View Poll Results: Was Willow and Co. in the right to resurrect Buffy?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    10 23.81%
  • Yes, only if they knew she was in hell.

    11 26.19%
  • Yes, even if they assumed she could have been in Heaven.

    2 4.76%
  • Yes, because Buffy was needed for the slaying. The Buffybot is no substitute for the real Buffy.

    2 4.76%
  • No.

    21 50.00%
  • No; only because the Buffybot, Spike, and the Scoobies were handling the slaying.

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 74

Thread: Was Willow and Co. in the right to resurrect Buffy?

  1. #41
    Slayer zianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 1,226 Times in 422 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Artea View Post
    Maybe you missed the part of my post that specifically addressed this very aspect of the resurrection storyline. Do I need to signal my arguments from space or something?
    So in other words you're looking for consequences that happened the moment of the spell or right afterwards. Well spells and magic don't work like that.
    Again, telling instead of showing. Why the hell does the First need a resurrection to take over the world? It's never explained, nor is it ever mentioned again, we are just told to assume the resurrection caused it.
    Because a long dead slayer was brought back to the world? Don't start about S1 and Xander, Buffy's brain wasn't dead yet at that moment. It was explained that that wasn't supposed to happen and that gave the First the opportunity to attack the slayer line. They've also shown Bringers killing innocent girls. What more do you need?

    You are free to pursue this line of reasoning of course, but I for one have to wonder how you can even like any of the characters since of all their actions can be traced back to causing a resurrection if one tries hard enough. Heck, I would sooner blame the Scoobies for not apprehending Andrew and Jonathan earlier in season 6 since they were the ones who activated the Seal of Danzalthar.
    And sometimes I also wonder how could you watch the show past S3 and still talk about it so many years after.
    Last edited by zianna; 22-06-12 at 07:10 PM.

    Banner by Moscow Watcher

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to zianna For This Useful Post:

    Sky (22-06-12)

  3. #42
    Scooby Gang Artea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    609
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 121 Times in 85 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zianna View Post
    So in other words you're looking for consequences that happened the moment of the spell or right afterwards. Well spells and magic don't work like that.
    No, I was talking about long-term consequences as well. And funny how the resurrections of Daryl, Jack and his friends, Angel, Darla, Spike and Joyce have yet to cause an apocalypse after all these years, but Buffy's resurrection supposedly triggers one within less than a year.

    Because a long dead slayer was brought back to the world? Don't start about S1 and Xander, Buffy's brain wasn't dead yet at that moment. It was explained that that wasn't supposed to happen and that gave the First the opportunity to attach the slayer line. They've also shown Bringers killing innocent girls. What more do you need?
    An explanation that makes sense. Giles wasn't upset because the Slayer was resurrected, he was upset because Buffy was resurrected. His argument had nothing to do with Buffy being the Slayer.
    And why did the First require a resurrection again? Its plan involved killing off all the Potentials and then killing the Slayer so that no new one could be called. That plan could have been enacted at any time, so why was a resurrection required? Never explained.
    And didn't Willow resurrect Kennedy, who is a Slayer, in the comics? Shouldn't you be upset about that?

    And I already regret replying to your post, because I really don't want this topic to get bogged down in yet another fruitless debate about the Buffyverse's 'just pull it out of your ass' brand of worldbuilding. Though I have to ask this: can you really say the resurrection storyline is well-written when we are still busy trying to ascertain just the basic facts about what a resurrection does or does not cause?

    And sometimes I also wonder how could you watch the show past S3 and still talk about it so many years after.
    If you don't have anything to say, you don't have to cover up your lack of argument with an insult. Though I appreciate the effort.
    Last edited by Artea; 22-06-12 at 07:23 PM.



  4. #43
    Slayer zianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 1,226 Times in 422 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Artea View Post
    No, I was talking about long-term consequences as well. And funny how the resurrections of Daryl, Jack and his friends, Angel, Darla, Spike and Joyce have yet to cause an apocalypse after all these years, but Buffy's resurrection supposedly triggers one within less than a year.
    Daryl was a consequence himself, do you remember how he looked?
    Angel actually didn't die but was sent to a hell dimension and brought back. Last time I checked, a sword isn't fatal for a vampire, unless he loses his head.
    As for Darla, again the consequence was on herself, she came back sick, days away from death. And that wasn't a spell made by a human witch.

