The question of how to exercise slayer power gets raised, not because Faith accidentally killed a human, but because Buffy once intentionally hurt someone she thought was human.
Are you sure? I would think that Buffy would have raised the issue regardless. Buffy seems to have clearly viewed the killing of the deputy mayor in the larger context of Faith's overall behavior. Buffy had been remarking upon Faith's out-of-control style all season long, and not merely because Buffy was previously used to being the "Bad Slayer" herself.
It’s a rather breathtaking claim to make, considering that Buffy tried to kill Faith, and did succeed in putting her into a coma. I’m not aware of any moment where Buffy admits that at least once in her life, she deliberately tried to kill another human being.She admits this to Xander, even before she does it
( ... )
Thanks for all your comments! You are definitely right that Buffy is reacting, at least in part, to a pattern of recklessness that Faith has had on display throughout the season. But we still know that Faith isn't EVIL -- her breakdown in season 4 makes that clear. And it's quite a jump from an accident, even one that occurs because of some recklessness, to the idea that Faith has become a 'killer'. And Buffy invokes the word 'killer' early on, at the end of Bad Girls. That shift in tone is what I'm trying to draw attention to -- and I think Ted is a good place to look for an explanation about where it's coming from
( ... )
And Buffy invokes the word 'killer' early on, at the end of Bad Girls. That shift in tone is what I'm trying to draw attention to -- and I think Ted is a good place to look for an explanation about where it's coming from.
It's not merely 'Ted'. Buffy, by Bad Girls has dealt with a number of murderers, both demon and human. And a key signpost is Faith's unwillingness to display contrition or guilt. This is valid, IMO. Faith, in the aftermath, does indeed become a killer - largely because she continues to abdicate responsibility for her actions and judgments.
Buffy is not being moralistic. She is being moral. And even Faith knows that, though she won't acknowledge it.
The viewer knows Faith is conflicted, but Buffy is not privy to Faith's moment in the bathroom. It is unrealistic to expect Buffy to read Faith's mind if Faith isn't going to share.
Buffy's near-killing of Faith is a far more deliberate act than Faith's failure to respond quickly enough to the discovery that the person she was staking was human.When Willow yells "Buffy
( ... )
We do disagree about this rather strongly, I'm afraid. I agree with you that Faith needed to take responsibility and that she resisted doing so. If I've given the impression that I think that Faith doesn't have serious issues, even culpable issues, in play here then I haven't been clear. But by invoking the word 'killer' so early on, Buffy closed out some of the space in which Faith might have had room to take that responsibility. And while I point to that as part of the sequence that pushed Faith from someone who was irresponsible in her use of power to someone who misuses that powerful to willfully serve her own end, I think even Buffy was willing to give Faith more room than you seem to want to do here. Buffy, at least, understood that it was an accident. In my mind you fail to make crucial moral distinctions between a faulty sense of judgment about how to exercise power and a willful decision to misuse it. And I disagree with your assertion that Faith's step over into the camp of evil was due to her wish to evade responsibility
( ... )
In my mind you fail to make crucial moral distinctions between a faulty sense of judgment about how to exercise power and a willful decision to misuse it.
I don't make that mistake. Faith herself does. Faith and Buffy willfully misuse their power in "Bad Girls" when they rob the Sporting Goods store. Faith argues "Want.Take.Have" that there is no distinction between faulty use of power - that she got caught - and faulty moral judgment. (That she shouldn't have committed the act in the first place.) Faith's refusal to face the second is emblematic...
But by invoking the word 'killer' so early on, Buffy closed out some of the space in which Faith might have had room to take that responsibility.Buffy's invocation of the word killer does not preclude Faith from taking responsibility. If Faith is big enough to run around with a stake, she's big enough to make the room to be responsible. She's big enough to say "I'm not a killer - I just screwed up. I'll talk to Giles and work this out
( ... )
I'm going to let you have the last word on most of this, since we aren't about to come to agreement on any of this. But I did have to take issue with a new note you introject here.
Putting Faith in a coma then, instead of stopping her long before has negative consequences for the Professor. Probably makes Buffy feel pretty guilty, letting more people die because she can't bring herself to stop someone she cares about. Putting her in coma then, has remarkably positive consequences for everyone except Mayor Wilkins.
Buffy, at least, has a firm rule that says you don't kill humans no matter what evil they might do. She thus is put in the difficult position of *having* to let Warren live, even though he is by all evidence committed to a course of evil. Buffy doesn't slay humans. Her choice to go after Faith in this way breaks her own rule. (It is true that Buffy feels a lot of guilt for not slaying Angelus -- but Angelus is the sort of being that Buffy is supposed to slay).
