Buffy, Riley (yes, Riley) and Spike (1/2): Not-Entirely Random (Feminist) Ramblings

[red_satin_doll]

When it comes to BtVS, I'd promised myself that I would not write on my own journal here about subjects that are generally quite well-worn and have been discussed at length - and with great intellegence - by other people. Nevermind that I'll rant or blather at length about a variety of subjects (the comics, the episode AYW, etc etc) on other people

Comments

[pocochina]

1) it occurs to me that the sentence can also be interpreted to imply that Buffy is "using" herself, not unlike the way Faith used her body in "Who's That Girl". And it ties in with the sense of having "come back wrong": whether she can consciously vocalize it or not, that she has only been using the body she was inserted when Willow resurrected her in Bargaining

OOOOH. I'm glad you did decide to post because I've never seen this point brought out before but it sounds exactly right. And I really, really like the comparison with her experience with Faith.

I'm not negating the sincerity of the apology to Spike, but she is apologizing to herself at the same time.

aw, yes. She really can't make an honest apology until she's started to forgive herself, really.

2) See, I never get that, that it became All About Spike. I liked his arc in S7, don't get me wrong, but I think Buffy's was at least as interesting. I wonder how much that is, as viewers we're used to prioritizing the POVs of male characters? I know I am, though I try not to. Female characters have to be twice as strong and flashy to get half the attention a similar male character would.

[red_satin_doll]

Thank you for reading my tossed-brain-salad! (I shall try to be more coherent in future.)

I'm glad you did decide to post because I've never seen this point brought out before but it sounds exactly right. And I really, really like the comparison with her experience with Faith.

I actually had to have that pointed out to me - I watched the scene and TOTALLY missed the fact that Faith was really raging against herself, (not against Buffy -in-Faith). When I was first watching a few months back, I was also reading Noel Murray's reviews on the ATV Club, and someone made note of that in the comments. (I felt foolish for not catching it.) Fortunately it's an episode that rewards multiple viewings. I hope to do some meta on that episode more specifically.

I find it interesting that in this ep and in S3, Faith represents Buffy's dark side, a role that Spike then takes over in S5-6. I also have wondered how much the body swap reflects Buffy's actions in future; we see that being in Buffy's body/life affects Faith greatly, but not so much the other way around. (Buffy certainly takes on a lot of darkness in the coming seasons, but I suspect that the writers really weren't connecting it specifically to the bodyswap, and I'm just fanwanking.)

I wonder how much that is, as viewers we're used to prioritizing the POVs of male characters? I know I am, though I try not to.

A very interesting point, and I definitely need to give that one further thought!

ETA: Something I've noticed in various fandoms whether for movies/tv shows, celebrities, etc, at least in the fanbases I've been aware of or participated in - most of the fans are female, straight (generally white, middle-class, and either quite young, or skewing middle-aged), and there tends to be a strong identification towards a character/person they find sexually attractive, be it Spike (duh) or Ewan McGregor or Keith Urban, etc, which gives a sort of fierce passion to the fans of that character/person that is often lacking in female characters/celebrities. (I know for myself I tend to identify with female characters and actors, but there is very rarely a sexual component to that identification, even though I am a lesbian. Of course I'm not talking about the fanbase of specifically lesbian icons such as kd lang, etc. That's probably another story.)

The sexual element of BtVS took me by surprise - it's the first time I've been part of a fandom where porn/erotic fantasy (often quite explicit) seems to be a huge percentage of fanfic.

In other words, I think you are right, but I would add that the sexual element is a strong part of it. It may be what allows people to be "Spuffy" fans without actually liking Buffy at all - do people identify WITH Spike - and certainly his feminization on the show makes this possible - or are they inserting themselves into Buffy's place, or a bit of both?

Female characters have to be twice as strong and flashy to get half the attention a similar male character would.

Your comment reminds me of the notion that a woman has to do twice the work to get a fraction of the reward. (etc and so forth) You remind me of the fact that in the Buffyverse, Angel and Spike have centuries of history that can be worked off of and explored (FFL is does so brilliantly), but Buffy has very little backstory; she is very young and her character exists in the here-and-now (something Giles says explicitly to Joyce in the episode Angel, if I recall). So compared to the Fanged Four, she has a bit of a handicap in that regard.