    An explanation that makes sense. Giles wasn't upset because the Slayer was resurrected, he was upset because Buffy was resurrected. His argument had nothing to do with Buffy being the Slayer.
    And why did the First require a resurrection again? Its plan involved killing off all the Potentials and then killing the Slayer so that no new one could be called. That plan could have been enacted at any time, so why was a resurrection required? Never explained.
    And didn't Willow
    Spoiler:
    resurrect Kennedy, who is a Slayer, in the comics?
    Shouldn't you be upset about that?
    Just because you didn't like the explanation it doesn't mean that none was given. It was given, and it was explained. Whether we like the explanation or not, that's another discussion. As for Kennedy,
    Spoiler:
    I think that Willow was joking, Kennedy never died, am I wrong?
    Btw, edit and use a spoiler tag, here we don't talk about the comics.
    And I already regret replying to your post, because I really don't want this topic to get bogged down in yet another fruitless debate about the Buffyverse's 'just pull it out of your ass' brand of worldbuilding. Though I have to ask this: can you really say the resurrection storyline is well-written when we are still busy trying to ascertain just the basic facts about what a resurrection does or does not cause?
    Are we discussing whether it was well written or whether it was explained and the consequences were shown?
    So, yes they were explained and shown, no it wasn't well written, they could have done it better. To answer your question to me.

    If you don't have anything to say, you don't have to cover up your lack of argument with an insult. Though I appreciate the effort.
    What insult? It wasn't meant as an insult. You have admitted many times that you believe the show was at its best the 3 first seasons, and went downhill afterwards especially in the last 2 seasons. And you still talk about it so many years after the end of it. Where is the insult?

    Banner by Moscow Watcher

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to zianna For This Useful Post:

    Sky (22-06-12)

  6. #44
    Slayer Jack Shaftoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,588
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked 892 Times in 457 Posts

    Default

    And Giles was right, Willow actually did release hell on Earth by bringing back Buffy.
    The who in the what now? First, Giles had no idea of the First's actions, if he happened to be right that was only by complete accident as the apocalypse he meant was clearly not the one The First was trying to achieve. Second, there was no hell on earth in S7. Heck, there was not even hell in Sunnydale. There was a danger of it becoming a reality but that's like saying there was a hell on Earth in S2 and it was all Buffy's fault because she slept with Angel.

    Really, we either have to assume Giles had no idea what he was talking about in Flooded or that everyone else, Giles included sometimes, were really forgetful because no one ever mentioned this supposed apocalyptic danger when Daryl or Joyce or whoever was being resurrected. We also have to assume that Giles had more knowledge on this subject that Willow, Tara and Anya who spent months researching it.

    As for resurrections being unnatural - well then why are the people who say that rooting for Buffy to defeat her opponents post-S6? Shouldn't they be in favour of Buffy dying again and reverting to her "natural" state of being dead? "Buffy hates her life but please root for her to win and thus keep on living" is the paradoxical party line of the show itself. Furthermore, nothing about Spike, Angel and Dawn is "natural" either but none of their fans wants them to go back to being wormfood or "living energy", I wonder why?

    It’s all well and good to try and pretend that S6 is the only season to have an anti-resurrection message but it’s far from it. The show portrayed it to be just as disturbing that Daryl was resurrected and he too died unfairly young.
    Not really. The biggest villain in Some Assembly Required was Eric who had nothing to do with the resurrection. The guy who was doing the resurrection, Chris, was portrayed as sympathetic. It was more of a story about how Daryl abused the gift Chris gave him than anything else. The Scoobies were not really disturbed by the idea of zombies at all - they cracked jokes about it, made fun of Cordelia for her unwillingness to dig up graves, etc. Things only became really dark when they realized the plan involved adding up a head from a living person. Prior to that it was more of a "how the hell are they going to pull this off" and "why would anyone need a Frankensteinian girlfriend" than any big outrage caused by the idea of resurrections in general.
    Last edited by Jack Shaftoe; 22-06-12 at 08:15 PM.
    Xander: "Willow, you are the best human ever! I adore you! Well, that's the cookies talking, but you rock!"

  7. #45
    Slayer zianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 1,226 Times in 422 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Shaftoe View Post
    The who in the what now? First, Giles had no idea of the First's actions, if he happened to be right that was only by complete accident as the apocalypse he meant was clearly not the one The First was trying to achieve. Second, there was no hell on earth in S7. Heck, there was not even hell in Sunnydale. There was a danger of it becoming a reality but that's like saying there was a hell on Earth in S2 and it was all Buffy's fault because she slept with Angel.

    Really, we either have to assume Giles had no idea what he was talking about in Flooded or that everyone else, Giles included sometimes, were really forgetful because no one ever mentioned this supposed apocalyptic danger when Daryl or Joyce or whoever was being resurrected. We also have to assume that Giles had more knowledge on this subject that Willow, Tara and Anya who spent months researching it.

    As for resurrections being unnatural - well then why are the people who say that rooting for Buffy to defeat her opponents post-S6? Shouldn't they be in favour of Buffy dying again and reverting to her "natural" state of being dead? "Buffy hates her life but please root for her to win and thus keep on living" is the paradoxical party line of the show itself. Furthermore, nothing about Spike, Angel and Dawn is "natural" either but none of their fans wants them to go back to being wormfood or "living energy", I wonder why?
    Giles said that Willow's magic that was used to bring back Buffy was so dark that she could have released hell on Earth. He doesn't say when though. He, and we, believe that he was talking about the moment of the resurrection.