Buffy, at least, has a firm rule that says you don't kill humans no matter what evil they might do. She thus is put in the difficult position of *having* to let Warren live, even though he is by all evidence committed to a course of evil. Buffy doesn't slay humans.
I'm not sure it's quite that clear cut. True, Buffy wants to believe that she has such a rule: Buffy is the type of person to hold herself to very high moral standards then get depressed because she fails to meet them. But in 'Villains', her main concern is the effect on Willow of her using dark magic to hunt down and kill someone out of vengeance: the fact that killing humans is wrong in itself is secondary to her. (If anything, it's her explanation - for Dawn's benefit - as to why she's not grabbed an axe and gone straight out to hunt down Warren side by side with Willow). I think the clearest sign of this is her comment in the next episode: "And the only reason it happens to be your lucky day is because if she kills you, a line gets crossed, I lose a friend. And I hate
( ... )
As an unrelated aside, I seem to have accidentally left a few duplicate replies to moscow_watcher elsewhere in your post - first anonymous and then logged in. Would you please delete the anonymous duplicates. I wouldn't want to leave your entry cluttered with excisive duplicates.
Are you sure? I would think that Buffy would have raised the issue regardless. Buffy seems to have clearly viewed the killing of the deputy mayor in the larger context of Faith's overall behavior. Buffy had been remarking upon Faith's out-of-control style all season long, and not merely because Buffy was previously used to being the "Bad Slayer" herself.
It’s a rather breathtaking claim to make, considering that Buffy tried to kill Faith, and did succeed in putting her into a coma. I’m not aware of any moment where Buffy admits that at least once in her life, she deliberately tried to kill another human being.She admits this to Xander, even before she does it ( ... )
Reply
Reply
And Buffy invokes the word 'killer' early on, at the end of Bad Girls. That shift in tone is what I'm trying to draw attention to -- and I think Ted is a good place to look for an explanation about where it's coming from.
It's not merely 'Ted'. Buffy, by Bad Girls has dealt with a number of murderers, both demon and human. And a key signpost is Faith's unwillingness to display contrition or guilt. This is valid, IMO. Faith, in the aftermath, does indeed become a killer - largely because she continues to abdicate responsibility for her actions and judgments.
Buffy is not being moralistic. She is being moral. And even Faith knows that, though she won't acknowledge it.
The viewer knows Faith is conflicted, but Buffy is not privy to Faith's moment in the bathroom. It is unrealistic to expect Buffy to read Faith's mind if Faith isn't going to share.
Buffy's near-killing of Faith is a far more deliberate act than Faith's failure to respond quickly enough to the discovery that the person she was staking was human.When Willow yells "Buffy ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I don't make that mistake. Faith herself does. Faith and Buffy willfully misuse their power in "Bad Girls" when they rob the Sporting Goods store. Faith argues "Want.Take.Have" that there is no distinction between faulty use of power - that she got caught - and faulty moral judgment. (That she shouldn't have committed the act in the first place.) Faith's refusal to face the second is emblematic...
But by invoking the word 'killer' so early on, Buffy closed out some of the space in which Faith might have had room to take that responsibility.Buffy's invocation of the word killer does not preclude Faith from taking responsibility. If Faith is big enough to run around with a stake, she's big enough to make the room to be responsible. She's big enough to say "I'm not a killer - I just screwed up. I'll talk to Giles and work this out ( ... )
Reply
Putting Faith in a coma then, instead of stopping her long before has negative consequences for the Professor. Probably makes Buffy feel pretty guilty, letting more people die because she can't bring herself to stop someone she cares about. Putting her in coma then, has remarkably positive consequences for everyone except Mayor Wilkins.
Buffy, at least, has a firm rule that says you don't kill humans no matter what evil they might do. She thus is put in the difficult position of *having* to let Warren live, even though he is by all evidence committed to a course of evil. Buffy doesn't slay humans. Her choice to go after Faith in this way breaks her own rule. (It is true that Buffy feels a lot of guilt for not slaying Angelus -- but Angelus is the sort of being that Buffy is supposed to slay).
Reply
I'm not sure it's quite that clear cut. True, Buffy wants to believe that she has such a rule: Buffy is the type of person to hold herself to very high moral standards then get depressed because she fails to meet them. But in 'Villains', her main concern is the effect on Willow of her using dark magic to hunt down and kill someone out of vengeance: the fact that killing humans is wrong in itself is secondary to her. (If anything, it's her explanation - for Dawn's benefit - as to why she's not grabbed an axe and gone straight out to hunt down Warren side by side with Willow). I think the clearest sign of this is her comment in the next episode: "And the only reason it happens to be your lucky day is because if she kills you, a line gets crossed, I lose a friend. And I hate ( ... )
Reply
Thanks, and my apologies.
Reply
Leave a comment