[rahirah]

Just as a data point, I identify with Spike far more than with Buffy, but not because he's feminized. In fact, I think fandom rather overdoes feminizing Spike - yes, some of his traits are more often assigned to female characters, but in other ways he's quite stereotypically masculine. It's A) because I find his goals and emotions far easier to understand than Buffy's in most cases, B) because I've had the experience of being madly in love with someone who'd been gutted by a previous relationship and was using me as Rebound Girl, and C) I'm old enough to have lived through being in the closet. Buffy's attraction to Spike, and her self-loathing at that attraction, reads very like the self-loathing of a closeted gay relationship. (And yes, I'm aware of the dubiousness of equating vampires to any real-world minority group, I'm just talking about the relationship dynamics here.)

I wanted very badly for Buffy to come to the realization that her feelings for Spike, in and of themselves, weren't evil or sick or wrong. (If she'd allowed those feelings to influence her into letting Spike's evil deeds slide, THAT would have been wrong, but that's not the same thing.) But she never does. Instead, Spike 'fixes' things by getting a soul. Which means Buffy never really has to examine her own actions or make any changes in her own behavior. I mean, three seasons later, her response to people making her uncomfortable emotionally is still to give them a black eye.

Which is, I think, the main reason why she doesn't really have a story in S6. "Buffy gets depresssed, does some unwise stuff, and then stops being depressed" is not a story arc, it's just a series of events. What did Buffy learn? How did Buffy change? That's what I wanted to know.

And that's what Joss never told me. I think part of it was, the writers themselves couldn't decide what story they were telling, and ended up contradicting and undercutting each other all the time - but it's still a pity.

[red_satin_doll]

Buffy's attraction to Spike, and her self-loathing at that attraction, reads very like the self-loathing of a closeted gay relationship. (And yes, I'm aware of the dubiousness of equating vampires to any real-world minority group, I'm just talking about the relationship dynamics here.)

Agreed; and I noticed that in S1-2 as well, in terms of Buffy not being "out" to her mother. Again, I didn't take it as a direct commentary on being gay, but simply borrowing the concept of "in the closet". (I've seen people argue for and against that reading.)

I think in the '80's there was a resurgence of vampire films (The Hunger, etc) that seemed to be using vampires as a metaphor for fear of AIDS (a least, I read a lot of commentary at the time that indicated such); and of course there's the gay subtext (and context) of Anne Rice's work.

I don't think that's what's going on here in BtVS however; and I never read the vampires in this show as a metaphor for an oppressed group, though I'm sure some people do.

[red_satin_doll]

FYI I just wrote you a VERY long response and LJ ate it, damn it all. I'll try again later. You've actually inspired some thoughts on the use of the words "sorry" and "love" in the Buffyverse, that I think will become a meta.

I wanted very badly for Buffy to come to the realization that her feelings for Spike, in and of themselves, weren't evil or sick or wrong. (If she'd allowed those feelings to influence her into letting Spike's evil deeds slide, THAT would have been wrong, but that's not the same thing.) But she never does.

Agree to disagree? I see her actions towards him in S7 as proof of apology and having learned - this after her verbal apology in AYW, which is the first time she acknowledges him as a person, even if the apology is not perfect it's a first step. I don't see his soulquest as fixing anything by itself nor is it, IMO, his redemption all on it's own. In any case, her actions to me (including words like "I believe in you"), which help him heal on several levels, is all the proof I need personally.

the writers themselves couldn't decide what story they were telling, and ended up contradicting and undercutting each other all the time

I definitely agree on that, even if we disagree on what we each wanted/needed to see. A lot of dropped balls and missed opportunities in S7. (For instance, I SO wanted to see the women of the coven; that would have been more interesting to me than a gaggle of pseudo-teenage girls.)

[rahirah]

Agree to disagree?

Sure; I know I'm in the minority in that opinion.

I don't think that Spike getting a soul was his redemption (I was shipping Spuffy when the show was first airing and it was inconceivable that Spike would ever get a soul!) but I do suspect it's the main/only reason Buffy was willing to help him in S7. Him having a soul now made it acceptable for her to help and forgive him. If he'd tried to get a soul and failed, or if getting a soul hadn't been an option for some reason, I think she would have been perfectly willing to let him rot in the school basement. And I'm not sure how I feel about that.

[boot_the_grime]

Very much disagree. Buffy was obviously concerned with Spike when she saw him crazy and with scratches on his chest in the basement, when she had no idea he had a soul. She reluctantly agreed to give him a chance to help before she knew he had a soul and wasn't sure about his motives. And, really, she never had the "I hate the bastard" attitude that a lot of the fandom wanted her to have after SR in season 6, there was resentment but she was still concerned where he was and didn't want him dead. I don't think she ever would have let him "rot in the basement", even though she would've never considered rekindling a relationship with him if he hadn't changed by getting a soul.