    But then, S7 comes, and near the end of it we learn that it was actually Buffy's resurrection that gave the opportunity to the First to attack the slayer's line. In S7 we see the consequences of Buffy's resurrection. And then Buffy has a vision and she sees millions of ubervamps to be getting prepared to be released on Earth. Imagine how Earth would look like with all those ubervamps killing and siring. And all of that were consequences because Buffy was brought back from the dead.

    It was explained. Do we like it? That's another discussion.

    Banner by Moscow Watcher

  8. #46
    Slayer Jack Shaftoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,588
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked 892 Times in 457 Posts

    Default

    Giles said that Willow's magic that was used to bring back Buffy was so dark that she could have released hell on Earth. He doesn't say when though. He, and we, believe that he was talking about the moment of the resurrection.
    So basically it's just as I said - even if Giles was right, it was by accident so his knowledge of resurrections and the dangers they entail remains suspect.
    Xander: "Willow, you are the best human ever! I adore you! Well, that's the cookies talking, but you rock!"

  9. #47
    Slayer zianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,274
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 1,226 Times in 422 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Shaftoe View Post
    So basically it's just as I said - even if Giles was right, it was by accident so his knowledge of resurrections and the dangers they entail remains suspect.
    The way I look at it, that's what I understand.
    If you had asked Giles before, he would have said "No, because you'll release hell on Earth". When he finds out that Willow did it, he's kind of surprised and says "you could have released hell on Earth" (paraphrasing) because he sees that hell hasn't been released. So he thinks that it was just a risk, but Willow managed to overcome it. So do we.

    But then S7 comes and we see the consequences of Willow's spell and Buffy's resurrection. The First got its opportunity to attack the slayer line, kill all those potentials and create an army to release hell on Earth. So Giles was right to believe that Willow could have released hell on Earth, he was just wrong about the timing. But at the same time the First was so stupid that gave Buffy the weapon and the solution to defeat it. OK, W&H helped too.

    Do we like it? Like I said, another discussion, but S7 is the consequence of bringing Buffy back to life.

    Banner by Moscow Watcher

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zianna For This Useful Post:

    Lyri (22-06-12),Vampire in Rug (23-06-12)

  11. #48
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    World Republic
    Posts
    324
    Thanks
    207
    Thanked 377 Times in 130 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dipstick

    I'm a humanist and that's one of my big stumbling blocks on S6. It's one thing to not be afraid of death but I do think that any pro-living reading and not a pro-death reading has to kind of embrace the resurrection. It's one thing to not fear death because death is inevitable and it's a tragedy that we have to swallow if we can't fix it.

    However, life has to be the central good in this show about saving lives from demons and I don't really consider that negotiable to my enjoyment of the series. Dying and getting to heaven at twenty can't be the main event of happiness on this show while the show still expects us to mourn for Jenny and Tara and Fred and all while actually thinking of Buffy's jump as a sacrifice instead of a Get Out of Jail Free Card. A vague feeling of warmth and being felt like you were loved has to pale compared to the active, dynamic experience of getting to love and experience others loving you with sex or acts of bravery or hugs.
    Hi Dipstick, thanks for writing this.

    Now i get what your problems are re: season 6! And: valid reasons, too.

    For me, the defining episode of season 6 is "Grave", not "Bargaining".
    "Grave", which shows Buffy reclaiming her will to live (as well as reclaiming the the joys of life), Xander expressing his love in ways that save the world (and that was his problem all along, not being able to express his love, thus falling back on ritualistic forms - which crashed spectacular), Willow finding the strength to live - and let live - despite her deep despair over the state of the world (her "Buffy-moment", so to speak!). Dawn starting to fight her own "monsters and demons". Spike getting his soul.

    So, if you're looking for the life affirmative, humanist message - look at "Grave", not "Bargaining".

    "Bargaining" sets up the conflict, and doesn't make a definitive statement towards death and life. The conflict gets resolved (as much as this conflict can be resolved, and future backsliding not withstanding) in "Grave".

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to norwie For This Useful Post:

    Francy (26-06-12),Local Maximum (23-06-12),Lyri (23-06-12),Stoney (23-06-12),TimeTravellingBunny (23-06-12),vampmogs (23-06-12)

  13. #49
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,195
    Thanks
    2,850
    Thanked 3,290 Times in 911 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwie View Post
    Hi Dipstick, thanks for writing this.

    Now i get what your problems are re: season 6! And: valid reasons, too.

