tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post575881072331624280..comments2024-01-15T02:19:13.716-08:00Comments on Fragments Of My Imagination: Lies My Parents Told MeMark Fieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-68830084458824196162018-03-08T08:11:11.799-08:002018-03-08T08:11:11.799-08:00That's a good point about the desires. We see ...That's a good point about the desires. We see that with Angel as early as his eponymous episode, where he attempts suicide by cop after being tempted by Darla to drink from Joyce. He hadn't actually done anything wrong, but he *wanted to* and that drove his guilt.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-90310443644951922192018-03-08T05:55:13.632-08:002018-03-08T05:55:13.632-08:00I think it is not the actions Spike and Angel are ...I think it is not the actions Spike and Angel are guilty of. It are the desires. Vampires always seem to retain a great deal of the person they used to be. I think that part consists mostly of the desires. Without the soul the ID acts on the desires. Ensouled Spike and Angel are not responsible for the actions they committed without their soul, but their personality did influence what actions they committed. These desires are still present and is what they are struggling with. I think that might also be the big difference between how Spike and Angel reacted to their ensoulment and what kind of vampire they were. Williams desired mostly a bit of freedom from his repressed and timid life making him a carefree vampire. Liam's desires, given the vampire he turned into, are a lot darker, causing far more internal struggle. Angel has to atone for his actions he committed after getting his soul back. The first thing he did was trying to keep being a vampire.Sciurushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13489313969355371408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-58072652953728316552018-03-02T18:35:53.070-08:002018-03-02T18:35:53.070-08:00You agree? Damn, I must have dialed the wrong inte...You agree? Damn, I must have dialed the wrong internet. :)Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-85438484384190009732018-03-02T15:54:19.776-08:002018-03-02T15:54:19.776-08:00That's fair. I'll concede the point. (To b...That's fair. I'll concede the point. (To be clear, I wasn't expecting him to go into every gory detail, just to show he was willing to use the new information he had to try to work on the problem.)Gracenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-63182080663208508132018-03-02T14:03:04.785-08:002018-03-02T14:03:04.785-08:00The way I saw it, the song was something very pers...The way I saw it, the song was something very personal to Spike. Explaining why it could trigger him would have required a very in-depth explanation of his relationship with his mother and his behavior towards her (before and after he was turned). I can understand why he didn't want to expose that to everyone, especially including Giles and Wood.<br /><br />Partly for that reason, I don't think he had any obligation to tell anyone, though perhaps he should have done so in order to increase everyone's confidence in him. But more importantly, I don't think it would have mattered if he had -- as Giles himself says, "the rest is up to Spike". <br /><br />So my view is that he didn't have any obligation to disclose his past, nor could anyone else have done anything different even if he had. <br />Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-10780418739436139142018-03-02T09:31:20.330-08:002018-03-02T09:31:20.330-08:00I mostly agree with your very excellent essay. But...I mostly agree with your very excellent essay. But this part stuck out for me: "Until the very end, Spike did nothing controversial; he was the victim."<br /><br />Maybe it wasn't "controversial" but I thought his behavior in the basement was wrong. To me, he was acting in bad faith by lying about the trigger and refusing to work on defusing it until Wood inadvertently forced the issue. Buffy thought Spike didn't "know anything" and that the stone didn't work, which was not true; Spike was deliberately withholding information. (As Giles had said beforehand, "The stone's just a catalyst for the process. The rest is up to Spike.") Spike essentially confirms that he had insight into the trigger in my view when he said, "Been weighing on me for quite some time" at the end of the episode.Gracenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-19971238671073631752016-09-10T01:11:42.153-07:002016-09-10T01:11:42.153-07:00I can agree with the First being representative of...I can agree with the First being representative of one's fear and insecurities, I actually came to the conclusion that in Amends the First is very much representative of that little voice in your head that tells you aren't worth very much and why both. However I think this ultimately shows that the First as a villain works better in theory or metaphor than it does as an actual villain in the show, particularly since a) it's evil plans are a tad extreme or questionable and more particularly b) the plans themselves have a lot of holes in them particularly those surrounding Spike as kidnapping him didn't serve a purpose and we're not given any real definitive answer as you what his real purpose was in the grand scheme of things (except perhaps for the whole "battle of souls" thing you mentioned but even that would only do so much). In that regard the First might have been a better Big Bad for S6 as that was a much more character-focused and psychological season. And while the metaphor is fine and all the fact is there is still a big evil out there that has nefarious plans so strictly looking at it as a metaphor doesn't necessarily work for me in this case, and that's even putting aside the fact that quite a few of the Buffy metaphors have issues if taken to the logical extreme. In that regard Angel's Wolfram & Hart is far more successful at being the ancient all-knowing evil that is representative of the evil in the heart of people as it works as a metaphor and a villain with common sense.<br /><br />The point about triggered-Spike and Angelus being equally dangerous is fair though I would add that while Angelus would probably pose a more long-term danger ala Season 2 Spike's triggering would have an aspect of surprise that could cause some damage at any time. But again it's hard to know what kind of damage would or would not have happened given the lack of clear goal on the part of the First with Spike. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-36296809976409352392016-09-09T06:53:53.420-07:002016-09-09T06:53:53.420-07:00I tend to see the FE as metaphorical -- representi...I tend to see the FE as metaphorical -- representing our inner fears and insecurities -- rather than actual. In that case, the question is whether Spike's insecurities were more likely to trigger than Angel's "perfect happiness", in the situation before either was aware of the problem. I don't really know how to evaluate those relative chances, though I'd probably agree that Spike was more likely. But the actual danger in each case -- unleashing a vicious vampire -- was the same.<br /><br />Your point about bias is fair. Buffy did have a prior relationship with Spike, though I'm not sure her attitude towards that would help him much if she thought HE (not the First) were actually killing again. She was, after all, ready to stake him in Sleeper. She also had a good relationship with Wood up to that point in time. The bias pretty much cancels out.<br /><br />What makes the difference is the fact that Buffy intuits that she needs Spike for the coming apocalypse. That's not bias, that's an actual reason.<br /><br />Also, in the legal system, there are instances in which every judge would have a bias (e.g., a case involving judicial pay). In that case, since we can't disqualify all the judges, the case proceeds as it normally would. Here, Buffy is the only available judge (Faith isn't functioning as a Slayer at this point), so it has to be her regardless of any bias. Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-84759428440842237602016-09-09T05:33:07.879-07:002016-09-09T05:33:07.879-07:00"By that logic, Angel was just as dangerous p..."By that logic, Angel was just as dangerous pre-Innocence as Spike is now. "<br /><br />I don't feel this logic really works. With Spike's trigger all someone would have to do to activate it would be to sing the song and get him to do stuff. Now as you brought up he might be able to stop himself from there but regardless Spike has no actual barring in the trigger being activated.<br /><br />With Angel he would have to be able to be in a position where he would feel extreme happiness in order to lose his soul, which either includes sex (which as pop culture tells us is the best thing eva!) or as Passion of the Nerd says some kind of football game to make him feel extreme joy. In either case the only person that is able to cause this happiness to occur is Angel (which ANGEL SPOILERS might offer an alternative explanation to why he didn't lose his soul in Reprise outside of higher powers or miracles) since these feelings would have to originate from him. Sure someone could help him achieve this happiness but he would be the deciding factor here, drugs might not even be an option since (MORE ANGEL SPOILERS the happy drug from Eternity didn't actual make him lose his soul but temporarily made him lose his sense which isn't quite the same thing. And in both Surprise/Innocence and Eternity the Angelus unleashing was entirely accidental since certain parties weren't aware of the truth whereas they'd have to be in Spike's case, since the odds of someone playing that song these days by chance are pretty minimal) In either case Angel could not really be held accountable for losing his soul in Surprise/Innocence as he was not aware of the happy clause at the time whereas he could if he really wanted to lose his soul. Overall one "trigger" is much easier to enact than the other which makes Spike a bit more dangerous on the whole, particularly with the First's ability to teleport at any time to him and sing the song. <br /><br />As for the point about The Slayer being the judge in the case of the Wood getting justice from Spike, wouldn't she be extremely bias as well due to her need to hang on to him and the fact they've had a past relationship. I get they don't really have much in the way of choice but I don't see why Wood would go to Buffy deliberately and expect anything other than a "no". At least with the Anya situation there was a least a bit of a chance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-74996142828563459392014-08-06T17:04:36.096-07:002014-08-06T17:04:36.096-07:00At your opening para about LMPTM, i think you coul...At your opening para about LMPTM, i think you could have added forgiveness. To me that's the biggest theme.<br />Just a sugestion,<br />Thanks NaturalyBuffBuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00513610119801118844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-63777649937060640202014-07-11T06:50:55.424-07:002014-07-11T06:50:55.424-07:00Cool idea. I'd like to see it as part of a Gil...Cool idea. I'd like to see it as part of a Giles spinoff (which, sadly, we're never going to get).Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-24752007053506078822014-07-10T23:26:57.989-07:002014-07-10T23:26:57.989-07:00I adore this series, but I always felt that there ...I adore this series, but I always felt that there was a missed opportunity in S7 wrt Giles. Instead of doing the is-he-noncorporeal bit, the writers could have laid the groundwork for all his deeds by exploring the end of the WC. When that blew up - and we know that many Watchers have been murdered - Giles has gone from being a Watcher in disgrace to pretty much the senior Watcher remaining. That would be an incredible burden, because it would mean that he was responsible for most of the Potentials, and also for making sure that the knowledge of the WC was rebuilt to lay a foundation for protecting humanity for eternity.<br /><br />It would have been a great source of stress, could explain his turning against Spike, and been wonderful for a character arc.Victoriahttp://www.amazon.com/Children-Tantalus-Pelops-Tapestry-Bronze-ebook/dp/B004F9PANE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1405059854&sr=8-1&keywords=children+of+tantalusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-14549868955113555062013-02-26T12:29:36.755-08:002013-02-26T12:29:36.755-08:00Agreed on all counts.Agreed on all counts.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-86842831538492676722013-02-26T12:27:55.923-08:002013-02-26T12:27:55.923-08:00I think this is fair. I'd add two points. One ...I think this is fair. I'd add two points. One is that there's a Frodo/Gollum comparison to be made with Buffy and Spike, I think. The other is that Buffy's struggles in each season are always both personal and take place in a larger context. In the personal sense, Buffy needs Spike just as she needs Xander and Willow and Dawn and Giles, so keeping him around is the right decision.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-88579209681713642822013-02-26T12:27:24.216-08:002013-02-26T12:27:24.216-08:00Oh, and a thought on Spike and his comments to Woo...Oh, and a thought on Spike and his comments to Wood. I'm not sure if I agree 100% that Spike the ensouled cannot be (or should not be) held accountable for Spike the pure demon. He and Angel certainly have the capacity to remember and feel remorse for their crimes (in fact, that is one of the main reasons Angel was first ensouled by the Gypsies). And Angel, at least, seems to feel the need to redeem himself for his past crimes by his present actions (that's sort of what AtS is all about). And in any regard, even if Spike needn't feel remorse for what old Spike did, if we're thinking along those lines of "doing the right thing," then he should at least understand that Wood might benefit from Spike's acting contrite and remorseful. <br /><br />But I don't think the question of Spike's culpability really matters all that much in relation to his words to Wood anyway. I get the feeling that Spike responds to Wood to hurt him - Wood just tried to kill him after all, and Spike knows why. Spike's a fine manipulator, and great at using people's own thoughts and emotions against them, to push them towards self-doubt.<br /><br />But I think it's even more than that. Spike has got to be somewhat grateful to Wood. He seems to know in the moment he reverts back to his own self that the trigger has been vanquished, and he has Wood to thank for that. In a way, I think he's almost returning the favor. He needs to break Wood of his vengeance trip (or his "trigger"), and he attempts to do so by dropping a dose of what he sees as cold reality on him.<br /><br />In a sense, Spike is very right (and very close to Buffy in this regard) - it doesn't matter who killed whom 25 years ago. What matters is now, and if Wood wants to be a part of that, he needs to get his head in the game.<br /><br />Knowing Spike, I'd say he's also driven, at least in part, by the desire to exert his superiority (or sense of it, anyway).aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09511776738005115468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-73234554017366629632013-02-26T12:17:20.927-08:002013-02-26T12:17:20.927-08:00Having read your comments on S7 up to this point, ...Having read your comments on S7 up to this point, and also having discussed some of this with you some time back during the AVClub write-ups, I know where you stand on the issue of Buffy as General, and I pretty much agree with you. One thing that occurred to me while watching this episode is that, even as Buffy is trying to fit (uncomfortably) into the role of general (at the insistence of Giles among others), she's also grappling with other types of leadership as well. I'm not an expert on war theory, but I think Buffy has a fairly strong strategy but is weak on the tactics.<br /><br />Her display of knowledge that Spike is necessary in the coming fight shows a big picture understanding of how she's going to handle (or attempt to handle) what's to come. The same is probably true to different degrees with Willow, Anya, Andrew, and the others. What you've written about Buffy's capacity for forgiveness figures into this, but it's also a credit to her understanding that she's got only so many tools in her arsenal and she needs to learn how to put them to good use (or, to go back to some previous posts, get them to bring their A games).<br /><br />Her day-to-day tactics (acting the general, shutting people out, keeping secrets, etc.) are more problematic. And I think that also fits into your reading of one of the season's major conflicts: when Buffy trusts her instincts (keeping Spike alive, refusing more power from the shadow men), her leadership instincts are strong, and they tend to be non-patriarchal in nature. When she succumbs to the demands of others to be a general, to fit her round pegginess into their square hole-iness, that's when she falters.aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09511776738005115468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-63068202782342320132013-02-14T18:48:09.214-08:002013-02-14T18:48:09.214-08:00It is pronounced Brenner.It is pronounced Brenner.learning thingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-79380370864799437772013-02-08T07:03:42.672-08:002013-02-08T07:03:42.672-08:00I'm not sure either, but it's a good point...I'm not sure either, but it's a good point.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-89781471158628945642013-02-08T00:07:24.372-08:002013-02-08T00:07:24.372-08:00I don't know if this is trivia or what, but I ...I don't know if this is trivia or what, but I think it's interesting that in both Fool for Love and LMPTM Buffy unknowingly administers that last devastating, echoing blow for Spike and Wood: "You're beneath me" & "The Mission is what matters." Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-58560234209280243002013-02-07T17:39:58.997-08:002013-02-07T17:39:58.997-08:00I always pronounced it "Brenner", hence ...I always pronounced it "Brenner", hence my mis-spelling. I just listened to SMG say it, and she makes the same mistake.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-83129088402153997612013-02-07T16:50:53.445-08:002013-02-07T16:50:53.445-08:00Wait now I'm confused. How did Buffy pronounce...Wait now I'm confused. How did Buffy pronounce it? Brenner or Briner? Which are you saying is correct? I'm just intterested is all, 'cause for a sec I thought I had been pronouncing it wrong all my life along with everyone else I've ever heard say it, but only based on the way I read the original comment. But I just found this somewhere not too dubious on the internet: <br /><br /> Boris, the middle son of Jules and Natalia, earned a Masters <br /> degree in mine engineering in St. Petersburg, before <br /> operating the Bryner mines north of Vladivostok. He married <br /> Mara Blagovidova and had two children, Vera and Yul Brynner <br /> (both later added a second 'n' to Bryner, to suggest the <br /> correct pronunciation. "It rhymes with 'sinner,'" Yul liked <br /> to say).again from a different anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-83055274580960780642013-02-07T16:34:06.200-08:002013-02-07T16:34:06.200-08:00Many if not most people pronounce it incorrectly (...Many if not most people pronounce it incorrectly (I knew the spelling and didn't know it was supposed to be pronounced Briner) including Rupert Head's brother Murray in the (awesome) song "One Night in Bangkok." So I don't know about not bothering or mangling. Maybe it's just a fairly common misperception?a different anonymous posternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-62845453074797785182013-02-07T14:58:09.664-08:002013-02-07T14:58:09.664-08:00That's right. I haven't watched in a whil...That's right. I haven't watched in a while, so sometimes I need my memory recalled. I just remembered them talking on the steps, but I thought other people were talking while they were. <br /><br />Aerylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10442074043571201717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-7746870620840615982013-02-07T12:02:39.552-08:002013-02-07T12:02:39.552-08:00Damn. Thanks for catching that.Damn. Thanks for catching that.Mark Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16661801011668244109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5913356479406165601.post-6474420943904033962013-02-07T12:00:50.462-08:002013-02-07T12:00:50.462-08:00You misspelled Yul BRYNNER'S name the same way...You misspelled Yul BRYNNER'S name the same way Sarah Michelle Gellar mispronounced it. Poor Yul. I always wondered if that was Sarah's own mistake (which no one affiliated with the show bothered to correct), or if it was SUPPOSED to be yet another typical, mangled Buffy pronunciation. :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com