And I never thought that it was the fact that Spike had a soul that made it different for Buffy - as much as the fact that he CHOSE to fight for his soul. That's why she has tears in her eyes in the church in Beneath You. If someone had cursed Spike with a soul without his will, I don't think she would've felt the same. I think that if she had tried to get a soul and failed, it would've mattered, a lot more than if Spike had just got a soul without wanting it. It's what she says herself when she talks to him, that he fought the monster inside, and she whispers "I know" when he says he got his soul back for her. "He has a soul now" is just an easy shorthand she uses with other people to defend her decisions regarding Spike.

And while she is deeply moved by Spike getting his soul back to be a better man for her, she doesn't immediately fawn over him and declare him a great guy, which wouldn't have made a lot of sense and would have bothered me. She's never met Souled!Spike before; she has no idea what kind of person he would be with a soul, and when he first comes back, he's insane and confused and a complete mess, and as she soon learns, controlled by the First. A lot of fans claim that soul is used as a get out of the jail card on the show and that Buffy has a "souled = good, soulless = bad" view. But that's not really the case: she doesn't immediately decide that Spike is a good man or that she could get back with him because he has a soul; Warren had a soul, too, and lots of other humans - the soul just guarantees that Spike has the option to be a good man. She believes in him because he fought for his soul, because he's changed, because he wanted/wants to be good, and when she removes his chip, she thinks he *can* be a good man. He's not a suddenly, magically transformed prince; at that point, he's an ongoing project, he's changing and she believes he can change more and fight his demons.

[rahirah]

Sure, that's one perfectly valid interpretation. I can't completely buy into it for various reasons: I don't know if Buffy's concern when she first sees Spike in the basement is because of his condition, or because a vampire who attacked her not that long ago is back, and is obviously unstable. When he reappears, having apparently saned himself up, she reluctantly agrees to let him help her - but it's not until she finds out he has a soul that she reluctantly decides to help him.

I would be very happy if the show had ever explicitly said that Buffy recognized that deciding to get the soul, rather than having it, was why she felt Spike could be a good man and believed in him. But it doesn't. It leaves that up to the viewer's interpretation. Which is fine as an artistic choice, but frustrating for me personally, because so many other things are also left to the viewer's interpretation. If you happen to be a viewer who is completely confident that you know what's going on in Buffy's head at all times, it's a very different show than if you're a viewer who isn't.

[red_satin_doll]

I would be very happy if the show had ever explicitly said that Buffy recognized that deciding to get the soul, rather than having it, was why she felt Spike could be a good man and believed in him. But it doesn't. It leaves that up to the viewer's interpretation.

Fair enough. As I mentioned, I tend to feel the similarly about Willow in S7 - has she learned her lesson about what she did to Tara and why it was wrong? So I don't know why I feel ok about one and not the other, except that I'm pretty Buffy-centric by that point, and maybe I think I see more in the Buffy/Spike interaction that I'm ok with. And I completely buy her reluctance at first because she doesn't know what she'd be getting herself into - she's starting off life on a positive, sunnier note when he comes back to town, and I'm sure she's not wanting to go "back there". But we've discussed all this upthread, so I'll stop beating the poor horsie.

If you happen to be a viewer who is completely confident that you know what's going on in Buffy's head at all times, it's a very different show than if you're a viewer who isn't.

Buffy's very opaque that entire season, definitely. (Except for a few moments - I love the scene with her and Dawn at the window after her dream of girls dying; before she's become hardened.) I wouldn't say I'm confident I know what's going on in her head at all that season, only what I happen to take away from it or interpret it. (Maybe it's whatever makes me happiest or what interpretation I am most comfortable with. I certainly can't claim how I see it is "right", only that it works for me.)

I'm far more bothered by other things she does that season NOT related to Spike: calling Chloe "stupid" after she's buried the girl, particularly was an "ouch" moment where I thought, oh Buffy no. I actually felt the cutting herself off theme and her hardness/bitchiness were in character, yes, but badly handled or a bit overdone by the writers, to the point where I actually began to suspect that some of the writers feelings about Buffy, or about SMG herself, had begun to seep into things? Or simply that they didn't understand Buffy anymore either? Again, it just felt overdone and undercooked when I was watching it. (Which is true of a lot of things in the later seasons, come to think of it, as much as I love them.)

I thought btw it was rather thoughtless of Giles to bring all those girls to Buffy's house unannounced, expect Buffy to provide room and board (was Giles paying for it?) on part time counselor's wages. (Then expecting her to come up with a plan, telling her to be a general without telling her how to do that, etc. I love Giles, I do, but man oh man sometimes....)

Anyhow - did I offer you a cookie yet? (My Mexican spiced hot cocoa snickerdoodles are particularly amazing.)