    For me, the defining episode of season 6 is "Grave", not "Bargaining".
    "Grave", which shows Buffy reclaiming her will to live (as well as reclaiming the the joys of life), Xander expressing his love in ways that save the world (and that was his problem all along, not being able to express his love, thus falling back on ritualistic forms - which crashed spectacular), Willow finding the strength to live - and let live - despite her deep despair over the state of the world (her "Buffy-moment", so to speak!). Dawn starting to fight her own "monsters and demons". Spike getting his soul.

    So, if you're looking for the life affirmative, humanist message - look at "Grave", not "Bargaining".

    "Bargaining" sets up the conflict, and doesn't make a definitive statement towards death and life. The conflict gets resolved (as much as this conflict can be resolved, and future backsliding not withstanding) in "Grave".
    Thanks, Norwie, for writing this. I do think that the episodes leading up to this set up this conflict in terms of Buffy's resurrection, as well -- Buffy's resurrection gets "repeated" by Willow saving her again in Villains (and, for contrast, failing to save Tara -- which as Dipstick points out is recognized by Buffy as a tragedy); Willow identifies the resurrection as a mistake from her own POV, and Buffy doesn't correct her, and it's implied that this is part of the reason for Willow's self-loathing, that the world is terrible and she made steps into the darkness by thrusting Buffy back into it. But this is just one POV -- the other is that she did give Buffy a gift, too, and that Buffy can find the will to live/enjoy life again can give Willow some measure of hope. Willow still believes that Buffy blames her -- and I don't think Buffy knows with certainty if she's glad that the resurrection happened, or knows how to deal with it by looking at it directly -- but she is glad to be alive now, I think, despite the backsliding.

    Giles plays a similar role for both Buffy and Willow in this ep (though that is a separate argument, and I know Dipstick has understandable problems with that too) -- but he helps Buffy and Willow "see things in a different way," I'd argue, but doesn't provide the real resolution -- it's Buffy understanding that other people can carry the load along with her (Dawn, in particular -- but not having to stop Willow herself plays a big role as well) and Willow, through Xander, coming to the live-and-let-live place and start on a journey that hopefully will one day lead her to self-acceptance. Buffy talks to Giles about not being sure if she wants to be back, and Giles -- because Giles is duty-bound and has difficulty appreciating life for what it is -- can help her, now that he's spent some time away, but he can't provide her with a reason to live. Buffy doesn't find it until she sees that Dawn can fight, too, that the trials of life can be shared with the person she died to both protect from life and to guarantee life too.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Local Maximum For This Useful Post:

    TimeTravellingBunny (23-06-12)

  15. #50
    Sunnydale High Student WhiteHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Tartarus
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 8 Posts

    Default

    I don't have time today to read through all the above posts, so...maybe later.
    I voted 'no, they had no right'. They should have done research, probed into the matter thoroughly to make sure that Buff was in a hell dimension before cruelly and selfishly yanking her out of whatever celestial bliss she had been consigned to.
    "Strong is fighting! It's hard, and it's painful, and it's every day. It's what we have to do."

    (BtVS, ep 3x10, "Amends", 40:56)

  16. #51
    Well Spiked Stoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Blighty
    Posts
    8,178
    Thanks
    11,141
    Thanked 13,218 Times in 5,497 Posts

    Default

    I agree they should have checked somehow, definitely, but they thought she was in a hell dimension of some sort. If they had been right would you still say they should have left her? If there was no way to check would the risk of leaving her in hell be preferable to protect the chance of leaving her in a good place?

    It is only because of this that I voted 'yes' but I really wanted an additional option of "yes but only because they believed she was in hell, if possible they should have checked".

  17. #52
    Slayer TimeTravellingBunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,803
    Thanks
    5,608
    Thanked 4,767 Times in 2,253 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteHat View Post
    I don't have time today to read through all the above posts, so...maybe later.
    I voted 'no, they had no right'. They should have done research, probed into the matter thoroughly to make sure that Buff was in a hell dimension before cruelly and selfishly yanking her out of whatever celestial bliss she had been consigned to.
    That's a really wrong use of the word "cruelly". Cruelly means doing something in order to deliberately hurt someone. The Scoobies' motives may have been a mix of selfish and unselfish motives, but cruelty?! There was no cruelty about it, unless you believe they knew Buffy was happy and did it because they wanted her to suffer.

    Regarding the question: if the Scoobies had known for sure that Buffy 1) was ar peace, and 2) wouldn't have wanted to be resurrected, then it really would have been bad to do it against Buffy's will. But they didn't know that, and I'm greatly sympathetic to their desire to resurrect Buffy, even if there was a fraction of possibility that she wasn't happy while dead. Their selfish motives are also understandable and human; Buffy herself was in Forever for a moment willing to have her mom back in any shape or form, or to hope that Joyce was brought back right - even though it was far more likely that Joyce was some sort of zombie or other abomination. Since people have brought up Some Assembly Required: that episode portrayed Chris sympathetically, as someone who resurrected his brother and did everything for him out of love.*The same goes for Willow (and Xander) wanting to resurrect Buffy... but one of the themes of the season is "You always hurt the one you love".

