I think that's a good idea. Because I get the
impression that some people like to use BtVS to examine and gain a
greater knowledge of concepts in psychology, philosophy, and religion.
But on the other hand there are people like myself (and when I say
"people like myself", I really hope it isn't just myself) who are only
interested in defining how the concepts are used on the show and what
they mean in terms of the show, nothing larger. I think the use of a
separate list for grander topics might be wise.

I mean, despite my pretensions to Jewish culture and ethics, put a gun
to my head and I'm an atheist--you live, you die, worms eat you,
period. To me, a soul is as fictional as magic or vampires. So I'm
not interested in correlating it with any scientific theory or belief
system, to me the soul is only important for what Joss thinks it is and
how it factors into the show's plots.

Along those lines, I think it's clear that, according to the show and
ONLY the show, vampires have no soul. After all, everyone (Watchers,
the vamps themselves, immortal demon judges, gods) says so--if Joss
actually had the opposing viewpoint in mind, I think he likely would
have had it voiced by now.

On to the spoiler space, since now I'll touch on the two big Season 6
plots.

(actually, I wonder how necessary this is. I mean, who has read this
far without knowing which plots I refer to and which characters are
involved in them? Oh, well, it's better to err on

T
H
E

S
I
D
E

O
F

C
A
U
T
I
O
N

?like so.)

As to whether Spike can love in his (stated) soulless condition, both
arguments have been advanced on-air. Spike said he loved Dru ("Lovers
Walk"), the Judge said otherwise ("Surprise" and spared them for it).
And when Buffy quests to discover if she is capable of love
("Intervention") the Guide casts its affirmative answer in terms of
Buffy's soul ("you love with all your soul"). I tend to believe the
more powerful beings, since they have wider experience and are dedicated
to the purpose of revealing truths, whereas Spike himself would admit to
a self-serving nature.

As for my personal opinions extrapolated from this theory, I think that
questing for love without having the ability to truly know it makes
Spike a tragic figure and could also be an interpretation of the title
of his origin ep, "Fool For Love".

As for my wish to how this question will be answered (yes, I'm trying
overly hard to define my statements, to separate argument from opinion
from preference, just so I don't accidentally offend), let me say again
that a Spike who can know love without a soul is unfair to and
possibility in contradiction with an Angel who suffers despite one.

In a guess, I'd say this could actually be a theme of the B/S arc (I
know it's a cheap shot, but I think those initials neatly describe the
idea of such a romance working). Can Spike really love? My guess is
that when (yes, WHEN) Buffy dumps him, we might get an exchange like
this:

S: Buffy, please! I love you!
B (coldly but sadly): You don't know what love is.

On to Willow, I suppose I was so thrilled at Jim's (I botched typing his
pen name, so it's back to "Jim" for me) addiction theory that I didn't
bother to note she doesn't seem physically addicted (unlike Giles, who
summonned Eyghon for the physical rush). It is more like a
psychological dependency, growing out of the identity crisis you
theorized. So I probably mucked up the debate by using the term
"addiction" for what may merely be a pattern of behavior that's taken on
aspects of a compulsion. And since I have only a very lay knowledge of
psychology, I'm probably using the wrong terms here, but I hope my
meaning comes through.

I traced before Willow's emotional state in the post-Season 2 summer,
her feelings of having failed Buffy, Angel, and Jenny. Also note, she
was the only person who lost all three of them--Giles may have worked
willingly with Angel, but it can't have been as painful for him to see
Angel go evil as it was for Willow (who probably had nightmares
remembering the hands on her throat). She really did idolize
him--'shipper note, that's a sublimation of her love for Buffy (of
course Buffy would chose a perfect boyfriend, she's so wonderful, etc.).
So that's three of the four people she looked up to whom she
failed--and Giles was a wreck that summer, unable to cope himself, much
less help her. And she decided to better herself by following in
Jenny's footsteps magically, just as she had taken over her computer
class. So, yes, she's invested a lot of her self-esteem in her magic,
going from the screw-up who couldn't restore Angel's soul (she thought)
to arguably more powerful than Buffy.

After all, in "Tough Love" she thinks she can have the success against
Glory that Buffy hasn't had, and Buffy basically confirms this in the
"Big Gun" pep talk in "The Gift" ("you're the only one who's ever hurt
her"). Which I guess is another reason for this plot--the show ain't
called "Willow the Witch", so she's foredoomed to sidekickdom.

But if the magic is an outgrowth of her personality growth, then this
arc has to essentially be sympathetic. They can't repudiate all that
personal growth and self-esteem, after all. And that's all I ask--I
don't mind Willow messing up, I just object to Willow as essentially
evil.

And I think brickbats have to be thrown at Giles and Tara (and the
writers for bad scenes, naturally). Wielding of great power isn't
innately evil, it just represents greater responsibility. And Tara
should probably be wanting Willow to have more familiarity with magic,
not less--if she's going to be casting the big spells, she should be
honing her craft. Again, I think Inell covered this beautifully in "Two
Sides of a Coin."

Really, they're coming from the same place (I always thought they were
similar characters). Their stock in trade is knowledge and
caution--now Willow is beyond what they can teach her and she doesn't
respect their authority. It's just Willow's bad luck that Buffy, her
partner (and, essentially, role model) in "I'll do it my way and deal
with the consequences later" heroism, is so unavailable. It's a good
thing Aly has a contract or I'd worry this would be the story of Willow
ending tragically because Buffy wasn't there for her.

Plus, although they haven't shown it, Tara has to be jealous. Willow
does all this risky over-the-top stuff for another woman, wouldn't you
be? So if she now sees Willow's magic usage as a betrayal, a "you only
loved me for my spellbooks" thing, it's no wonder she's now sensitive
about light shows and other minor demonstrations, the sort of thing she
used to love.

Giles, for his part, is probably projecting from his black magic days,
which did involve a (possibly-addictive) physical rush, and which are
his deepest shame, so maybe he isn't quite fair on this subject.

Actually, I get happier about this season as things go on. Well, I'm
not happy that the eps themselves, as television, continue to suck, but
the future looks good. If, as Jim theorized, Buffy is not quite right,
then that makes her relationship with Spike the mistake we all think it
is. And if Spike is a mistake, and the closeness with Spike is in
reaction to the rift with Willow, then logically, the right thing to do
is to get close to Willow. Maybe even closer than before. Maybe the
kind of closeness we all think should be.

It would be a pity if the season WAS about B/W and was considered bad
because of eps like the last four (okay, "Life Serial" was acceptable,
but no one's nominating it for the pantheon). But I'll take B/W any
way, any time.

The only thing is to beware of over-interpretation. After all, if
Mad-Hamlet says it was supposed to be W/O forever, then that famous "I
think I'm kinda gay" (in "Doppelgangland") wasn't the sort of
foreshadowing it's been held to be, just a fortuitous coincidence.
Which, come to think of it, would make it hilarious if things do end up
the way I 'shippily think they should. Thank you, Seth Green.

Peace,

Dan

(hopefully nice)

"The only chance you had with me was when I was unconscious."--Buffy to
Spike ("Crush"--hmm, wonder if fractured souls count as
unconsciousness?)

"I know you'll never love me."--Spike to Buffy ("The Gift")

"Nobody like my Willow." "No, sir, there is not."--Oz and Xander
("Choices")

"There aren't two of those in the world."--Buffy, re Willow ("Lie To
Me")