[rahirah]

I actually felt the cutting herself off theme and her hardness/bitchiness were in character, yes, but badly handled or a bit overdone by the writers, to the point where I actually began to suspect that some of the writers feelings about Buffy, or about SMG herself, had begun to seep into things?

Some of the things Joss has said over the years (as well as what happened to Cordelia, when he had problems with Charisma Carpenter) lead me to suspect that very strongly myself.

S7 was in mail ways a season of back-stage flailing - Joss was off playing with other shows, no one was sure if it was going to be the last season, or if there would be a spin-off, or what. There were at least three spinoff ideas floated over the course of the season, only one of which even came close to getting off the ground, and it was scrapped when Eliza Dushku went for Tru Calling instead. But if you look close, you can see where they were doing setup for a possible Dawn spinoff early in the season (all that back to high school stuff, giving her a gang of friends who were never sean again), and a Slayer school spinoff mid-season. But the network didn't bite, and the season went careening off in sixteen other directions.

[red_satin_doll]

I've heard some horror stories regarding the way he treated Charisma, Robia LaMorte, etc (that remark that he killed off Jenny to show what happens to an actor when they get him mad may have been meant as a joke, but if so it's a particularly unfunny and revealing one.) I actually have a great deal of respect for Amber Benson for not giving in and doing CWDP. That might have been "nifty" dramatically, but I think she was absolutely right in thinking that would be hurtful to fans who were still upset over Tara's death. (And somehow I suspect that for all the praise Joss gets, he's not the easiest boss and you need to beware if you get in his line of fire? He sounds to me like another "baby king", but I'm just extrapolating from things I've read, so I could be totally off-base.)

But if you look close, you can see where they were doing setup for a possible Dawn spinoff early in the season (all that back to high school stuff, giving her a gang of friends who were never sean again), and a Slayer school spinoff mid-season. But the network didn't bite, and the season went careening off in sixteen other directions.

*nods* I liked early S7, and thought that more would come of the high school setting; I thought the exploited both the differences and the samenesss of Dawn's new school to Buffy's old one. And I really thought they were going to make more of it, of Dawn's new friends, and so forth.

I was sorry they killed off Cassie, I thought she was an interesting character, and nicely played by Azura Sky. (Apropos of nothing, I'd swear that she was also the actress who played the leader of the campus coven in Hush, but now I think it might be Brooke Bloom? they certainly look very similar to me.)

[red_satin_doll]

100% agreement on this - and how much do I LOVE your icon? (Allow me a fangirl moment) That scene is one of my favorites in the series - actually that shot of SMG's face is one of my favorites. Buffy's face is suffused with love and caring and SMG just knocks it out of the park.

Buffy was obviously concerned with Spike when she saw him crazy and with scratches on his chest in the basement, when she had no idea he had a soul.

I'd add - and this was inspired by Barb's comment above - the scene in Beneath You, specifically, where Buffy follows Spike to the church. She's seen him behave in a violent, insane manner; when he screams "help me" she dismisses him at first because priority #1 is helping Richard, who's injured and in shock. Only after she's made sure help is arriving and Xander and Anya are there to stay with him does she go after Spike (priority #2) to find out what's going on with him. Which actually seems like a pretty foolish thing to do - or would be for an ordinary woman, but of course she's the Slayer. She can "take him" but she doesn't know what to expect. If she didn't care about him, she wouldn't have even bothered.

"He has a soul now" is just an easy shorthand she uses with other people to defend her decisions regarding Spike.

I thought the exact same thing about that when she says it to Giles in First Date; he's not only talking as her Watcher, but as a father-figure who is disappointed in his daughter's choices ("I wanted so much more for you") AND as someone who lost his own love, Jenny, the last time Buffy made a souled vampire the center of her life ("That way lies pain and heartache": he's speaking from his own experience.) So he has ample reason to question her judgement here based on that (whether or not she is "proven right", his doubts are not unreasonable IMO), so I see her trying to justify her decision on both a moral and tactical level. She has to PROVE that love isn't clouding her judgement, and there's the irony - the First Slayer told her that she was full of love, that love would bring her to her gift; and in S2 she stated without hesitation that her emotions gave her strength - before Angelus broke her heart.

at that point, he's an ongoing project, he's changing and she believes he can change more and fight his demons.

*nods* When I think of Buffy/Spike, the phrase "progress not perfection" keeps popping in my head. Cliche perhaps, but apt.