    [*That episode is one of those BtVS episodes that now seem like examples of (unintentional) foreshadowing: a redhead talented scientist - who Willow has some sort of rapport/casual friendship with - resurrects his elder, blonde athletic sibling that he loved and looked up to.]


    My views on season 6 are similar to those of Local Maximum and norwie. Unlike Dipstick and Jack, I don't think the show was ever trying to portray Willow and the Scoobies as bad guys for resurrecting Buffy, or arguing that it was better for Buffy to stay dead. I don't think we're meant to be judging the Scoobies as bad or good for what they did; but the show makes a point that actions like that have consequences, it's not all peachy and "Buffy died, but she's back now, woo hoo!" which would've felt false and devalued the drama of Buffy's death. It would have been really bad writing if she had been the same after having died and been dead for months - it would've been devaluing the very concept of death.

    Season 6 is not about whether the Scoobies should or shouldn't have brought Buffy back. Buffy's there and that's it. It's about Buffy coping with life, life that's 'harsh and cruel and bright', not peaceful or perfect or 'complete'. Buffy's line from The Gift that Dawn calls back to in OMWF, "The hardest thing in this world is to live in it", is the theme of the season. The season does emphasize the difficult and messed up aspects of life, in keeping with the theme; we get to see things from Buffy's POV, as she struggles, is tempted to escape into death (Bargaining II, OMWF) and in an imaginary "peaceful" world of the mental asylum (Normal Again) and decides that she wants to live after all. The Scoobies do fail at offering support for Buffy after they learn about heaven, but I think a lot of that is, at least for Willow and possibly Xander, about guilt (the same reason why, for instance, Buffy wasn't able to stay by Xander's hospital bed in Dirty Girls) and because they have no idea how to help her. Willow's ultimate act of villainy comes when she starts believing that life is not worth living and should be destroyed, that killing people is a way to save them from suffering, the opposite of what she did when she brought Buffy back. The ultimate message of the season is delivered, IMO, in OMWF and Grave - that, difficult and painful as it is, life is still worth living, and that for all the pain and violence and badness, there's still beauty, and above all, love, that makes it worthwhile. The finale therefore ends on a hopeful note, with Xander hugging Willow, with Buffy and Dawn, with Spike getting his soul back, and with Sarah McLachlan's version of The Prayer of St. Francis, about love, forgiveness, understanding and hope, setting up season 7.
    You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to TimeTravellingBunny For This Useful Post:

    Local Maximum (25-06-12)

  19. #53
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,195
    Thanks
    2,850
    Thanked 3,290 Times in 911 Posts

    Default

    TTB, I like and agree with your whole post (on Some Assembly Required foreshadowing, I feel a bit like Chris and Darryl's mother is a bit like Giles -- she spends her time watching videos of Darryl, neglecting Chris; he spends much of his time training the Buffybot rather than imparting his knowledge and experience onto Willow, Dawn and the others). But especially:

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny View Post
    Season 6 is not about whether the Scoobies should or shouldn't have brought Buffy back. Buffy's there and that's it. It's about Buffy coping with life, life that's 'harsh and cruel and bright', not peaceful or perfect or 'complete'. Buffy's line from The Gift that Dawn calls back to in OMWF, "The hardest thing in this world is to live in it", is the theme of the season. The season does emphasize the difficult and messed up aspects of life, in keeping with the theme; we get to see things from Buffy's POV, as she struggles, is tempted to escape into death (Bargaining II, OMWF) and in an imaginary "peaceful" world of the mental asylum (Normal Again) and decides that she wants to live after all.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Local Maximum For This Useful Post:

    TimeTravellingBunny (26-06-12)

  21. #54
    Sunnydale High Student WhiteHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Tartarus
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 8 Posts

    Default

    That's a really wrong use of the word "cruelly". Cruelly means doing something in order to deliberately hurt someone. The Scoobies' motives may have been a mix of selfish and unselfish motives, but cruelty?! There was no cruelty about it, unless you believe they knew Buffy was happy and did it because they wanted her to suffer.
    I hereby withdraw the word cruel and replace it with unintentionally injurious (emotionally and/or physically). I assume that TimeTravellingBunny is a lawyer, for only a lawyer would haggle so cruelly over semantic minutiae. I meant that their actions, whether wilfully harmful or not, did indeed inflict much suffering in Buffy. In the final assessment it was all about Willow, with her growing metaphysical addiction, wanting to prove that she was a nigh-omnipotent Wicca. It was Willow's hubris that set the course for that season. Her abuse of 'magicks' hurt everyone around her beginning with Buffy's unwarranted abduction from spiritual perfection. Later she hurt her girlfriend, Dawn, Giles, Xander, and pretty much everyone else.
    "Strong is fighting! It's hard, and it's painful, and it's every day. It's what we have to do."

