Does it cover things like forgetting (after OMWF) her promise in season 5 to not forget that he's capable of good? ... And does that one apology really compare -- as an act of contrition -- with going off to fight for a soul?
My own metathon essay is going to be looking at repentance and redemption - specifically for Faith and Willow - but you're touching on an important point here: is a dramatic gesture of contrition really necessary for someone to experience repentance? Or is it just something that onlookers want to see for their own satisfaction? (Or that they need to see before they can accept that person 'back into the fold'.)
In season 7, Buffy might not specifically apologise to Spike for her S6 characterisation of him. She does something much more important (and difficult): she actually treats him as someone capable of good - over the strenuous objections of Xander and Giles and the scepticism of Dawn. Having his chip removed is the ultimate symbol of this. On a weekly TV show, words often have to speak louder than actions: but Buffy shows us here that the reverse is still more valid in reality.
Is a real gesture of contrition necessary for repentance? In the Buffyverse, I'd say the answer seems to be a resounding 'yes'. Certainly it is true for the vampires with souls. Faith really did have to go to prison. I think there has to be a willingness to bear the consequences of one's actions. Of course, that raises the question of why Buffy doesn't seem to have to bear any consequences for season 6. Either it's a deep commentary by the writers on the way that 'heroes' are not held fully accountable (in a way that is ultimately detrimental for their own ability to grow). Or it's because the writers don't see that she did anything terribly wrong in season 6 (either because Spike is a non-person who can be battered at will; or because they have an oddly unfeminist idea that domestic violence/abuse is only a problem when perpetrated by men against women). Not sure what to make of it.
And I *really* look forward to hearing what you have to say about Willow -- who also does not seem to have to bear consequences in proportion to her offense (which was, of course, significantly graver than anything Buffy did). But I will say this. With respect to Willow, the relatively mild nature of the consequences she bears leaves room, at least for me, for a plausible story of her turning dark again in season 8. I think we can say we are sorry, and even think we mean it. But really suffering the consequences seems to me to be a surer way of knowing that we really 'got it'. (Willow herself is not sure of herself in season 7, if I recall).
My own metathon essay is going to be looking at repentance and redemption - specifically for Faith and Willow - but you're touching on an important point here: is a dramatic gesture of contrition really necessary for someone to experience repentance? Or is it just something that onlookers want to see for their own satisfaction? (Or that they need to see before they can accept that person 'back into the fold'.)
In season 7, Buffy might not specifically apologise to Spike for her S6 characterisation of him. She does something much more important (and difficult): she actually treats him as someone capable of good - over the strenuous objections of Xander and Giles and the scepticism of Dawn. Having his chip removed is the ultimate symbol of this. On a weekly TV show, words often have to speak louder than actions: but Buffy shows us here that the reverse is still more valid in reality.
Reply
Is a real gesture of contrition necessary for repentance? In the Buffyverse, I'd say the answer seems to be a resounding 'yes'. Certainly it is true for the vampires with souls. Faith really did have to go to prison. I think there has to be a willingness to bear the consequences of one's actions. Of course, that raises the question of why Buffy doesn't seem to have to bear any consequences for season 6. Either it's a deep commentary by the writers on the way that 'heroes' are not held fully accountable (in a way that is ultimately detrimental for their own ability to grow). Or it's because the writers don't see that she did anything terribly wrong in season 6 (either because Spike is a non-person who can be battered at will; or because they have an oddly unfeminist idea that domestic violence/abuse is only a problem when perpetrated by men against women). Not sure what to make of it.
And I *really* look forward to hearing what you have to say about Willow -- who also does not seem to have to bear consequences in proportion to her offense (which was, of course, significantly graver than anything Buffy did). But I will say this. With respect to Willow, the relatively mild nature of the consequences she bears leaves room, at least for me, for a plausible story of her turning dark again in season 8. I think we can say we are sorry, and even think we mean it. But really suffering the consequences seems to me to be a surer way of knowing that we really 'got it'. (Willow herself is not sure of herself in season 7, if I recall).
Reply
Leave a comment