On this subject I always defer to the_royal_anna because she said it so much better than I can: Buffy talks a lot in Season 7 about the fact that Spike has a soul. Of course it matters to her. It is everything to her, because she is the one who lost Angel his soul. That is who she is. That is what she is worth. She is the destruction of what is good and the end of hope, and she can save the world a thousand times but that will still hang over her. Until now. Because suddenly this is how much she is worth - she is worth a soul. She is worth a vampire going out and getting a soul for her, all for her, and yes, it matters to her. She is the Slayer and she can do anything and everything but she cannot earn back that soul, that damn soul that was lost at her hands and regained only for her to destroy it again, sending it to straight to Hell. But this time, this vampire takes it out of her hands. She cannot earn back that soul but he can. And what Buffy is only just starting to understand is what he can do for her is as much hers as what she can do for herself, that this gift of a soul is part of who he is, and who she is, and who they are.
http://the-royal-anna.livejournal.com/22963.html#cutid1

[boot_the_grime]

The avatar was made as a gift for me by pamsblau. <3

I agree with everything you say about BY and LMPTM. One of the ironies of the situation is that Giles is as influenced by his own feelings as Buffy is, despite believing himself to be the voice of reason.

The fandom reactions to season 7 Buffy, especially regarding her relationship with Spike, are particularly ironic in that she's subject to two completely opposite criticisms: one portion of fans dislikes her for being too much affected by her emotions, for being too soft and forgiving with Spike and for prioritizing him and putting others at risk, while the other dislikes her for being harsh and cold and not loving or romantic enough (or even accuse her of being ruthless and manipulative). It's one of those no-win situations where a woman can't allow herself to appear affected by her emotions so she wouldn't be called weak and an "such an emotional girl" unqualified to be a leader, while at the same time she will face hate for being cold and unfeeling and unfeminine. Men in the same situation are rarely faced with those criticisms.

[red_satin_doll]

One of the ironies of the situation is that Giles is as influenced by his own feelings as Buffy is, despite believing himself to be the voice of reason.

Indeed. He had perfectly logical reasons for leaving Buffy and the Scoobies in S6, just as he had logical reasons for what he did to Buffy in Helpless; he's very good at rationalizing things. And obviously she's learned from her "father", or at least is making a very good effort at matching his logic with her own.

I'm struck by how in some ways, Giles is really "the one who sees" (I know Caleb says that of Xander, but Caleb is EVIL and an unreliable narrator, so I don't take what he says at face value.) Whether he chooses to act on what he sees or turns a blind eye is another matter (foreshadowed by Willow's spell in Something Blue.)

But remarkably Giles is the only one who is able to describe Buffy and Spike's relationship with any accuracy at this point: "You rely on him, he relies on you." that's their entire relationship right there. It's significant because while everyone else is trying to get Buffy to pin a label on their relationship, an easily-understood definition (Is he her "boyfriend"? Is she "in love" with him? What are they to each other?) Giles is the only one to actually describe how the relationship functions.

It's one of those no-win situations where a woman can't allow herself to appear affected by her emotions so she wouldn't be called weak and an "such an emotional girl" unqualified to be a leader, while at the same time she will face hate for being cold and unfeeling and unfeminine. Men in the same situation are rarely faced with those criticisms.

WORD to all of that. (Is the phrase "word" still used, btw?) Ironically, that "damned if you do damned if you don't" criticism exactly reproduces what Buffy faces from the Scoobies. And in RL I'm reminded of someone like - well, Hillary Clinton for instance. Remember when Bill was running for president and Hillary, an accomplished attorney, had to prove that she could bake cookies (or had a recipe published) in order to not be proven "less feminine" that Barbara Bush? And that's just one example.

I can't think of a single instance offhand of a man having to face the same sort of double-bind accusations, at least when it comes to emotions affecting their ability to function and lead capably.

In a way I'm actually surprised that Buffy and Spike's relationship wasn't used in some way as proof against her that she wasn't thinking clearly or leading capably in Empty Places (not to start a kerfuffle about that entire episode at the moment).

[red_satin_doll]

Sure; I know I'm in the minority in that opinion.

Are you? I'm sure I've seen others voice a similar opinion; I guess it just depends on which site one happens to be on. But you'd know better than I, of course.

How embarrassing is it that I only just now figured out that's Harmony on your icon and "got" it? (I assume the text actually refers to her on AtS, which I haven't see - thus my excuse.)

[rahirah]

Well, if you tallied up the opinion of every fan, I think it would probably be split about 50/50. But if I'm just talking about "Spuffy fans who actively talk meta on Livejournal," which is the only site I really frequent these days, I think the Buffy-centric view is more prominent. (Which is a a change from, and I'm sure partly a reaction to, fandom ten or so years ago. Spuffy fandom was, for some time, strongly Spike-centric.)

I have a sad affection for Harmony. *g*