    (BtVS, ep 3x10, "Amends", 40:56)

  22. #55
    Slayer TimeTravellingBunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,803
    Thanks
    5,608
    Thanked 4,767 Times in 2,253 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteHat View Post
    I hereby withdraw the word cruel and replace it with unintentionally injurious (emotionally and/or physically). I assume that TimeTravellingBunny is a lawyer, for only a lawyer would haggle so cruelly over semantic minutiae.
    Nope, I am in fact a philologist, which makes me much more likely to care about language than a lawyer. But if I weren't, I'd have as much of a problem with the wrong use of words, because, newsflash, language is that thing we all use to convey thoughts, and people tend to get upset when you tell them something that isn't true or wrongly accuse someone, whatever their profession is. If you don't believe me, try telling someone that they're evil, and then laughing it off and explaining that you just meant that they are bad at their job.

    The difference in the meaning between intentionally and unintentionally hurting people does not fall under "semantic minutiae". It's a huge honking super-important difference, and the only way you could justify not knowing it is if you don't know the meaning of the English word "cruel", which doesn't seem to be the case. That's like saying it's just a minor semantic matter if you call someone evil, but you just meant that they tend to screw things up.
    You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

  23. #56
    Sunnydale High Student Dinza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Wishverse Sunnydale
    Posts
    82
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts

    Default

    Wasn't she where Cordelia was before she returned to earth (Skip mentioned a slayer leaving)? Anyway what choice did they have? Could they have gotten Faith? Could they have trusted her?? Buffy's 2nd death "could" have triggered another slayer, but didn't because Faith was still around (which kind of bugs me because if there already was a "glitch" in the slayer system then technically it should have activated another girl).
    325 posts to go til signature

  24. #57
    Well Spiked Stoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Blighty
    Posts
    8,178
    Thanks
    11,141
    Thanked 13,218 Times in 5,497 Posts

    Default

    Buffy's first death at the hands of the Master triggered Kendra. That passed the Slayer line on so Kendra triggered Faith. There was no possibility that Buffy dying again would trigger another slayer, she had already passed on her baton.

  25. #58
    Sunnydale High Student Dinza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Wishverse Sunnydale
    Posts
    82
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts

    Default

    I just figured since there was a glitch in the "system" that maybe the almighty slayer power line would catch on and reconnect with Buffy, guess not.
    325 posts to go til signature

  26. #59
    Well Spiked Stoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Blighty
    Posts
    8,178
    Thanks
    11,141
    Thanked 13,218 Times in 5,497 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blix View Post
    I just figured since there was a glitch in the "system" that maybe the almighty slayer power line would catch on and reconnect with Buffy, guess not.
    I think we are supposed to see it as significant that Buffy had someone to bring her back as slayers normally go it alone and it is her thang. One of the more realistic outcomes would have been the Watcher's Council effectively trying to 'harvest' slayers, I've seen the intentional resuscitation storyline in fanfic. I might run a poll to see if people think they would have done it.

    EDIT: Poll set up here.
    Last edited by Stoney; 03-07-12 at 11:13 AM.

  27. #60
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,524
    Thanks
    4,539
    Thanked 3,765 Times in 1,623 Posts

    Default

    I haven't had Internet for awhile so I didn't get to respond a lot of stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by vampmogs View Post
    It’s all well and good to try and pretend that S6 is the only season to have an anti-resurrection message but it’s far from it. The show portrayed it to be just as disturbing that Daryl was resurrected and he too died unfairly young. So I guess S2 has a pro-death message as well? Likewise for S5 when Dawn has to get help from some very unsavoury characters to try and resurrect Joyce and it is depicted as very wrong, spooky and disturbing when she tries to return Joyce from the grave. The only other resurrections we saw were in the form of zombie jocks, W&H zombie lawyers and Wesley’s dad mentioning how as a young boy Wes risked resurrecting zombie birds that would peck out their eyeballs. Resurrection has always been portrayed darkly in the Buffyverse.
    Not so. The difference between Willow bringing back Buffy from a magical death with full intent to have Buffy come back as her healthy full self to have her own life back to do what she wants with it and Wesley/W&H bringing back zombies to control them is Grand Canyon sized. The difference between powerful witch Willow with a real plan to succeed and Dawn stumbling around resurrection is legion.

    As a matter of fact, the idea of having powerful Willow resurrect a person from a magical death so that person can live out a good lifespan on their own terms came up twice- with Buffy in S6 and Fred in AtS S5. In S6, the idea was used to bash Willow for resurrecting Buffy; in AtS S5 it was Angel and his crew snitting about Willow was astral projecting and wasn't on speed dial to bring back Fred. Really, really fair...except not.

