WTF?!?! Buffy #12 [SPOILERS}

[beetlebum]

Doesn't Four also have the one with "Buffy Want Beer?"

I have an irrational fondness for that episode.

Beer Bad. A pretty funny skewering of the collegiate love of brewed hops.

[beetlebum]

Would Buffy be an existentialist, an idealist, or a post-structuralist? :confused:

She's proof that blondes love asian gurls (tm). :evilsmile:

[diana_fan]

Doesn't Four also have the one with "Buffy Want Beer?"

I have an irrational fondness for that episode.

I think "Beer Bad" is hilarious. And at the time, I remember it being totally hated on the newsgroup. It regularly was called the worst episode ever.

I found it hysterical.

[Corrina]

I thought it was funny.

My Buffy experience is weird because I watched it out of order. A friend insisted that I watch, so I started with what was going on at the time. First episode was "The Body" in Season Five. It was an interesting start.

Then I tried catching up when Fox was showing reruns and got to most of then and then my daughter got obsessed, so it was easily to justify the DVD sets. Though since she was only twelve, I stopped at S5 for a bit. S6 was a bit too explicit for me as a parent, until she was a year or two older. She was not pleased with me.....

Obviously, Season Five was good enough to hook me. Oddly, I saw most of Seasons Three and then Two, and then One, all the while watching Six as it played out.

Two might be my favorite, I think. But love episodes from every season--I'd forgotten "Pangs." Love that. But Six definitely had the largest number of weak episodes for me. Doublemeat Palace was just boring. Still...even the episode with Riley back had one of my favorite dialogue exchanges.

"Did you die?"
"No."
"I win."

And I just love the moment when Giles shows up at the magic shop to face down Dark Willow. Between that and Tabula Rosa, I really became an Anya/Giles shipper. Which I knew was hopeless (and didn't make story sense, at least that much) but they were so interesting in those episodes. Ah, well.

[BnL]

Season six, as I said, was one of my least favorite seasons, but it has one of my favorite episodes from the show, "Normal Again." It was an interesting "what if" story.

"Life Serial" was another fave, if only for the scene where Buffy is caught in a time loop.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Doesn't Four also have the one with "Buffy Want Beer?"

I have an irrational fondness for that episode.

"Beer Bad". It's really one of the weakest episodes, and probably the least subtle in terms of dealing with thematic issues, but it does have a few charming bits.

I don't hate it as much as a lot of people do - like diana_fan notes, many hardcore BUFFY folk consider it possibly the worst episode in the series - but it's nowhere near my personal favorites.

[diana_fan]

God did I hate Tabula Rasa. That episode marks the point where I completely lost faith in the show.

[beetlebum]

Yeah, season two was my fav as well. Of all the seasons, it's the one I watch the most. I also liked four, mainly because I was in high school at the time, and I could relate to Buffy's search to find herself and navigate through her first year of university. Except of course, I ended up applying that to my high school experience.

Five was depressing, and six like I said before, was Whedon's answer to Radiohead's Kid A. Bold, experimental, and controversial due to its divisiveness. Except while I loved Kid A, I just found that with the few exceptions of episodes like "Tabula Rasa", season six was in desperate need of prozac.


Season three was great, what with Faith being Buffy's Iago, and Richard Wilkins, who was a caricature of the "Moral Majority". It was heartbreaking to see Angel and Buffy grow apart, but they did a good job with showing how it would not work out for them. At least, for that moment in time. *crosses fingers*

Oh, and as for season one, I loved "Prophecy Girl". I thought Sarah Michelle Gellar's acting was absolutely wonderful in that episode. I mean, the way she delivered her lines; "Read me the signs, tell my my FORTUNE!" showcased the full range of her acting talent. It's too bad that she was never nominated for an Emmy. Too bad because the Academy is filled with stuffy, old people who totally suck.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Season six, as I said, was one of my least favorite seasons, but it has one of my favorite episodes from the show, "Normal Again." It was an interesting "what if" story.


While on its own terms "Normal Again" is pretty well done - a really amazing piece of postmodernist drama, really, and SMG's performance is exceptional - I have a lot of problems with it within the context of the series.

The biggest problem is that the way the episode ends, it leaves very open the possibility that the entire series - all of Buffy's adventures, all the sacrifice and everything she and everyone experiences - is nothing but the delusions of an institutionalized, schizophrenic young woman. In my opinion, this rather serves to undercut the themes of heroism and female empowerment which are central to the show; one can take the episode as saying that the idea that a woman can be strong and heroic is itself delusional. Given how much Buffy is put through during the season, and thus how much the viewer is forced to endure while relating to her, I think tossing that one into the season puts the dark and tortured factor of the season way, way over the top. One can argue that the stuff with Spike represents the degradation of Buffy (the character), but "Normal Again" is thematically degrading to BUFFY - the entire series - and thus to the viewers that have stuck with it to that point and beyond.

This is the main reason why, objective quality aside, "Normal Again" is possibly my least-favorite episode of BUFFY.

[beetlebum]

God did I hate Tabula Rasa. That episode marks the point where I completely lost faith in the show.

Why?! :mad: :p

[beetlebum]

While on its own terms "Normal Again" is pretty well done - a really amazing piece of postmodernist drama, really, and SMG's performance is exceptional - I have a lot of problems with it within the context of the series.

The biggest problem is that the way the episode ends, it leaves very open the possibility that the entire show is nothing but the delusions of an institutionalized, schizophrenic young woman. In my opinion, this rather serves to undercut the themes of heroism and female empowerment which are central to the show; one can take the episode as saying that the idea that a woman can be strong and heroic is itself delusional. Given how much Buffy is put through during the season, and thus how much the viewer is forced to endure while relating to her, I think tossing that one into the season puts the dark and tortured factor of the season way, way over the top. One can argue that the stuff with Spike represents the degradation of Buffy (the character), but "Normal Again" is thematically degrading to BUFFY - the entire series - and thus to the viewers that have stuck with it to that point and beyond.

This is the main reason why, objective quality aside, "Normal Again" is possibly my least-favorite episode of BUFFY.

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I always thought that "Normal Again" was created to capitalize on "A Beautiful Mind", which also deals with schizophrenia, and was a popular film at the time. I could be wrong, it could have been written earlier before that. But that's my theory. Oh and Smallville did a poor remake of it that is very much worthy of the term "eew". Aggie summed it up best when she said that episode should have been aborted before it ever got onto the air.

[TCJohnson]

Season three was great, what with Faith being Buffy's Iago, and Richard Wilkins, who was a caricature of the "Moral Majority". It was heartbreaking to see Angel and Buffy grow apart, but they did a good job with showing how it would not work out for them. At least, for that moment in time. *crosses fingers*

I always felt bad the the principal. He really was trying to do the right thing, even if he was a jerk.

Season Three had my favorite of....almost anything! The Zeppo!

[JeffreyWKramer]

I don't know that I have a favorite season. 2, 3, 5 and 6 have a lot of wonderful aspects to them, and are neat in different ways.

I do agree that "Prophecy Girl" is easily the highpoint of the first season, and I think it's one of the very best episodes of the whole series.

Seasons 2 and 3 are probably the most consistently good seasons of the series.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Season Three had my favorite of....almost anything! The Zeppo!

Another excellent episode.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I always thought that "Normal Again" was created to capitalize on "A Beautiful Mind", which also deals with schizophrenia, and was a popular film at the time. I could be wrong, it could have been written earlier before that. But that's my theory.

Given the timing - A BEAUTIFUL MIND was released about 6 months before "Normal Again" was televised - you may very well be right.

I still don't like the episode, though.

[BnL]

While on its own terms "Normal Again" is pretty well done - a really amazing piece of postmodernist drama, really, and SMG's performance is exceptional - I have a lot of problems with it within the context of the series.

The biggest problem is that the way the episode ends, it leaves very open the possibility that the entire series - all of Buffy's adventures, all the sacrifice and everything she and everyone experiences - is nothing but the delusions of an institutionalized, schizophrenic young woman. In my opinion, this rather serves to undercut the themes of heroism and female empowerment which are central to the show; one can take the episode as saying that the idea that a woman can be strong and heroic is itself delusional. Given how much Buffy is put through during the season, and thus how much the viewer is forced to endure while relating to her, I think tossing that one into the season puts the dark and tortured factor of the season way, way over the top. One can argue that the stuff with Spike represents the degradation of Buffy (the character), but "Normal Again" is thematically degrading to BUFFY - the entire series - and thus to the viewers that have stuck with it to that point and beyond.

This is the main reason why, objective quality aside, "Normal Again" is possibly my least-favorite episode of BUFFY.

That's what I thought at first too, until I realized that the ending, with Buffy in the institution going catatonic, was part of Buffy's delusion. The effects of the demon's poison had not yet worked it's way out of her system by the end of the episode.

[beetlebum]

I always felt bad the the principal. He really was trying to do the right thing, even if he was a jerk.

Season Three had my favorite of....almost anything! The Zeppo!

He was a toadie for the mayor, who was trying to commit genocide. That's doing the right thing? :confused:

[KenK]

Season Three had my favorite of....almost anything! The Zeppo!

Who DOESN'T love The Zeppo?!?! Seriously, I can't imagine anyone not loving this episode!

[JeffreyWKramer]

That's what I thought at first too, until I realized that the ending, with Buffy in the institution going catatonic, was part of Buffy's delusion. The effects of the demon's poison had not yet worked it's way out of her system by the end of the episode.

That's one interpretation, and the one that keeps the episode from completely scuttling the series, but it's still left as not at all a sure thing at the end of the episode.

[TCJohnson]

He was a toadie for the mayor, who was trying to commit genocide. That's doing the right thing? :confused:


If I remembered right, all he was trying to do was run an orderly school. He was fanatical about it to an unhealthy degree, but that really is all he wanted.

It has been a while since I have seen the complete third series, but other than trying to have Buffy expelled I don't remember him doing anything particularly evil. I also don't remember him being on the Mayor's plans since he went ballistic (very shortly before his death) when the Mayor turned into a demon.

[TCJohnson]

Who DOESN'T love The Zeppo?!?! Seriously, I can't imagine anyone not loving this episode!

And it is not because Xander slept with Faith, and I wanted to be him...which is something I hear a lot of people say about the popularity of the episode.

But when I was in high school I remember trying to find my thing to make myself cool, to make myself stand out...exactly like Xander does.

ANd at the end when Xander figures out what it does take to be cool and just walks away from Cordelia...love that.

[Corrina]

That's one interpretation, and the one that keeps the episode from completely scuttling the series, but it's still left as not at all a sure thing at the end of the episode.

I figure all the writers were throwing out scripts and Joss had taken a bunch over to "Firefly" and those left in charge read the script (Marti Noxon, I think), saw how strong it was and the good role it had for their star, and went with it.

I don't think they realized what they were implying at the time but that doesn't quite take away the fact that your analysis is completely valid and it does offer a very denigrating take on the series.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And it is not because Xander slept with Faith, and I wanted to be him...which is something I hear a lot of people say about the popularity of the episode.

But when I was in high school I remember trying to find my thing to make myself cool, to make myself stand out...exactly like Xander does.

ANd at the end when Xander figures out what it does take to be cool and just walks away from Cordelia...love that.

The other neat thing about the episode is that Xander does so much cool stuff, and not only does nobody know anything about it, but Xander also doesn't tell anyone. He's secure in his knowledge that he totally rocked that night.

*That* is cool.

[beetlebum]

If I remembered right, all he was trying to do was run an orderly school. He was fanatical about it to an unhealthy degree, but that really is all he wanted.

It has been a while since I have seen the complete third series, but other than trying to have Buffy expelled I don't remember him doing anything particularly evil. I also don't remember him being on the Mayor's plans since he went ballistic (very shortly before his death) when the Mayor turned into a demon.

Watch "Becoming". In it, Snyder tells the mayor he has some "good news." Thus making him complicit in Wilkin's evil.

Here's a summary. (http://www.angelicslayer.com/tbcs/quotes/q_bp2.html)

And I suspect, that most of the torment he imposed on Buffy, whether it was forcing her to take little kids trick or treating in "Halloween", and trying to prevent her from enrolling back in school, were done at the behest of the mayor.

Here's a Wikipedia article about them (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_Snyder).

[TCJohnson]

If I am ever allowed to breed and have a son I am going to make him watch that episode, many times.

[TCJohnson]

Watch "Becoming" in it, Snyder tells the mayor he has some "good news." Thus making him complicit in Wilkin's evil.

Here's a summary. (http://www.angelicslayer.com/tbcs/quotes/q_bp2.html)

And I suspect, that most of the torment he imposed on Buffy, whether it was forcing her to take little kids trick or treating in "Halloween", and trying to prevent her from enrolling back in school, were done at the behest of the mayor.

Here's a Wikipedia article about them (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_Snyder).

But did he know the Mayor was evil? From the way I saw it, he believed the Mayor was trying to bring order to his town, while Buffy was nothing but pure chaos in his life (and he was not wrong.)

The guy was a jerk, and he was a antagonist. Yes, he worked for the Mayor but from what I gathered he was tricked into doing so and he was not aware of what the Mayor's plans were.

[beetlebum]

And it is not because Xander slept with Faith, and I wanted to be him...which is something I hear a lot of people say about the popularity of the episode.

But when I was in high school I remember trying to find my thing to make myself cool, to make myself stand out...exactly like Xander does.

ANd at the end when Xander figures out what it does take to be cool and just walks away from Cordelia...love that.

Don't forget how he outlasts and outruns the zombie gang as they were trying to "bake a cake", and how he stops both Jack O' Toole and the "cake" from exploding. And yeah, I loved the episode for the same reasons. :)

[JeffreyWKramer]

I don't think they realized what they were implying at the time but that doesn't quite take away the fact that your analysis is completely valid and it does offer a very denigrating take on the series.

I need to first make sure someone hasn't already covered the same ground to death, but if not, I'm considering writing an article based around my analysis of "Normal Again" to submit to the online Buffy studies journal, SLAYAGE.

That would be a rather odd, but quite satisfying, addition to my publications CV.

[beetlebum]

But did he know the Mayor was evil? From the way I saw it, he believed the Mayor was trying to bring order to his town, while Buffy was nothing but pure chaos in his life (and he was not wrong.)

The guy was a jerk, and he was a antagonist. Yes, he worked for the Mayor but from what I gathered he was tricked into doing so and he was not aware of what the Mayor's plans were.

Well, the school board might have known, but it's not clear whether or not Snyder did. Still, I find his statement in "Becoming" incriminating. But who knows? He could have been just trying to do the right thing like you said. I'm sad to say that the show never did clarify this.

[TCJohnson]

Well, the school board might have known, but it's not clear whether or not Snyder did. Still, I find his statement in "Becoming" incriminating. But who knows? He could have been just trying to do the right thing like you said. I'm sad to say that the show never did clarify this.

But if they did, then we couldn't have enjoyable debates about it.

[Superbeast]

Whether you are giving or receiving in a same sex sexual encounter, I'd say it constitutes a gay/lesbian experience. It's not like Buffy is in prison. Although in hindsight it makes her initial judgmental reaction to Willow coming out highly ironic.

I found the Xander-centric episodes of Buffy the funniest for the most part. Bothered, Bewitched and Bewildered was hilarious IMO. Oz searching for the Buffy-rat... good times.

[Johnny_Luck]

IMHO Season 3 was easily the best of Buffy

Other than the Obvious Zeppo episode named you have Graduation Day Parts 1 and 2, Homecoming, Band Candy, The Wish, Amends(The first time we see the First), Bad Girls and Consequences, Dogglegangland, Enemies, Earshot(though how Joshua(I think that was his name) expected to commit suicide with a riffle is still beyond me)

Overall it just had so many excellent episodes. Not only That but Faith was kick ass and to this Day the Mayor remains the cooler big bad in Buffy History IMHO.

as for the rest of the order I go

Season 3, Season 2, Season 7, Season 1, Season 6, Season 5, Season 4.

[Starleafgirl]

Well, the school board might have known, but it's not clear whether or not Snyder did. Still, I find his statement in "Becoming" incriminating. But who knows? He could have been just trying to do the right thing like you said. I'm sad to say that the show never did clarify this.

Ah, I am of the very strong opinion that no one -- not the school board, not the prinicipal -- knew of the evil Mayor's plans. Even Faith wasn't party to the whole story. I mean, come on, what people in their right minds would go along with such a thing?

Speaking to the Principal Synder in particular, I agree with everything TCJohnson remembers. Being a big fan of Quark, I paid particular attention to that character. Sure, I thought the Principal was a bad dude, at first, the way he kept getting in Buffy's way... but as time wore I, I realized that at heart he was a good (though strict) guy trying to impose order. Obviously he believed the Mayor, as another authority figure with considerable power in the town, was trying to do the same thing, so he teamed up with him in the name of keeping order. He didn't know the Mayor was some evil, scheming demon dude or he wouldn't have gone along with him.

[beetlebum]

Ah, I am of the very strong opinion that no one -- not the school board, not the prinicipal -- knew of the evil Mayor's plans. Even Faith wasn't party to the whole story. I mean, come on, what people in their right minds would go along with such a thing?

Speaking to the Principal Synder in particular, I agree with everything TCJohnson remembers. Being a big fan of Quark, I paid particular attention to that character. Sure, I thought the Principal was a bad dude, at first, the way he kept getting in Buffy's way... but as time wore I, I realized that at heart he was a good (though strict) guy trying to impose order. Obviously he believed the Mayor, as another authority figure with considerable power in the town, was trying to do the same thing, so he teamed up with him in the name of keeping order. He didn't know the Mayor was some evil, scheming demon dude or he wouldn't have gone along with him.

But what about during "School Hard" when he tells someone to tell the press it was "gangs on pcp"? Or his spin doctoring of the paranormal activity that went on in "I Only Have Eyes For You"? That to me, sounds like he had some idea of the demonic activity that was going on.

[Johnny_Luck]

But what about during "School Hard" when he tells someone to tell the press it was "gangs on pcp"? Or his denial of any paranormal activity in "I Only Have Eyes For You"? That to me, sounds like he had some idea of the demonic activity that was going on.

I remember School Hard and it was clearly his attempt to continue to allow himself to pretend that there wasn't as much going on as there really was.

[Starleafgirl]

But what about during "School Hard" when he tells someone to tell the press it was "gangs on pcp"? Or his denial of any paranormal activity in "I Only Have Eyes For You"? That to me, sounds like he had some idea of the demonic activity that was going on.

He knew some pretty weird stuff goes on in Sunnydale and part of his job as Prinicipal was to cover it up. Covering up the truth to prevent panic and chaos isn't evil.

[Starleafgirl]

I think at some point, some people in charge, including the school board, knew there were dangerous supernatural occurences going on in Sunnydale. Their natural reaction was to cover up whatever they could and deny, perhaps even to themselves, just how deep and dark and evil it all was.

After all, they're trying to protect THE CHILDREN, right? Right? :D

[beetlebum]

The people of Sunnydale were daft, there is no doubt about that.. But I'm not so sure Principle Snyder was as daft as they were, esp. considering the vampire gangs that broke into buildings, and the spaghetti that transmogrified into snakes.

[TCJohnson]

Why couldn't you have been dealing drugs like normal people?!?

[scout1279]

It's that kind of fuzzy headed, liberal thinking that gets you eaten.

[beetlebum]

I remember School Hard and it was clearly his attempt to continue to allow himself to pretend that there wasn't as much going on as there really was.

But by "I Only Have Eyes For You" he had to come to some sort of epiphany that something was going on. Hell, even Scully gave in eventually during the X-Files.

EDITTOADDNOTE: I think I unintentionally moved the goalposts away from "did he know about the mayor's plans" to " did he know about paranormal activity? ". Whoops. :o See what happens when you type when you're distracted? :p I think it's safe to say that Snyder probably did not know what the mayor had planned. Though by the time of the episode I had mentioned above, he had to know there was paranormal activity in Sunnydale, even if he was unaware of the mayor's ascension.

[Cthulhudrew]

The biggest problem is that the way the episode ends, it leaves very open the possibility that the entire series - all of Buffy's adventures, all the sacrifice and everything she and everyone experiences - is nothing but the delusions of an institutionalized, schizophrenic young woman.

Actually, I felt the exact opposite way. When they had scenes that took place outside of Buffy's perception (Xander and Spike looking for the Nerd Trio, IIRC, among other scenes) it completely undercut the notion that what we were looking at existed only in her head.

Personally, if it weren't for that, and if they had left it open as to whether it was a delusional fantasy or reality, it would rank as one of my favorite episodes of the series.

But then, I'm a big fan of head trip/insanity fiction, so it might be just me.

[ForkedTongue]

I'm just skipping to the end of the thread to say that I really liked the issue and it worked for me, character-wise.

That's all. :D

[Starleafgirl]

Actually, I felt the exact opposite way. When they had scenes that took place outside of Buffy's perception (Xander and Spike looking for the Nerd Trio, IIRC, among other scenes) it completely undercut the notion that what we were looking at existed only in her head.

Personally, if it weren't for that, and if they had left it open as to whether it was a delusional fantasy or reality, it would rank as one of my favorite episodes of the series.

But then, I'm a big fan of head trip/insanity fiction, so it might be just me.

Are you kidding me? The episode ends with them panning out of her room in the asylum. They totally leave the very real possibility that it's all in her head and that's why it's one of the best, or one of the reasons, really. Yes, the scenes that took place outside of her perception could make one think it's not all in her head, but couldn't that have been another splintered fantasy in her warped mind? Another delusional little part of "Sunnydale" suddenly thrusting itself upon her?

Just trying to help. :D

[JeffreyWKramer]

Okay, earlier in the thread, I made some comments about the really dark nature of the scene where Willow does a blood sacrifice in the first episode of Season 6 (Bargaining, part 1). Someone asked me what I meant by that, and I was just explaining it to my wife as well, so let me share it here in more detail.

The onscreen action involves Willow doing a chant. A young deer responds to the summoning and Willow calls it to her, puts her arm around it, then picks up a knife and stabs it. She thanks it for giving its life and collects its blood for use later in the resurrection ritual.

It's a pretty shocking and gruesome scene. There's even more to this scene than meets the eye, however.

The chant Willow uses is taken from a classical work of ritual magic, the LEGEMETON, or "The Lesser Key of Solomon", which itself incorporates some aspects of earlier mystical and religious traditions, most notably Kabbalism and Judaic mysticism. The names she evokes - Adonai, Helomi, Pine (pronounced Pee-nay) - are among the traditional names of God, and the ritual itself is intended, in the original source, to summon an angel, which usually arrives in the form of an animal or some other form which the human mind can handle more than it could an angel's true visage. Now, in Willow's version, even though she is using the names of the Abrahamic God, she refers to "gods", but the text is otherwise drawn from that source. She refers to the deer that arrives as "blessed one", and after killing it says "May you find wings to the Kingdom."

So, in summary: Although the critter appears to be a deer, and nothing else is overtly said to indicate otherwise, the nature of the chant and the "wings to the Kingdom" reference pretty clearly tell a different story, namely that Willow has just conducted a ritual derived from her original faith, Judaism, to summon an angel, then kills it to prepare a sacrifice to a deity of another tradition (Osiris) during the later resurrection ritual. Not only does she pervert the tenets of her original faith by doing this, but by doing this in a natural setting and by doing a bood sacrifice, she also violates Wiccan tenets against killing, doing no harm and corrupting or perverting nature.

It should also be noted that the traditional form of this ritual involves symbols which are not utilized in the episode. The symbols include both the six-pointed star familiarly associated with Judaism and the five-pointed star, or pentacle, of significance in Wicca (as well as many European witchcraft traditions).

Now, in Willow's defense, she appears pretty shaken during this scene (according to the commentary on the episode DVD, Allyson Hannigan had an extremely difficult time doing the scene, often breaking into tears, and at one point they considered filming the bloodier parts of it using her stunt double). Nonetheless, she clearly knows she's done something the others will regard as wrong. At the Magic Box, she refers to the last ingredient she needed for the spell as "vino de madre", or "wine of the mother," and says she got it through the black market. She keeps it hidden, though, and during the later resurrection ritual it is clearly blood (Xander, noticing this, is visibly shaken). Presumably she attempts to obfuscate what she's done because Tara would realize what was really up, and she was already questioning the wisdom of the attempt to bring Buffy back.

In response to concerns Tara and Anya express about her doing magic involving black market ingredients, Willow replies that it's needed for the spell, so it's "good stuff in (her) book."

So, again... already at this point in the show, Willow is performing magical rituals which would qualify as sacriligious in both her former and her currently-avowed faith, in order to achieve a goal which she's decided is necessary, and she's hiding her activities from her friends, even though they are going to be taking part in the resurrection ritual.

This isn't entirely unprecedented - near the end of Season 5, while seeking revenge against Glory, Willow went straight to the books of darkest magic in search of power, with no apparent thought to the morality or consequences of her action - but it sure indicates a pretty big slide into darkness for Willow. No wonder Giles responds as he does after he finds out what she'd done.

Credit where due - I didn't figure out all the subtext noted above on my own. Nikki Stafford's BITE ME: THE UNOFFICIAL GUIDE TO BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER includes a citation of the original source of the ritual in the notes for that episode and also mentions the aspect of Willow violating her faith(s) for the sake resurrecting Buffy. Those notes got me doing some research and putting the pieces together.

The writers (and, by extension, since he okayed it, Joss) clearly intended to convey that Willow was going to a pretty dark place, and I iimagine some viewers and commentators (particularly those that like to frame BtVS as a very Christian work,* despite all the contrary elements and Joss Whedon's own statements that, as an athiest, he incorporates Christian themes and symbols to draw on the cultural and mythical connotations of same, rather than for any ideological purpose) might be even less comfortable with this subtextual analysis of the scene than they were with the whole sacrifice bit and allusions to pagan gods in the first place.


* In contrast to the various religious groups that were always calling for boycotts against BUFFY while it aired, and who frequently complained to the FCC about the sexuality, violence and "disrespect to Christianity" of the show, there are whole books and websites full of Christian analyses and commentaries of BUFFY that are, on the whole, rather positive toward the show, focusing on some of the Christian allusions and allegory and the themes of redemption even while being rather critical of the premarital sex and so forth.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Actually, I felt the exact opposite way. When they had scenes that took place outside of Buffy's perception (Xander and Spike looking for the Nerd Trio, IIRC, among other scenes) it completely undercut the notion that what we were looking at existed only in her head.

How so? It's not like a person making up an elaborate story can't imagine/make up events which happen outside their own view. Authors do that all the time, after all, and so do real-world psychotic people. When I talk to schizophrenic individuals with detailed paranoid fantasies, their accounts often include detailed suppositions about the things which they "know" are going on, even if they aren't there to observe these events.

[Cthulhudrew]

How so? It's not like a person making up an elaborate story can't imagine/make up events which happen outside their own view.

Just for me that- in television or film; visual mediums- it doesn't work in quite the same way that it would in say, prose. In visual media the purpose is to show, and in a situation where the point is to try and showcase that what is actually happening on-screen may be just a function of the main character's psychotic/delusional viewpoint, having scenes that take place outside of the perception of that character remove the viewer from their perspective. There are narrative tricks you can use in prose that can still leave it vague enough to pull it off that I'm not quite sure work in visual format (at least they didn't for me in this particular case, and I can't offhand think of how you would do it- actually, I can- when a character is narrating over the other scene, such as happened in Fight Club and Memento. Conversely, imagine those two movies if they had had scenes outside of the main character's viewpoint taking place sans narrative. You would be pulled out of thinking that the movie is taking place entirely from that character's perspective, and it would change a lot- if not all- of the impact of those films.)

All IMO, of course.

[Tobias March]

Just for me that- in television or film; visual mediums- it doesn't work in quite the same way that it would in say, prose. In visual media the purpose is to show, and in a situation where the point is to try and showcase that what is actually happening on-screen may be just a function of the main character's psychotic/delusional viewpoint, having scenes that take place outside of the perception of that character remove the viewer from their perspective. There are narrative tricks you can use in prose that can still leave it vague enough to pull it off that I'm not quite sure work in visual format (at least they didn't for me in this particular case, and I can't offhand think of how you would do it- actually, I can- when a character is narrating over the other scene, such as happened in Fight Club and Memento. Conversely, imagine those two movies if they had had scenes outside of the main character's viewpoint taking place sans narrative. You would be pulled out of thinking that the movie is taking place entirely from that character's perspective, and it would change a lot- if not all- of the impact of those films.)

But that is to illustrate what is really going on to us, the audience. Whereas in that episode we discover that Buffy is the audience, that the previous six years have in fact been a fantasy she has used to escape from her predicament.

[JeffreyWKramer]

But that is to illustrate what is really going on to us, the audience. Whereas in that episode we discover that Buffy is the audience, that the previous six years have in fact been a fantasy she has used to escape from her predicament.

Exactly.....

[PatrickG]

The other neat thing about the episode is that Xander does so much cool stuff, and not only does nobody know anything about it, but Xander also doesn't tell anyone. He's secure in his knowledge that he totally rocked that night.

*That* is cool.

You know what else is cool?

Every time somebody mentions Faith from that point forward, he had a flinch in his left eye. Later, in "All the Way" he dresses up as a pirate with an eyepatch. And the eye he loses? Left eye.

According to Whedon, this is unintentional "but pretty funny".

[JeffreyWKramer]

You know what else is cool?

Every time somebody mentions Faith from that point forward, he had a flinch in his left eye. Later, in "All the Way" he dresses up as a pirate with an eyepatch. And the eye he loses? Left eye.

According to Whedon, this is unintentional "but pretty funny".

That is very neat.

However, the level of attention to microcontinuity demonstrated by the eye twitch thing (which probably wasn't unintentional) is part of why I find it hard to buy that the problematic implications of "Normal Again" just slipped by the creative and production team, as discussed above.

[Indigo Al]

* In contrast to the various religious groups that were always calling for boycotts against BUFFY while it aired, and who frequently complained to the FCC about the sexuality, violence and "disrespect to Christianity" of the show, there are whole books and websites full of Christian analyses and commentaries of BUFFY that are, on the whole, rather positive toward the show, focusing on some of the Christian allusions and allegory and the themes of redemption even while being rather critical of the premarital sex and so forth.

Damn, I'm sorry I missed out on the bulk of this discussion. Thanks for the notes on Willow's spell, Jeffrey.

As far as the Christian analyses, how did they feel about "Bewitched, Bewildered"? I always thought that was a hilarious commentary on Satanic Panic, banning D&D, heavy metal, and other real life moral panics.

(Did you know Kill Bill has a Christian following as a pro-life movie?)

I personally disliked the "magic as crack" storyline in Season 6 - it felt lame and a bit cliche. And its "resolution" (S7: "it's not as simple as quitting the magics altogether - go be a good witch again!") wasn't terribly satisfactory.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Damn, I'm sorry I missed out on the bulk of this discussion. Thanks for the notes on Willow's spell, Jeffrey.
You're welcome. Glad to have you joining in.

As far as the Christian analyses, how did they feel about "Bewitched, Bewildered"? I always thought that was a hilarious commentary on Satanic Panic, banning D&D, heavy metal, and other real life moral panics.
Although I know such commentators exist, I honestly haven't paid that much attention to them or their arguments. Being an athiest, I'm not particularly interested in analyses that are focused primarily on Christianity or which presume a Christian perspective as the "right" one - though of course examination of Christian myth, allusions and such in BUFFY are just as valid as are Jungian analyses and those drawing on other mytho-religious and cultural themes, philosophy and political theory, linguistic theory, etc.

Honestly, from what I have seen of it, it appears to me that a lot of the Christian BUFFY analysts engage in a lot of denial and selective attention, focusing mostly on either those elements which fit within a Christian view of things, or sometimes those which are contrary to the Christian POV (again, the premarital sex stuff is often commented upon with a disapproving eye), while ignoring the vast amount of evidence strongly suggesting that a perspective giving primacy to Christian thought probably isn't the best one from which to analyze BUFFY, at least not if you want to try to understand the intent of the show's creators or its larger cultural context. It's rather as if hardcore Christian BUFFY fans and commentators recognize the quality of the show, but in order to maintain their enjoyment/approval of it, they sidestep or ignore all the stuff that doesn't fit comfortably in with their perspective.

Of course, that's still vastly better than the dingbats that dismiss and rail against the show simply because it doesn't cater to their narrow mindset.

(Did you know Kill Bill has a Christian following as a pro-life movie?)
I did not know that, and I find it rather hilarious to contemplate. I might have to look up some stuff on that.

I personally disliked the "magic as crack" storyline in Season 6 - it felt lame and a bit cliche. And its "resolution" (S7: "it's not as simple as quitting the magics altogether - go be a good witch again!") wasn't terribly satisfactory.

I prefer to look at Season 6 as encompassing broader themes of working through tragedy and the demands of adulthood, and the corruptive nature of power, vs. focusing on the obvious but rather narrow addiction metaphors. As to Season 7... I'm rather mixed about it. It's not my favorite season by any means, but there are some pretty neat things and interesting things going on. For example, the resolution of the show, which moves Buffy beyond a focus on personal sacrifice and into a greater focus on sharing and community, is a pretty nice way to end things on a feminist note. And of course those that like to focus on the redemption themes and the Christian allegory have lots to look at in Season 7, including Spike's final fate (final in the BUFFY TV series, anyhow), in which he finds his final redemption by giving his life to save others while bursting with cleansing light.

[The Xenos]

(Did you know Kill Bill has a Christian following as a pro-life movie?)

A movie that used buckets of blood for some fight scenes... is labeled "pro life". These idiots are missing some delicious irony.

I thought this comment in a thread in the indie forum was brilliant.

those vamps were too much
i loved it...
D: Hello Manservant
X: Hey How's It Going... Master {shame-face}
classic...
I love his return
Looking forward too see where this is going
I hope the first panel of #13 is

X: "....bator" :D

[tangentman]

Interesting analysis of the blood sacrifice, Jeffrey! I'd always wondered about the choice of Hebrew names in Willow's invocation, and your theory goes a long way toward sufficiently answering my question. I want to add another way Willow blatantly violated her Wiccan faith: the blatant ignoring of the "Three-fold Rule" or "Rule of Three". Many Wiccans believe that whatever you put out into the world--negative or positive--returns back to you threefold.

There's a saying among Wiccans: "and you harm none, do as you will". Willow egregiously harms people--if not the universe itself--with her actions in "Bargaining". The obvious violation occurs in the act of ripping Buffy away from her hard-earned reward in "Heaven". Willow selfishly denied Buffy the peace she'd finally realized. She only thought of her own wants, rather than thinking through the far-reaching consequences of bringing a dead woman back to life.

Willow broke trust with her family of choice and allies. To gain the most important spell component, she hides her actions from Tara, Xander, and Anya. Of course, we know she lies to them about that ingredient. Perhaps because she unconsciously knew that her intentions were wrong, she hid them from Dawn, Giles, and even Spike.

By casting the spell, Willow essentially played "Goddess". Taking it upon herself to decided who lived or died, she stepped well beyond the bounds of mortal power and responsibility. Willow tampered with reality itself by super-ceding the natural order with the resurrection spell. She was well aware of the Wiccan taboo she violated, given the conversation with Tara & Dawn in "Forever".

Willow's selfish actions put copious amounts of negative energy out into the world. Accordingly, the consequences of her actions sought her out threefold. Buffy returned tormented and alienated from everyone who loved her. Willow sought ultimate power, but ended up becoming ultimately powerless over her own lust for magick. Willow wanted to return things to the way they were before Glory or the Gift--Buffy around as best friend and protector, the tight-knit Scoobies reunited as an ideal family of choice. Instead, the group splinters and, most importantly, Willow loses Tara when Buffy's troubles literally follow her home.

That's not even getting into the hassles of the First Evil, who becomes motivated to eliminate the Slayer line because of the way Willow's spell affected it...

[beetlebum]

Good analysis tangent! Hence, the magic as addiction story line was a part of her bearing the repercussions of her decision. That's why I didn't have a problem with it and thought it was appropriate when viewed within its full context. And besides, as was noted earlier, it was more about being addicted to power, and how self destructive that is. As I have said before, Augustine made gluttony one of the Seven Deadly Sins for a reason. And that reason is? To much of a good thing can be harmful.

[dogzilla]

The whole lesbuffy thing came as a bit of a surprise. I'm not particularly dismayed or affronted but it did seem to come out of nowhere

[tangentman]

The whole lesbuffy thing came as a bit of a surprise. I'm not particularly dismayed or affronted but it did seem to come out of nowhere

No, not really. Buffy's clingy neediness has already been well-covered by several members. Bottom line: Buffy HATES being alone. She doesn't bear single status very well, especially when faced with the difficulties of Life (Slayer or mundane versions). Ergo, Buffy reaches out to the nearest warm or cold body around.

Let's consider the foreshadowing with Satsu. Buffy languished in Amy's "Snow White" spell. Only 'True Love's" kiss could wake Buffy--and Satsu's love proved sufficient to the task at hand. We saw that Buffy intuited Satsu's role--that level of love obviously moved Buffy. Especially considering the lack of ANY romantic love in her life.

Platonic love didn't seem forthcoming, either:

--Dawn's "super-sized" problems drove a wedge between the Summers sisters.
--Willow avoided Buffy because of unresolved issues surrounding Tara's death.
--Once again, Giles acted behind Buffy's back, and basically left Buffy's camp.
--Xander is the only true friend around, but he's pre-occupied with Renee, Dawn's troubles, and the state of "Slayer HQ".

Furthermore, Buffy is a wanted fugitive in her own country. She's literally a woman with no country now. No home, true friends far and few, surrounded by an army of subordinates who need her, and enemies hounding from all sides. Buffy felt as alone as a lonely person could get.

Thus, it's not inconceivable that a woman with Buffy's relationship history and current circumstances might seize upon the nearest person, who also happens to genuinely love her on the scale of fairytale romances. I think Satsu would be a most attractive--and tempting--person when under such duress.

[dogzilla]

I agree with the stuff about her jumping into relationships out of loneliness, I'm just not convinced that's enough to make someone suddenly switch sexual orientation. Not without a lot of booze being involved first anyway

Like I said, I wasn't outraged about it or anything. Just felt like there should have been a bit more of a lead up to it in previous issues than "Buffy feels lonely and likes Satsu's hair"

[Indigo Al]

I'm interested to see how it's gonna play out for Satsu. If her kiss was enough to get Buffy out of Amy's spell, then she's bound to get hurt by this whole thing and become the next Spike - clearly more than a case of "college experimentation" going on here.

[Tobias March]

I agree with the stuff about her jumping into relationships out of loneliness, I'm just not convinced that's enough to make someone suddenly switch sexual orientation. Not without a lot of booze being involved first anyway

Like I said, I wasn't outraged about it or anything. Just felt like there should have been a bit more of a lead up to it in previous issues than "Buffy feels lonely and likes Satsu's hair"

I can't remember the name of the director of Kinsey - he also made Gods and Monsters - but during interviews for the former film he made mention that as a gay man he'd never believed in bisexuals. He just figured they were closeted gays looking to experiment. But doing research on the Kinsey scale he discovered there are people who genuinely are attracted to both males and females.

It was an interesting admission and I like that in Buffy we're once again looking at the idea of sexuality and it's being suggested that it's more fluid than we sometimes like to believe.

[tangentman]

I think it's been made clear that Buffy hasn't "turned lesbian"--not even bisexual! She had sex with one woman and stated it was a one-time deal. Kinsey's studies would support the notion that a heterosexual person can have one same-sex experience without "turning gay". A single act does not a new sexual orientation make!

On the flipside, there are plenty of gay men and lesbians who've had a single opposite sex encounter after coming out as gay. That doesn't make THEM "straight", either. :)

Back to Buffy: I don't think Satsu will turn as obsessive as Spike, certainly not as psychotic. However, I'm sure that the eventual realization that Buffy just used her most likely stokes a deep resentment on Satsu's part.

[Puma]

There's a saying among Wiccans: "and you harm none, do as you will". Willow egregiously harms people--if not the universe itself--with her actions in "Bargaining". The obvious violation occurs in the act of ripping Buffy away from her hard-earned reward in "Heaven". Willow selfishly denied Buffy the peace she'd finally realized. She only thought of her own wants, rather than thinking through the far-reaching consequences of bringing a dead woman back to life.



I'm certainly not justifying Willow's actions but she believed that Buffy had gone to a Hell dimension and was compelled by compassion to bring her friend back. That is why she was so shocked in "Once More With Feeling" when Buffy sang that she was in heaven.

[beetlebum]

No, not really. Buffy's clingy neediness has already been well-covered by several members. Bottom line: Buffy HATES being alone. She doesn't bear single status very well, especially when faced with the difficulties of Life (Slayer or mundane versions). Ergo, Buffy reaches out to the nearest warm or cold body around.

Let's consider the foreshadowing with Satsu. Buffy languished in Amy's "Snow White" spell. Only 'True Love's" kiss could wake Buffy--and Satsu's love proved sufficient to the task at hand. We saw that Buffy intuited Satsu's role--that level of love obviously moved Buffy. Especially considering the lack of ANY romantic love in her life.

Platonic love didn't seem forthcoming, either:

--Dawn's "super-sized" problems drove a wedge between the Summers sisters.
--Willow avoided Buffy because of unresolved issues surrounding Tara's death.
--Once again, Giles acted behind Buffy's back, and basically left Buffy's camp.
--Xander is the only true friend around, but he's pre-occupied with Renee, Dawn's troubles, and the state of "Slayer HQ".

Furthermore, Buffy is a wanted fugitive in her own country. She's literally a woman with no country now. No home, true friends far and few, surrounded by an army of subordinates who need her, and enemies hounding from all sides. Buffy felt as alone as a lonely person could get.

Thus, it's not inconceivable that a woman with Buffy's relationship history and current circumstances might seize upon the nearest person, who also happens to genuinely love her on the scale of fairytale romances. I think Satsu would be a most attractive--and tempting--person when under such duress.

I agree with this, but wasn't Giles using Faith to save Buffy? That was the impression I got when I reread issues #7 and #8 recently. But I can understand Buffy's sense of betrayal, as he is basically shutting her out of his plans.

On another note, as I noted earlier in this thread with my link, it is natural for some people to want to experiment with members of the same sex. Due to the outward constructs of our respective ethnocentric environments, and the eisegesis into the texts of the Abrahamic religions (you'll have to talk to Typo for a clarification of homosexuality in the Torah), suppression of homosexual urges and these tendencies became the order of the day.

In Ancient China, before the advent of Confucianism, women were encouraged to have sexual relations with each other. It was said that women possessed an unlimited supply of yin, while men possessed a limited supply of yang. Confucianism eventually turned that on its head, as I noted.

It was like this in many other cultures as well. As it is natural for so many women, and if we were to go by empiricism here, than it was only inevitable that Buffy would go down the same route.

[beetlebum]

Well, she may have believed that Buffy was in a hell dimension, but she also had selfish reasons for doing what she did. Joyce was dead, and Willow's parents were always a bit distant to her, save for the "King Friday, patriarch" debates. Buffy was one of the few bright spots in her life. So mainly, Willow just wanted her best friend back, and was willing to go to any means to get her back.

[dogzilla]

I think it's been made clear that Buffy hasn't "turned lesbian"--not even bisexual! She had sex with one woman and stated it was a one-time deal. Kinsey's studies would support the notion that a heterosexual person can have one same-sex experience without "turning gay". A single act does not a new sexual orientation make!
I know all this, I was just saying in terms of story-telling and characterisation it seemed weird to have this just suddenly pop up out of nowhere

And if it was really just a "one-time deal", that's actually kind of annoying, because then the whole thing would seem less like a new direction for the character and more like a cheap stunt

[Puma]

Well, she may have believed that Buffy was in a hell dimension, but she also had selfish reasons for doing what she did. Joyce was dead, and Willow's parents were always a bit distant to her, save for the "King Friday, patriarch" debates. Buffy was one of the few bright spots in her life. So mainly, Willow just wanted her best friend back, and was willing to go to any means to get her back.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. Willow was in a very good relationship with Tara, taking care of Dawn, and surrounded by her friends, while she certainly missed Buffy I don't believe she would've done what she did unless she believed Buffy was experiencing what Angel went through following the closing of Acathla. I really believe she thought she was helping her friend. But as Jeffrey has said, she never looked at the consequences of her actions, both to herself and to Buffy.

[beetlebum]

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. Willow was in a very good relationship with Tara, taking care of Dawn, and surrounded by her friends, while she certainly missed Buffy I don't believe she would've done what she did unless she believed Buffy was experiencing what Angel went through following the closing of Acathla. I really believe she thought she was helping her friend. But as Jeffrey has said, she never looked at the consequences of her actions, both to herself and to Buffy.

Ah deontology vs. consequentialism. =p. There is no doubt that Willow had some good motives and reasons for doing what she did, as you pointed out. And yes, she was in a healthy stable relationship with Tara. But there is no denying that she also had her selfish reasons as well. Mainly, she just wanted her friend back.

[tangentman]

Not only that, Puma, but Willow felt overwhelmed by the additional responsibilities involved in filling the void left by The Slayer. The Scoobies combined struggled with killing two vamps in the season premiere. Willow, Xander, Tara, and Anya were trying to maintain the lie of Buffy still being alive. Constant maintenance of the Buffybot contributed extra stress to Willow.

Sure, I think Willow might have believed Buffy was being tormented, but that doesn't negate the selfishness involved in her actions. Willow wanted Buffy back to unload her additional responsibilities. She needed a Slayer to fight the demons--as well as the metaphorical demons of adult life. I have no doubt that included playing "mother figure" to Dawn. That's why the part about "taking Dawn away and raising her" rang a little false to me. It also seems strange to me that Willow would assume a good person like Buffy would suffer in Hell.

[beetlebum]

Not only that, Puma, but Willow felt overwhelmed by the additional responsibilities involved in filling the void left by The Slayer. The Scoobies combined struggled with killing two vamps in the season premiere. Willow, Xander, Tara, and Anya were trying to maintain the lie of Buffy still being alive. Constant maintenance of the Buffybot contributed extra stress to Willow.

Sure, I think Willow might have believed Buffy was being tormented, but that doesn't negate the selfishness involved in her actions. Willow wanted Buffy back to unload her additional responsibilities. She needed a Slayer to fight the demons--as well as the metaphorical demons of adult life. I have no doubt that included playing "mother figure" to Dawn. That's why the part about "taking Dawn away and raising her" rang a little false to me. It also seems strange to me that Willow would assume a good person like Buffy would suffer in Hell.

Exactly. There was no pure deontological motive, and is there ever? And let's not forget about the demon biker gang that over ran Sunnydale as they were trying to resurrect her back from the dead. Hell that gang even threatened to rape Willow, Dawn and Tara. And lo and behold, Buffy comes back just in time to save them.

[Corrina]

Jeffrey, I appreciate the extra information about Willow's spell. I knew at the time that it definitely signaled bad things for Willow. It's not so much the 'going evil' that I find unrealistic, it's that the progression didn't work.

Willow brings back Buffy. Willow tries bad things to keep Tara with her. That all works. It's the next jump to Amy and the 'magic addict' that seems heavy handed and it continued that way. Killing Warren was excellent. Going over to destroying the world didn't quite play for me. Maybe using an evil method to destroy the hellmouth, possibly, and Buffy & company knowing that method would actually unleash something worse and fight her over it works better. But that's a nitpick, I think, because I did love the final two episodes quite a bit.

And while the extra information is good about the spell, knowing how evil it really was doesn't help if that part isn't really able to be seen on the show. I like explanations as much as the next fan but your story really has to be on the page (or screen in this case) because you really can't amend the story to put in all the notes about the evil origins of that particular spell.

[tangentman]

I don't know if that's necessarily true, Corrina. Joss & the rest of Mutant Enemy loved peppering their stories with all sorts of mythical and cultural allusions and "Easter eggs". While Marti Noxon basically fessed up that much of the occult stuff was created off-the-cuff, I wouldn't be surprised if Whedon put a little extra "something" in there for the sharp-eyed Buffy fans. Not unlike Gail having Wonder Woman sailing out of the morning sun riding a seashell, alluding to her patron goddess Aphrodite's birth.

[beetlebum]

Killing Warren made sense, though I would not say it was "excellent". I remember shortly after Faith killed the deputy mayor Allan Linch, how she and Buffy got into an argument over taking the life of another human being. Faith gave the utilitarian argument, that basically it didn't matter in the larger scheme of things. Buffy rebutted it every step of the way.

Being addicted to magic, specifically power, made sense as it overrode her senses and made right from wrong nearly indistinguishable. Being corrupted with all of that magic, which she brought into forbearance by bringing Buffy back from the dead, made sense to me if you follow the sequence of events. But that's just my opinion.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I'm certainly not justifying Willow's actions but she believed that Buffy had gone to a Hell dimension and was compelled by compassion to bring her friend back. That is why she was so shocked in "Once More With Feeling" when Buffy sang that she was in heaven.

Yeah, as it turns out she was completely wrong, and took Buffy from what Buffy regarded as a hard-earned reward, but that wasn't Willow's intent.

Aside from the compassion, though, given some of what she was doing and how her experimentation with magic had grown in leaps and bounds over time, despite cautionary statements by both Giles and Tara, it seems likely that another motivation for Willow would be to try a different, powerful sort of magic, and perhaps she even specifically wanted to do something so forbidden. Clearly her wanting Buffy back was a primary motivation - witness her sadness when she thought the spell had failed due to the interruption by the demon gang - but I tend to think she also wanted to try the spell for her own sake.

[beetlebum]

That's another element to consider. Thank you for bringing that up. Willow was able to convince herself that Buffy was in a hell dimension, and that, when viewed in a larger context, may have been just the excuse that Willow needed to go through with her plans.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I agree with this, but wasn't Giles using Faith to save Buffy? That was the impression I got when I reread issues #7 and #8 recently. But I can understand Buffy's sense of betrayal, as he is basically shutting her out of his plans.

Yes. The mission was essentially a black ops/assassination mission, and he didn't think that would be proper thing for Buffy. This is rather like the moment in the Season 5 finale, in which Buffy didn't kill Ben after Glory reverted to him, but Giles then killed him, noting that it wasn't proper Buffy do so, as she was a hero, and it thus fell to Giles to do this ignoble but nonetheless necessary task to prevent the risk of Glory manifesting again in the future. It's interesting to note that in choosing Faith for this mission, Giles doesn't seem to consider Faith's move away from her earlier, darker self, though it's possible he just wasn't really aware of how far she'd come since most of that happened when she was with Angel in LA.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I really believe she thought she was helping her friend.

While, as I noted above, I believe that Willow also had some selfish motive in wanting to do the spell for its own sake, I do believe her wanting to bring Buffy back was the primary motivation, and very possibly the only conscious one. In fact, the act of researching and preparing the spell, and her hope for its success, probably served to somewhat blunt the impact of Buffy's death for Willow; essentially, she hadn't given up on Buffy coming back, so she didn't have to really grieve until she later believed the spell had failed.

[beetlebum]

Yes. The mission was essentially a black ops/assassination mission, and he didn't think that would be proper thing for Buffy. This is rather like the moment in the Season 5 finale, in which Buffy didn't kill Ben after Glory reverted to him, but Giles then killed him, noting that it wasn't proper Buffy do so, as she was a hero, and it thus fell to Giles to do this ignoble but nonetheless necessary task to prevent the risk of Glory manifesting again in the future. It's interesting to note that in choosing Faith for this mission, Giles doesn't seem to consider Faith's move away from her earlier, darker self, though it's possible he just wasn't really aware of how far she'd come since most of that happened when she was with Angel in LA.

Thanks for the clarification. I can't help but feel Faith must have felt used as well, considering her "it always falls back to his golden girl" statement, or something similar to that where she states that "it's all about Buffy". And from what I gather, she seems to be tormented by the demons of her past, literally, or some sort of demonic figure as she is tormented by the voices in her head. The follow up to this will be quite interesting to read.

And given Giles ignoble past as "Ripper", the elements of which we saw displayed in scenes from episodes like "Halloween" and "The Dark Ages", it is very fitting that he would be the one who offs people. As opposed to Buffy.

[JeffreyWKramer]

That's another element to consider. Thank you for bringing that up. Willow was able to convince herself that Buffy was in a hell dimension, and that, when viewed in a larger context, may have been just the excuse that Willow needed to go through with her plans.

That's possible, though to take Willow's side a bit, I don't think it unreasonable that she would think that because she gave her life to close a rift to a hell dimension, Buffy's soul might well be trapped in said hell dimension.

tangentman offers up a very interesting possibility as well - that part of Willow's motive in bringing Buffy back was so Willow could transfer the responsibility given to her by Buffy's death back upon Buffy. I've thought about that a fair bit, but I tend to think, based on elements of earlier and later episodes, that this is probably not the case.

Consider Willow's dream in "Restless" (the Season 4 finale). The theme of her dream is the fear that deep down, she's still the ineffectual, shy, geekish bookworm she was at the start of the show, and that others will find this out. Consider also Willow's own statments after she goes "Dark Willow", about how after six years as a sideman, now she got to be the Slayer." Finally, consider also, the forcefulness with which she is trying to direct the slaying attempts of the other members of the gang in the scene that opens Season 6 ("Bargaining, part 1). Given all these bits, it seems likely Willow probably liked taking charge, even if doing so was taking its toll on her.

Now, it is certainly possible that the toll of taking on that much responsibility might be one factor that fed into Willow falling under the corruptive lure of the power offered by magic, but I think Willow was clearly tempted enough by this power all the way along, as magic made her more than the mousy geek she used to be. I suppose the extra toll of all that responsibility might help explain the excellerated rate at which she appeared to spiral into corruption after Buffy's death, though.

[beetlebum]

Consider Willow's dream in "Restless" (the Season 4 finale). The theme of her dream is the fear that deep down, she's still the ineffectual, shy, geekish bookworm she was at the start of the show, and that others will find this out. Consider also Willow's own statments after she goes "Dark Willow", about how after six years as a sideman, now she got to be the Slayer." Finally, consider also, the forcefulness with which she is trying to direct the slaying attempts of the other members of the gang in the scene that opens Season 6 ("Bargaining, part 1). Given all these bits, it seems likely Willow probably liked taking charge, even if doing so was taking its toll on her.



Well yeah, we've seen elements of take charge Willow before. In "Earshot", an eerie foreshadowing of Columbine, she gives Cordelia, Xander and Oz assignments and tells them to do it "Today people!" And, I think it was in "The Dark Ages", or another episode during season two, where she yells at both Xander and Cordelia to shut up and get serious. The subsequent yelling leaves both Xander and Cordelia stunned, as they both don't know how to handle something that is so incongruous of Willow's personality.

And in "Doomed", Willow spends most of the episode complaining about how Percy blew her off, and how it's just like high school all over again. The insecurity is always with her, as it is for all of us.

I was just positing a hypothesis that maybe, given how stressed Willow was by her responsibilities and how enamored she became with magic by that interval, that maybe resurrecting Buffy back from the dead was not only a way to shift the bulk of her responsibility away from her, but an excuse to try new magicks as well.

[JeffreyWKramer]

And while the extra information is good about the spell, knowing how evil it really was doesn't help if that part isn't really able to be seen on the show. I like explanations as much as the next fan but your story really has to be on the page (or screen in this case) because you really can't amend the story to put in all the notes about the evil origins of that particular spell.

I have two takes on this. The first one is as tangentman noted - there are lots of little in-jokes and references to stuff all through the show. Comic book references, literary references, etc. These are part of what makes the show work. One can argue the magic/religious references are also part of the story.

Second, I am big into the "deep read" school of lit crit, which says that in analyzing meaningful or "deep" works of art - and I think that the fact that we're all discussing a show that has been off the air for years now suggests that we all regard BUFFY as such a work - one must look below the surface, at the context and subtext, to get at the deeper meanings of the work.

But then, it's also possible that spending years reading and doing such analysis on works as varied as Eliot's THE WASTE LAND and Lovecraft's AT THE MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS might have damaged my brain.

[diana_fan]

OK, I have given this a great deal of thought since my initial temper tantrum (there's really no other way to describe it). I've thought about what happened, my reaction to it, and what everyone here has had to contribute.

I've come to the conclusion that it is totally dishonest, intellectually, for me to both accept what Joss did with Willow, then, otoh, turn around and condemn him for having Buffy doing what she did.

It's a total double standard, and either I retroactively go back and freak out over the whole Willow thing, or I just suck it up and accept what's happened now.

I may not be the biggest fan, at this (admittedly very early) stage, of this development, but I also have come around to accepting it. It's the way it is, and who knows? It may turn out to be very interesting.

Also, I apologize for my totally over-the-top initial reaction.

[diana_fan]

I remember School Hard and it was clearly his attempt to continue to allow himself to pretend that there wasn't as much going on as there really was.

But by the time of "The Prom" (which still, to this day, I cannot stay dry-eyed through), it was clear that the students, at least, were absolutely sure that something was going on.


I've always read that phone call from Snyder in "Becoming" as something they planned on addressing more, knowing that the Mayor would be the Big Bad of S3, but simply either changed their minds or just never got around to.

[Tobias March]

I think it's been made clear that Buffy hasn't "turned lesbian"--not even bisexual! She had sex with one woman and stated it was a one-time deal. Kinsey's studies would support the notion that a heterosexual person can have one same-sex experience without "turning gay". A single act does not a new sexual orientation make!

Indeed, but my point was that perhaps sexuality regardless of its nature is not as rigid as some would have us believe.

I always liked the story about how Joss planted hints from the very start that either Xander or Willow might be gay. In the end he chose to do that storyline with Willow

[diana_fan]

Killing Warren made sense, though I would not say it was "excellent". I remember shortly after Faith killed the deputy mayor Allan Linch, how she and Buffy got into an argument over taking the life of another human being. Faith gave the utilitarian argument, that basically it didn't matter in the larger scheme of things. Buffy rebutted it every step of the way.

Not only that, but Faith's "explanations" never seemed to me very honest. I never believe that *she* believed them, even. But she didn't want to face up to what she had done, and so came up with a self-serving explanation.

Actually, it was that dishonesty with herself which, AFAIC, finally drove her down the road which she eventually travelled. That sort of internal discord was something Faith simply couldn't overcome (until, of course, much later).

Being addicted to magic, specifically power, made sense as it overrode her senses and made right from wrong nearly indistinguishable. Being corrupted with all of that magic, which she brought into forbearance by bringing Buffy back from the dead, made sense to me if you follow the sequence of events. But that's just my opinion.

The "Magic as Crack" approach never worked for me, and I rolled my eyes whenever it was presented. Corrina called it "heavy-handed" and I think that might even be generous.

There were so many different, more subtle, more interesting ways of dealing with Willow's decline into darkness. But, "See, she's an *addict* and so she starts hanging around the bad part of town, the wrong kind of people, and even crashes the car with her friend it. See! It's just like drug addicts!"

That seems, to me, to be not only a poor "metaphor," but also a fairly simplistic view of addiction. I think that a high-functioning addict story, if you're absolutely determined to have her be an addict, would have been much more intersting, less heavy-handed, and more subtle.

Brett Favre was addicted to Vicodin. He never missed practice. He never missed a game. He wasn't suddenly acting completely differently than before. But it was taking its toll on him, and eventually led to him having a seizure. At that point, Favre realized he needed to deal with this addiction.

Not to mention that the whole "Sabrina The Teenage Witch"/"Charmed" approach to magic in S6 turned me off.

Anyhow, I think there are a number of ways they could have gone to reach the final point that would have been better.

[JeffreyWKramer]

OK, I have given this a great deal of thought since my initial temper tantrum (there's really no other way to describe it). I've thought about what happened, my reaction to it, and what everyone here has had to contribute.

I've come to the conclusion that it is totally dishonest, intellectually, for me to both accept what Joss did with Willow, then, otoh, turn around and condemn him for having Buffy doing what she did.

It's a total double standard, and either I retroactively go back and freak out over the whole Willow thing, or I just suck it up and accept what's happened now.

I may not be the biggest fan, at this (admittedly very early) stage, of this development, but I also have come around to accepting it. It's the way it is, and who knows? It may turn out to be very interesting.

Also, I apologize for my totally over-the-top initial reaction.


Hey, I think it's cool that you think about your reactions to things, and whether they make sense. Too few people do that at all.

[diana_fan]

Hey, I think it's cool that you think about your reactions to things, and whether they make sense. Too few people do that at all.

Thanks, Jeff.

And, as I believe it was you who stated earlier, at least it started an interesting discussion on the show in general. And that's always a good thing.

[ShaunN]

Boy, I should have gotten into this thread a lot earlier, and now I'm way behind. I don't know if I'll have the time to go and read from the beginning, so just let me throw out a few things:

First, I actually wrote a column about "Buffy" during its final season for a website called "The Buzz". In general, I felt that S7 sucked - except for the first maybe 7 episodes. After that, the series hit the floor and never got back up.

Second, I totally agree with the idea that the "magic as crack" metaphor was ludicrous and overdone. Willow's problem was that she lacked the maturity and self-discipline to handle her power wisely and responsibly. By treating it as an addiction, the writers missed an opportunity to say something interesting about power in general.

Finally, though I don't yet have my copy of the new issue, I have no problem with Buffy's lesbian experimentation (or whatever it is). I read in the CBR where the editor of the series made the point that Buffy has a history of sleeping with whomever happens to be convenient and makes her feel special (i.e, has an infatuation with her) regardless of whether or not doing so is appropriate. Spike is the big, obvious example here. So, the fact that she would sleep with Satsu, who is infatuated with her, at a time when she feels lonely and worn down seems in keeping with the character. I think it is interesting that Buffy is such a developed character that we can see her loneliness/abandonment issues coming out in a regular pattern of behaviour.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[diana_fan]

Boy, I should have gotten into this thread a lot earlier, and now I'm way behind. I don't know if I'll have the time to go and read from the beginning, so just let me throw out a few things:

Well, a lot of the early stuff is me ranting, so you won't miss too much. ;)

First, I actually wrote a column about "Buffy" during its final season for a website called "The Buzz". In general, I felt that S7 sucked - except for the first maybe 7 episodes. After that, the series hit the floor and never got back up.

I think it fell apart at the beginning of S6, and I quit watching a few episodes into S7. I felt like I suffered through S6, simply because it was Buffy. A few eps into S7, and I just promised myself that that wouldn't happen again.

Second, I totally agree with the idea that the "magic as crack" metaphor was ludicrous and overdone. Willow's problem was that she lacked the maturity and self-discipline to handle her power wisely and responsibly. By treating it as an addiction, the writers missed an opportunity to say something interesting about power in general.

With great power comes ... Yeah, exactly.

Finally, though I don't yet have my copy of the new issue, I have no problem with Buffy's lesbian experimentation (or whatever it is). I read in the CBR where the editor of the series made the point that Buffy has a history of sleeping with whomever happens to be convenient and makes her feel special (i.e, has an infatuation with her) regardless of whether or not doing so is appropriate.

While I have, finally by this point, accepted that development, I do disagree with the second part.

She had, in her entire life, up to the point of her death in "The Gift" had exactly three lovers. Two of whom she slept with exactly once. So, it's not as if Buffy had a history of feeling down and jumping into bed with people.

Spike is the big, obvious example here. So, the fact that she would sleep with Satsu, who is infatuated with her, at a time when she feels lonely and worn down seems in keeping with the character. I think it is interesting that Buffy is such a developed character that we can see her loneliness/abandonment issues coming out in a regular pattern of behaviour.


True, as far as the characterization.

The entire Spike thing never rang true, and I think actually was extremely demeaning to the character. And not in an interesting way, but in a depressing way.

But that's a different issue.
Sincerely,

Shaun[/QUOTE]

[Gilda Dent]

Regarding which reality is the true one in "Normal Again", my biggest problem with it wasn't the implication that it might be all a product of Buffy's break with reality, but that it's a stock SF plot that has been done to death, two or three times in Star Trek series, in the finales of Newhart and St. Elsewhere, an episode of Lost, in one of the endings of Brazil, at least one episode of the 80's syndicated Twilight Zone, three or four SF short stories and novellas, the anime Perfect Blue. It's usually resolved as to which reality is the true one, but I don't really have much problem with open endings.

This particular plot device is generally about two things: The nature of perception and a metatextual examination of storytelling. It's a reminder that all stories are told by someone, are the products of someone's imagination. The choice here between whether the events in Sunnydale are the product of Buffy's imagination/delusions/psychosis or actually happened is a false one; even if the events did actually happen in the reality of the show, they're still the product of a person's imagination--Joss Whedon's and the writers of this episode.

My problem wasn't with the particular episode or its execution, it's that it's a plot that's been done to death.

[Indigo Al]

The "Magic as Crack" approach never worked for me, and I rolled my eyes whenever it was presented. Corrina called it "heavy-handed" and I think that might even be generous.

There were so many different, more subtle, more interesting ways of dealing with Willow's decline into darkness. But, "See, she's an *addict* and so she starts hanging around the bad part of town, the wrong kind of people, and even crashes the car with her friend it. See! It's just like drug addicts!"

That seems, to me, to be not only a poor "metaphor," but also a fairly simplistic view of addiction. I think that a high-functioning addict story, if you're absolutely determined to have her be an addict, would have been much more intersting, less heavy-handed, and more subtle.

Not to mention that the whole "Sabrina The Teenage Witch"/"Charmed" approach to magic in S6 turned me off.

Anyhow, I think there are a number of ways they could have gone to reach the final point that would have been better.

I absolutely agree with all these points. That's why I was so suprised when Jeffrey posted the source of Willow's spell to bring Buffy back.

Regarding which reality is the true one in "Normal Again", my biggest problem with it wasn't the implication that it might be all a product of Buffy's break with reality, but that it's a stock SF plot that has been done to death

Another point with which I strongly agree. It's a plot twist that's been done to death, and it's produced some awful movies as well as some good ones.

As I type, I'm watching "Conversations With Dead People" from Season 7. And "Webs" the psych vampire from Sunnydale High, is discussing Buffy's problems with men. kinda funny

[JeffreyWKramer]

Earlier in this discussion, I wrote a bit (well, as usual for me, probably more than a bit) about the problems I have with the Buffy episode "Normal Again" (Season 6, episode 17). In that episode, Buffy mentally goes back and forth between the setting normally presented in the show and one - as far as we can tell supposed to represent or at least resemble the "real world" the viewers of the show inhabit - in which she is not the Slayer, but is in fact a hospitalized young schizophrenic woman. My biggest problem with this episode, as I noted, is that the way it ends creates the impression that the entire show might be the delusions of a psychotic young woman, and causes the viewer to think about whether or not s/he should accept the show's events, and thus its themes, as narratively "real." As such, this rather undercuts a lot of the themes and goals BUFFY creator Joss Whedon has stated underlie the show (feminism, feminine empowerment, the idea that women can be heroes, etc.); after all, if Buffy's adventures are nothing but the delusions of a disturbed woman, then perhaps the themes she represents are likewise delusional, or at very least unrealistic, i.e, is the whole concept of female empowerment and a female hero somewhat delusional?

In response to my initial statement of the above, it was suggested that perhaps this was not intended, as at that point Joss was somewhat less involved in BUFFY, having turned over some duties to Marti Noxon so he could focus on FIREFLY. In reply, I noted that I think this is unlikely. Supporting this are several facts, including the fact - attested to in numerous interviews, DVD commentaries, etc. with folk closely involved with the show, including Jane Espenson and David Fury - that while Joss was not quite *as* involved with the moment-to-moment running of BUFFY at that point as he had been in the past, he was nonetheless still *very* involved in story development, script oversight, etc, and maintained final approval over everything. Pretty much everything I can find on the subject suggests that Joss is rather much of a micromanager, but this is to be rather expected, given how personally important Joss has said BUFFY and its messages are to him. He has stated numerous times that in creating Buffy, he specifically wanted to create a pop-culture icon to serve as a lasting model of a heroic young woman. Given that, I'd think he would probably be rather sensitive to elements in an episode that might undercut that goal.

Second, there's the fact that Marti Noxon and the rest of the writing/production staff were, if anything, just as interested in micro-details of the show as was Joss, and cared about it quite a bit. Every discussion with virtually anyone involved in the show has at some point focused on the fact that everyone gave the show their all, often working much longer workdays and work weeks than is typical for a TV series (the insider joke was to summarize the show they were working on as BUFFY THE WEEKEND SLAYER). Furher, the way the show was written, all of these people had some role in devising story ideas, breaking down the story, early scripting process, etc. I find it rather hard to believe such a detail would slip past Joss Whedon and everyone else.

Third, while the show is not without minor continuity errors and such, it is anything but a haphazard show. Set elements (posters, art, etc.), clothing choices, music selections, etc. were all very carefully chosen. Some "Buffy Studies" folk have commented (see Rhonda Wilcox' WHY BUFFY MATTERS, among others) how elements such as art in the walls of the Summers home changed from episode to episode in a manner accenting the themes of the episodes. While there are mistakes on BUFFY, as on any TV show, anything chosen was chosen with intent; details matter very much on that show.

Given that, I started to wonder: If that aspect of "Normal Again" which bothers me so much was not something that slipped through, it is most likely something intentional. This only makes sense, after all, as directorial and editorial choices are made very intentionally. If that's the case, then, one next has to wonder (or I do, anyhow), why is that aspect there? What was Joss Whedon intending - and again, remember, Joss was ultimately choosing what did and didn't go into a BUFFY episode - when he included that element to the episode.

Here's my hypothesis, which I'd like y'all to consider and comment on. I believe that Joss intentionally wanted the viewers to question whether or not they should accept the viewpoints which underlie BUFFY, or whether they should instead take a more pessimistic and somewhat more conventional view of ideas such as feminine empowerment and the heroism of women.

Feminist ideals, after all, have not been very mainstream for very long, and there is still opposition to many aspects of feminism by many quarters of society - and in some cultures, full-scale opposition to the idea. Some would argue that the reality of the real world (i.e., that represented by the "Buffy is a schizophrenic woman" scenario), or at very least the conventional wisdom of same, is that women are still limited - by social forces, by innate qualities, by "thinking differently than men", by relative lack of muscular strength or whatever - in what they can accomplish, and in how meaningfully "empowered" they can be, and perhaps can't realistically expect this to truly change very much.

I think that by getting the viewer to question whether or not they should accept the narrative of BUFFY as generally accepted, Joss Whedon wants the viewer to not only passively accept the show's premises while watching it , but actively choose to embrace the view that the narrative reality of the show is the better way to view the show - and, hopefully, thereby enhance the viewer's sense that the show's themes are valid. Psychologically, actively making such a choice to view things in that way would would serve to increase the viewer's identification with the show's themes, and to question (and hopefully discard) older, more pessimistic, less feminist ideas that might still hold purchase in the minds of viewers.

So... comments, anyone?

[JeffreyWKramer]

The choice here between whether the events in Sunnydale are the product of Buffy's imagination/delusions/psychosis or actually happened is a false one; even if the events did actually happen in the reality of the show, they're still the product of a person's imagination--Joss Whedon's and the writers of this episode.

In terms of objective reality, this is obviously true; BUFFY is fiction, after all. But the same rules don't apply in regard to narrative reality, and narrative reality matters in terms of what a person takes from a work of fiction, and how it impacts their thinking and their way of viewing the reality fiction, and all art, are intended to illuminate.

That's not to say the metatextual storytelling issues aren't also active in this episode. Joss is clearly concerned with such things - look at the season 7 episode "Storyteller" as a very overt attempt to address this concept. Certainly we can analyze the nature of storytelling, but that doesn't keep us from being affected by the "narrative truths" of a well-done piece of art.

My problem wasn't with the particular episode or its execution, it's that it's a plot that's been done to death.
That point I can't argue with at all. Indeed, the whole time I first viewed this episode, I kept getting distracted by thoughts of how it paralleled a particular episode of DEEP SPACE NINE which was based around the same plot and ideas.

[PatrickG]

Regarding which reality is the true one in "Normal Again", my biggest problem with it wasn't the implication that it might be all a product of Buffy's break with reality, but that it's a stock SF plot that has been done to death, two or three times in Star Trek series, in the finales of Newhart and St. Elsewhere, an episode of Lost, in one of the endings of Brazil, at least one episode of the 80's syndicated Twilight Zone, three or four SF short stories and novellas, the anime Perfect Blue. It's usually resolved as to which reality is the true one, but I don't really have much problem with open endings.

This particular plot device is generally about two things: The nature of perception and a metatextual examination of storytelling. It's a reminder that all stories are told by someone, are the products of someone's imagination. The choice here between whether the events in Sunnydale are the product of Buffy's imagination/delusions/psychosis or actually happened is a false one; even if the events did actually happen in the reality of the show, they're still the product of a person's imagination--Joss Whedon's and the writers of this episode.

My problem wasn't with the particular episode or its execution, it's that it's a plot that's been done to death.

My biggest problem was that her break with reality took place after she had met Merrick.

While it helps explain her institutionalization, it presents a third problem scenario:

Namely that she IS the Slayer even though she's imagined the events of the TV show.

[Gilda Dent]

In terms of objective reality, this is obviously true; BUFFY is fiction, after all. But the same rules don't apply in regard to narrative reality, and narrative reality matters in terms of what a person takes from a work of fiction, and how it impacts their thinking and their way of viewing the reality fiction, and all art, are intended to illuminate.

That's not to say the metatextual storytelling issues aren't also active in this episode. Joss is clearly concerned with such things - look at the season 7 episode "Storyteller" as a very overt attempt to address this concept. Certainly we can analyze the nature of storytelling, but that doesn't keep us from being affected by the "narrative truths" of a well-done piece of art.

I can't argue with that, and I don't think what I was saying and what you were saying are really in conflict, but instead fit well together. The viewer is left to choose between two versions of narrative reality, one of which is the show's creators', and reflect the themes of female empowerment you describe earlier, or that this reality is one nested within a higher one in which the only way a woman can hope to achieve heroic status of the sort Buffy (and Willow, and Tara, and Anya, and Jenny, and even Mrs. Summers, and later in Angel, Cordelia) does is through a delusion that a woman can rise above her circumstances.

When looked at metatexually, it becomes a question of whether one believes that girls should dream of being more than what society has traditionally told them they should be, whether those dreams can become reality or must remain in the realm of idealistic fantasy.

That point I can't argue with at all. Indeed, the whole time I first viewed this episode, I kept getting distracted by thoughts of how it paralleled a particular episode of DEEP SPACE NINE which was based around the same plot and ideas.

And two episodes of ST: TNG, one dealing with Riker and one with Dr. Crusher, and an episode of Voyager dealing with The Doctor.

[ShaunN]

Dear Jeffrey,

Really interesting points. I don't know - I guess my initial reaction is to say that my impression was that Joss pretty much walked away from the show during S6 and 7, except to OK the larger storylines. I can easily see him as simply having said of "Normal Again" - "hey, sounds like a good idea, go to it", without overthinking the larger implications. But your interpretation is very interesting.

Diana-fan - I totally agree that many, many aspects of S6 were really badly done. Joss' departure from the show was dearly felt and S6 really went over the top - I think there's a line somewhere where Giles says something like "the subtext is rapidly becoming text" and S6 was that - no subtlety, every bad and every stupid choice that all of the characters could possibly make were made, everyone fell apart at the same time and the "family" that the Scoobies had constructed for themselves was shown to be remarkably lacking in emotional support. I understand the need to cram a lot of ideas and metaphors into a limited amount of time, but it was just too much. Towards the end of the season, there were some memorable moments - "Dark Willow" was fun and had some great lines (though why everything comes down to "saving the world" I don't know) and the return of Giles was spectacular. ;-)

And, yes, I completely agree that Buffy's "relationship" with Spike in S6 was completely degrading to her and an abdication of her responsibilities to herself as both a woman and a Slayer. In some ways, it was meant to be an indication of how depressed she was and how far she had fallen - though, frighteningly, a lot of Buffy fans just did not get this. But Marti Noxon also wanted it to represent the "bad boy" stage that lots of women go through. Fortunately, however, most women's "bad boys" aren't mass-murdering, soulless, conscience-less vampires. Buffy couldn't get involved with Spike without really undermining everything that she was. I like Spike - to a point - but the Buffy-Spike relationship was meant to be a demonstration in what not to do. The fact that many people considered it "romantic" was really disturbing.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[Indigo Al]

Earlier in this discussion, I wrote a bit (well, as usual for me, probably more than a bit) about the problems I have with the Buffy episode "Normal Again" (Season 6, episode 17).

My biggest problem with this episode, as I noted, is that the way it ends creates the impression that the entire show might be the delusions of a psychotic young woman, and causes the viewer to think about whether or not s/he should accept the show's events, and thus its themes, as narratively "real." As such, this rather undercuts a lot of the themes and goals BUFFY creator Joss Whedon has stated underlie the show (feminism, feminine empowerment, the idea that women can be heroes, etc.); after all, if Buffy's adventures are nothing but the delusions of a disturbed woman, then perhaps the themes she represents are likewise delusional, or at very least unrealistic, i.e, is the whole concept of female empowerment and a female hero somewhat delusional?


I personally have never given "Normal Again" much thought, except as a throw-away one off idea that underlines Buffy's weariness with herself, her current situation, the responsibility she has to burden, and being back from Heaven.

To me, if ANY episode undercuts the themes you mention - feminism, female empowerment, etc. - it's "Get it Done" from Season 7 - wherein we find out that The Slayer is essentially created by "rape", a little girl abused by priests who are setting her up to take their lumps for them.

(I don't mean to derail any discussion of "Normal Again," by the way).

[JeffreyWKramer]

I can't argue with that, and I don't think what I was saying and what you were saying are really in conflict, but instead fit well together. The viewer is left to choose between two versions of narrative reality, one of which is the show's creators', and reflect the themes of female empowerment you describe earlier, or that this reality is one nested within a higher one in which the only way a woman can hope to achieve heroic status of the sort Buffy (and Willow, and Tara, and Anya, and Jenny, and even Mrs. Summers, and later in Angel, Cordelia) does is through a delusion that a woman can rise above her circumstances.

When looked at metatexually, it becomes a question of whether one believes that girls should dream of being more than what society has traditionally told them they should be, whether those dreams can become reality or must remain in the realm of idealistic fantasy.

Yeah, I think our points fit well together, and I think your metatextual analysis offers some support for my hypothesis, in that not only did the episode present the choice, but the way the choice is set up - identify with this unpleasant reality, or stick with the show you've followed to this point, even as dark as it is right now - might be seeking to get the viewer to believe in the dream by choosing to go with the narrative reality that represents that dream.

And two episodes of ST: TNG, one dealing with Riker and one with Dr. Crusher, and an episode of Voyager dealing with The Doctor.

I recall the Riker episode, but not the Crusher one, and I'm not sure I saw the VOYAGER one, as I didn't follow that show very closely and gave up on it entirely somewhere around the middle of Season 4. The one I was referrning to (and Gilda, I'm guessing you already know this) frames Sisko a a science fiction writer in mid-20th century America who dares to dream of a time when race isn't a factor in one's opportunities. This episode is referenced again in at least one or two subsequent episodes of that series.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Dear Jeffrey,

Really interesting points. I don't know - I guess my initial reaction is to say that my impression was that Joss pretty much walked away from the show during S6 and 7, except to OK the larger storylines. I can easily see him as simply having said of "Normal Again" - "hey, sounds like a good idea, go to it", without overthinking the larger implications. But your interpretation is very interesting.

Jane Espenson's own statements contradict your impressions. As she states it, scriptwriting on BUFFY and ANGEL followed the following process:

1) Joss clearly lays out the emotional/thematic arc for the season. At this time he also details some specific episodes - including the ones he himself writes and directs - and where they will fall within that arc, and apparently also gives some roughs of many of the other episodes and how they will fit in with the season's theme and narrative arc. Occasionally an ep idea will come out of left field at a later date and subsequently and be worked into the arc plan - "Superstar" is one she says started this way - but for the most part there's a pretty good plan right from the start as to what will be occurring in the broad sense, and some details of specific stories.

2) Individual episodes are roughly plotted out by Joss and the writing team. The big moments of the story are ironed out, and Espensen specifically states that Joss leads them through the process of identifying the scenes necessary to tell the story and roughly where they fall within a given episode's four-act structure. This is "breaking" the episodes, and is done by the whole team, with the decided-upon ideas written on a whiteboard.

3) Episodes (other than those Joss has identified as "his") are assigned to a given writer to do an initial outline, which fleshes out the scenes already whiteboarded. Joss then reads the outline and gives the writer extremely detailed notes, although in seasons 6 and 7, Marti Noxon might have been the one doing this (Espenson's statements are sort of uncearl on this). The writer rewrites the outline to address the notes and then works on the first draft.

4) Joss reads each draft of the writer's script, writes notes and sends the draft back to the writer to do rewrites incorporating the notes. Sometimes as many as five drafts are written before it hits final draft/shooting script, though time pressures usually didn't allow for this. The impression I get is that in the later seasons, some of these draft/note/rewrite sessions are done by Marti Noxon, but that a draft isn't done until Joss reads and approves it.

And, yes, I completely agree that Buffy's "relationship" with Spike in S6 was completely degrading to her and an abdication of her responsibilities to herself as both a woman and a Slayer. In some ways, it was meant to be an indication of how depressed she was and how far she had fallen - though, frighteningly, a lot of Buffy fans just did not get this. But Marti Noxon also wanted it to represent the "bad boy" stage that lots of women go through. Fortunately, however, most women's "bad boys" aren't mass-murdering, soulless, conscience-less vampires. Buffy couldn't get involved with Spike without really undermining everything that she was. I like Spike - to a point - but the Buffy-Spike relationship was meant to be a demonstration in what not to do. The fact that many people considered it "romantic" was really disturbing.
While this analysis isn't entirely untrue, it ignores the larger context of Spike's own process of redemption, and the fact that he wasn't a mass-murdering creature or completely without conscience at that point, and hadn't been for quite a while.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I personally have never given "Normal Again" much thought, except as a throw-away one off idea that underlines Buffy's weariness with herself, her current situation, the responsibility she has to burden, and being back from Heaven.

To me, if ANY episode undercuts the themes you mention - feminism, female empowerment, etc. - it's "Get it Done" from Season 7 - wherein we find out that The Slayer is essentially created by "rape", a little girl abused by priests who are setting her up to take their lumps for them.


Yep, that is shown to be how the Slayer came to be, and how things worked up to that point in time, but note also that Buffy rebels against the "Shadow Men" and refuses to allow herself to be violated by the shadow in order to gain more power from it at cost to her humanity. From there on, the rest of the season is her working out another path, which comes to fruition in the finale. Also, the next-to-final episode, "End of Days" shows us that the Shadow Men didn't tell Buffy the whole story, i.e., there is a bit more going on than is encompassed by the patriarchal "offical line."

So, ultimately the message of that episode, considered in the context of the rest of the season, becomes one of "Things started with guys in charge, that's how things were, but that's not how it's going to be from now on."

[diana_fan]

To me, if ANY episode undercuts the themes you mention - feminism, female empowerment, etc. - it's "Get it Done" from Season 7 - wherein we find out that The Slayer is essentially created by "rape", a little girl abused by priests who are setting her up to take their lumps for them.

While I didn't like "Get it Done" at all, I do have to take some issue with this. If only because I don't believe that something born of violence, of ugliness, of utterly atrocious motives *necessarily* has to be undermined in its status as empowered.

Two examples:

First, from Buffy, I think Angel is a perfect example. As a human, Liam was a worthless, drunken, whoring douchebag. He just was. As a vampire, he was a torturing, violent, hateful creature who was evil in every way.

But once he was cursed, which was clearly a *punishment*, what happened? Well, to be honest, at first not a whole heck of a lot. But eventually, from that punishment, from those horrible memories, from that worthless status as a human even, Angel grew to be a hero, a warrior for light.

Second, an example from L&O:SVU. Mariska Hargitay's character, Olivia Benson, was conceived during her mother's rape. She obviously never knew her father, and her mother was an abusive alcoholic. Olivia didn't exactly have the deck stacked in her favor. However, now she is a Detective in the Special Victims Unit, trying every day to keep what happened to her mother from happening to anyone else. She protects the victims, and tries to bring justice to the bad guys.

Not that Olivia doesn't have problems. Her sex life is a disaster, her relationships are nearly non-existent. She has been known to drink too much. And she is sometimes overly violent on the job.

But at her core, what she does, what she tries to do is to help people.


So, even though I very much disliked the development in "Get It Done" of which you speak, I do not believe that it somehow, on its own, diminishes the empowerment theme in BtVS. Heck, Buffy Anne Summers is living proof of that. :)