    Angel was cursed. It certainly wasn't meant to be "merciful."
    Exactly. Buffy requests that Willow stuff a soul in Angel's body in continuation of the gypsy's curse because she wanted her boyfriend back. Laws of magic or what seems palatable to non-magic citizens don't enter Buffy's decision-making process in Becoming, nor Angel's gang when they call up Willow to continue Angel being cursed with a soul instead of staking Angel.

    However, the text never seems as hostile to Buffy or Angel's gang or heck, Willow in Becoming as it does on Willow for resurrecting Buffy and I find that illogical. I'd use the more simple and common moral calculus that as the "next-of-kin" that Buffy in Becoming and Angel's gang in Orpheus were justified in ensouling Angel because Angel indicated that he'd like to have his soul back to unlive as Angel more than being allowed to walk around as Angelus or be dusted. The show definitely takes that attitude.

    While Buffy and the Scoobies didn't talk resurrections specifically, the Scoobies were justified as the next-of-kin deciding that Buffy would rather be alive than dead from Buffy's S1-5 and Buffy wanted them to take big chances to preserve life from Buffy's S1-5 conduct. Now that Buffy has made it clear that she enjoys being dead and alone more than being alive with people, the Scoobies officially know not to resurrect her. It won't be appreciated at all.

    I would say that the fact the biker demons were coming to Sunnydale on the day Buffy was to be resurrected, and no harm was done to the Scoobies until after she was resurrected, are not enough to claim that Buffy was wrong (or lied to) to say that in the 3 months she had been in Heaven her loved ones were "all right."
    The Scoobies had no idea that a giant gang of giant demons were heading to them to take over Sunnydale and the Scoobies were allright? Were the French "allright" as the Nazis were en route with tanks and guns to take over France but just short of the French border or Paris? There's a phrase to describe the Scoobies' position- it's called "imminent danger" where "allright" isn't included.

    Unlike the Scoobies, Buffy was clinically depressed throughout S6 which makes all of life's problems seem far more unsurmountable than they actually are. A lot of the issues Buffy faced that year wouldn’t have been half as bad for her if she was in a more healthy state of mind. People suffering from depression can find it difficult just to get out of bed, let alone deal with all of these issues head on and at once.
    I'll bet that this is the only conversation where you'd argue that Buffy's life issues were fine in S6 and the only problem was her depression but just to score a debating point. Meanwhile, I'd take the more common position that Buffy's financial problems, need to parent a troubled Dawn, existence on the hellmouth, lack of Giles were BIG problems and Buffy's life was not allright in S6. The problem wasn't just Buffy's depression- she had big external life problems. Just like the Scoobies' lives weren't allright in Bargaining when they were facing those same problems. Their lives are different and sadder and more problematic than most people and more than their lives earlier in the series.

    I'd only add that that while the Scoobies' lives in S6 were not allright and had big external problems, they HAD their lives and that's a big gift despite their problems. They and Buffy weren't allright but they had the opportunity and faculties to make things better and learn and be together and all of the other things that make life worthwhile despite its headaches from sex to great food to interesting books.

    Lt. Dan hated Forrest Gump for saving his life and Lt. Dan had problems that were in some ways worse than Buffy's- his legs amputated, no friends, his platoon largely killed in battle, being a Vietnam vet in hostile-to-the-military 1960s-1970s, alcoholism, etc. but over time, Lt. Dan got the opportunity to fall in love with an Asian gal, go shrimping with Forrest Gump, get prosthetics and just develop a peace and wisdom that he would have totally missed out on if he died in his 20s in Vietnam. This show just missed Buffy coming to a similar and utterly necessary realization that it's better to be alive than dead despite life's problems and headaches.

    Quote Originally Posted by Local Maximum View Post
    But it also means that she simultaneously thinks life is horrible for herself and that life would be wonderful for those who are not her, which is problematic to the extreme. Having to move past that epiphany and continue living is difficult.
    This is exactly how I feel. Buffy is in a strange position in S6 but also in S7-8 where she thinks that life is horrible and undeserved punishment for herself but good and required to be lived fully by others. I sort of get why she feels that way but it is very self-centered and lazy and wrong. And since the story is told from Buffy's POV, there's a strange situation where I feel that the author wants us to believe that Buffy is condemned to hell by living but not feel that way about the other characters.

    I feel like the story wants us to believe that Buffy was entitled to a beautiful release from being concerned about her friends or parenting Dawn or figuring out jobs or higher education and it sucks that she had to get back to that. However at the end of S6, I don't think we're supposed to decide that if Tara got into heaven that Tara was greatly privileged and lucky to no longer have to wonder what she'll do as a career after college or care for Dawn or start a new relationship with Willow.

    I do want to add btw that there still is a big difference between a hero's death and a victim's death -- Buffy's death is closer to Doyle's than to Jenny or Tara's. And, well -- Doyle would not be unhappy to be resurrected IMO, because he wasn't already near-catatonic immediately prior, but I think it is less of a tragedy that his life was cut short because his death did something positive. But I do think this distinction is relatively minor.
    It is a minor distinction. It felt like Doyle would have felt similar sadness about missing out on life as Jenny.

    I also think that it's unfair to the gang to suggest that Buffy's mental illness eclipses all the things that made life hard for everyone else, but especially Dawn. I am not minimizing depression -- I know from depression, and Buffy has it, and I identify with Buffy hard -- but Dawn is in an impossible situation without any of Buffy's skill set. I strongly disagree that Dawn is doing okay at the beginning of season six, or throughout the season even, because she is not depressed -- she doesn't have depression-y problems, but she has every other problem. And when Buffy comes back, Dawn is expected both to continue living for Buffy and to accept that Buffy doesn't want the world to end. As a child of a depressed parent, I can tell you that does things to you, too.
    Heck yes to all of this.


    Quote Originally Posted by norwie View Post
    Hi Dipstick, thanks for writing this.

    Now i get what your problems are re: season 6! And: valid reasons, too.

    For me, the defining episode of season 6 is "Grave", not "Bargaining".
    "Grave", which shows Buffy reclaiming her will to live (as well as reclaiming the the joys of life), Xander expressing his love in ways that save the world (and that was his problem all along, not being able to express his love, thus falling back on ritualistic forms - which crashed spectacular), Willow finding the strength to live - and let live - despite her deep despair over the state of the world (her "Buffy-moment", so to speak!). Dawn starting to fight her own "monsters and demons". Spike getting his soul.

    So, if you're looking for the life affirmative, humanist message - look at "Grave", not "Bargaining".

    "Bargaining" sets up the conflict, and doesn't make a definitive statement towards death and life. The conflict gets resolved (as much as this conflict can be resolved, and future backsliding not withstanding) in "Grave".
    norwie, I guess I just don't think that Grave and S7-9 do nearly enough to disabuse the audience of the earlier message that death is better than life for Buffy. Lt. Dan in Forrest Gump or Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows when Harry rejects a peaceful death to go finish his fight side-by-side with friends and goes on to get a great, peaceful life, it is not!

    Grave was missing Buffy actively saying that her life is better than heaven or at least at this stage in her life. The last two episodes are structured as Buffy being totally unable to sell the positives of life to Willow and bitterly saying that she doesn't know why she's here to Giles at the start of the ep and then Buffy saying that she's happy with living for Dawn after Buffy catches anger and sadness from Dawn about Buffy's attitude all year. I've never been convinced that S6-9 Buffy gets the genuine enjoyment out of friends or a higher purpose or sex or the chance to make a career for herself that make her stand up and shout that she wants to live and it's way better than being dead. Buffy never says that she's glad that she was brought back and she needed to do that for me to believe that Buffy truly wants to be alive, particularly after she said she was sad about being brought back to Giles at the start of Grave and after her discontent with life and ever-burning bitterness at Willow for bringing back makes her so emotionally ineffective in Two to Go.

    Buffy said it in Grave- she'll live for others because being virtuous and the need to act virtuous in front of others is hammered into her and the need to parent and protect Dawn was literally hammered into her by the Monks. But Buffy liked the peace and isolation of heaven more than the dynamism and interpersonalness of Earth. If the Monks didn't give Dawn to Buffy and Buffy died and went to heaven after falling in another battle, Buffy would have committed a fully selfish suicide and that's a fact.

    I would have been tickled if Buffy said that on further reflection being in heaven is like going to a very nice nursing home in her twenties- very peaceful and stress free with her meals and transportation and rent and furniture provided but exceptionally limiting to get to full days of Bingo and shuffle-boarding before she's done anything. Good for folks in their 70s and 80s but not for folks in their 20s.

    Quote Originally Posted by zianna View Post
    Because a long dead slayer was brought back to the world? Don't start about S1 and Xander, Buffy's brain wasn't dead yet at that moment. It was explained that that wasn't supposed to happen and that gave the First the opportunity to attack the slayer line. They've also shown Bringers killing innocent girls. What more do you need?
    The real questions was whether those Potentials got into heaven. If most of them as young, innocent girls got into heaven and thus got their eternal peace without hassling with finishing educations or being slayers or <noise of disgust> dealing with bratty sisters, they are lucky, lucky, lucky according to the logic of the show.

    Anyway, I don't take the word of talking hamburgers, talking cats or talking eyes as gospel. Buffy was dead enough in Prophecy Girl for it to affect the slayer line i.e. creating two slayers. I don't believe the Eye until it's explained what made the resurrection different than the CPR.
    Last edited by Dipstick; 11-07-12 at 04:47 PM.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Dipstick For This Useful Post:

    DoktorRock (27-10-16)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •