How do you reconcile perceived OOC character behaviour?

[Dora]

Never understood how people who binge watched Buffy have the same feeling as those who watched it season on season as it aired how can they feel the same about the characters ? but I would never give Whedon the pleasure of taking my money for something he all but abandoned at the end of S5
I dislikes the whole Dawn thing just pried into everybodies memory if she was cloned from Buffy as someone pointed out how come she does not look anything like Buffy always thought a natural birth making more sense
I can only comment on Buffy and all the character acted OOC from S5 onwards to promote Spike / Spuffy , Riley was got rid of , Giles character was completely assassinated in S6 and came back a completely different Character in seven. Willow became hard and poor Xander got it worst of all , Buffy had to come back a nut job as to go with Spike and had to be nearly raped for Spike......... the core four was sacrificed for Spike's non story, the core four that was Buffy the vampire slayer

 

[EarthLogic]

Willow was someone Buffy CHOSE to care about and she was also a representation of what Buffy was fighting for. And where, pray tell, did I say that Willow had to stay that for the rest of her life?

Buffy also chose to care about Dawn after realising she was fake - I can understand your frustration with the fact that those feelings and memories were implanted - and like I said I agree that it should have been explored more - but I think the important point to take away is that Buffy was actively choosing to accept that connection rather than rejecting it. And if, as you suggest, Willow should have stayed on as respresentative of Buffy's humanity, then yes, she would have had to retain a degree of innocence for that symbolism to work and as a result wouldn't have had the more morally complex individual arc that she eventually did get.

"But otherwise they would have remained exactly the same" is, frankly a lazy argument because for all we know another type of change might have ended up being far better than what we actually got.

See above reply to RS.

Where in the everloving hell did I say that? How about you stop misquoting me or don't put words in my mouth. Buffy was a villain because of the decision she made prior to the asspull, retcon (that shouldn't have worked). How much clearer do I have to write that? Another novel?

You referred to Buffy not letting Dawn jump - and of course right after that she jumps herself so naturally I assumed you were talking about that whole moment.

Buffy is nowhere to be seen on any of the battle fields/action sites = Buffy not there. She is literally NOWHERE to be seen. It's really easy logic.

She's there at the start and there at the end. It's implied that she is in the fight. That's what's important for that scene. You can fault the writing and direction for not conveying this information very well - basically it's a continuity goof - but you can't just say that it implies Buffy the character has actually just buggered off in the story.

Buffy made hard decisions all along (and very much avoided doing it in S7 by the way), which is why Giles's idiotic speech in The Gift made no sense.

I was referring to the fact that in S7 she admits that yes she would let Dawn sacrifice herself, whereas she wasn't ready to lose her in S5 - but you rightly point out Buffy's other questionable decision-making in S7.

 

[Holden Webster]

See my above post.

Does that mean you view it similarly to how you view Dawn?

 

[Icarium]

And if, as you suggest, Willow should have stayed on as respresentative of Buffy's humanity, then yes, she would have had to retain a degree of innocence for that symbolism to work and as a result wouldn't have had the more morally complex individual arc that she eventually did get.

Morally complex is one way of puttting it, I guess. I prefer the phrase morally bankrupt. Turning Willow into a rapist and a killer who came very close to destroying the entire world is putting her character in the blender and coming with a whole new one, a character who was malicious and also incredibly dull, IMO. Trying to destroy the world and then suffering no repercussions whatsoever isn't my idea of complexity, but mileage varies, obviously.

I was referring to the fact that in S7 she admits that yes she would let Dawn sacrifice herself, whereas she wasn't ready to lose her in S5 - but you rightly point out Buffy's other questionable decision-making in S7.

Actions speak louder than words. She coddled Spike for most of that season, even though the whole point of Spike's stupid trigger was that, it wasn't up to Spike whether he would start killing people. It's like getting in a car and saying "I trust the driver, we will be safe", never mind someone else is driving and this someone would love nothing better than to crush the car.

I can only comment on Buffy and all the character acted OOC from S5 onwards to promote Spike / Spuffy

Yes, the real turning point was Out of My Mind where Riley behaves likes an absolute suicidal fool, Spike tries to prevent his surgery, Buffy vows vengence... only for neither of them to remember this in the next episode because after his infamous wet dream Spike was being rewriten into (excuse me while I puke) a romantic hero. Who cares if this required a radical rewrite of all other characters, I am Joss the great Whedon and no longer believe in plebeian ideas like consistent characterization! My anecdotal experience shows that the vast majority of people who like the latter seasons are big Spike fans and no surprise since the show was twisted into a pretzel to fit Spike where he didn't belong at the expense of all other characters.

Sorry, I got a bit carried away. BtVS was one of the first shows I binge-watched and to this day there hasn't been any show which has changed for the worse quite as much as BtVS did, IMO. Or at least if they did I managed to drop them (hello there, The 100). 😉

 

[RomanticSoul]

Buffy also chose to care about Dawn after realising she was fake - I can understand your frustration with the fact that those feelings and memories were implanted - and like I said I agree that it should have been explored more - but I think the important point to take away is that Buffy was actively choosing to accept that connection rather than rejecting it. And if, as you suggest, Willow should have stayed on as respresentative of Buffy's humanity, then yes, she would have had to retain a degree of innocence for that symbolism to work and as a result wouldn't have had the more morally complex individual arc that she eventually did get.

The fake memories are still ingrained. And it's something that belongs to new Buffy's subconscious. So is there really choice involved? I can't say 100% that Buffy chose at any point because there are too many uncertainties within the story. It's never explained how far the monks took it or were able to take it. And because of the retcons and OOC behavior that started to creep in with Dawn's arrival, it makes it even harder for me to see much choice. Since I have to find an explanation for this stuff happening NOW and not before and the monks are oh so convenient.

And I will never be ok with this story because of all the violation of women and their agency/choice. That so many people are fine with that is as unsettling to me as all the gushing about and romanticizing of abusive Spuffy.

What was done with Buffy/Joyce was despicable. It reminds me of what was done to Scully on X-Files. She was abducted, had her eggs stolen and which where then used to create hybrids and had her memories of the events wiped. All without consent. Replace eggs with blood and scratch the abduction part, it's the same thing to me.

She's there at the start and there at the end. It's implied that she is in the fight. That's what's important for that scene. You can fault the writing and direction for not conveying this information very well - basically it's a continuity goof - but you can't just say that it implies Buffy the character has actually just buggered off in the story.

She is not seen anywhere = she is not there. I don't care what a story implies or tries to tell. It's the responsibility of the directors, writers and so forth to make sure the story they are telling is the one they intended. If they don't do that then people like me will sit there and wonder why Buffy isn't double teaming Glory, helping her friends on the battlefield or getting up on that tower. Basically wondering why she isn't doing a damn thing. Sorry but unlike some people, I can't shut the logical part of my brain off.

I was referring to the fact that in S7 she admits that yes she would let Dawn sacrifice herself, whereas she wasn't ready to lose her in S5 - but you rightly point out Buffy's other questionable decision-making in S7.

Apparently that was only a thing Noxon-Buffy would say/do. Whedon-Buffy couldn't get her sister out of town fast enough, not willing to have her die. I mean sure she let her stay in the end but that initial statement is in total opposition to her earlier words. Oh well S7 Buffy...

Does that mean you view it similarly to how you view Dawn?

I'm going to skip the obligatory 'duh' and just say that unlike Whedon & Co., I don't happen to think every child is a blessing. I happen to place agency and free will above anything else. If Angel wanted to give his a son a good/new life, using magic to make his son forget, ok fine. But foisting him on another family without their consent? Hell no. Whedon thinks it's ok to do that because 'every child is a blessing'. I happen to disagree with that. If the family is given a choice to take him in (same with Dawn), then it's fine.

 

[Cheese Slices]

And I will never be ok with this story because of all the violation of women and their agency/choice

Huh ?

 

[EarthLogic]

She is not seen anywhere = she is not there. I don't care what a story implies or tries to tell. It's the responsibility of the directors, writers and so forth to make sure the story they are telling is the one they intended.

But there are so many mistakes made during filming - it doesn't mean we should take all of them seriously as part of the text. You could just as well say that the scenes where we accidentally see Angel's reflection mean that he's secretly turned human - after all it's there before our eyes the same way that Buffy absence is so apparent before our eyes in the fight in 'The Gift'. But of course that would be a silly assumption. The show tells us that he's a vampire, therefore he's a vampire until we are explicitly told he is not. Same with Buffy: despite the goof, she is there unless we are told or shown that she has indeed run away.

 

[EarthLogic]

Whedon thinks it's ok to do that because 'every child is a blessing'.

Where do you get that from?

 

[RomanticSoul]

But there are so many mistakes made during filming - it doesn't mean we should take all of them seriously as part of the text. You could just as well say that the scenes where we accidentally see Angel's reflection mean that he's secretly turned human - after all it's there before our eyes the same way that Buffy absence is so apparent before our eyes in the fight in 'The Gift'. But of course that would be a silly assumption. The show tells us that he's a vampire, therefore he's a vampire until we are explicitly told he is not. Same with Buffy: despite the goof, she is there unless we are told or shown that she has indeed run away.

How is that even remotely the same? A goof like the reflection is one thing. But not to show your heroine anywhere during a battle (while showing everyone else on different parts of the battle field) that determines the fate of the whole freaking world? It's not anywhere even remotely in the same ballpark. That's way past a goof like the reflection thing.

 

[RomanticSoul]

Where do you get that from?

Because that's the story. How else am I supposed to interpret it? When Jonathon changed the world (no matter his reason), we were told it's wrong because it's wrong to change the world to accomodate one person. But it's fine to do it when it involves children, despite the all around and multitude of violations of free will, body and agency. And it's never presented as wrong by the show and it's characters. They just accept it so we should accept that every child is a blessing.

 

[EarthLogic]

Because that's the story. How else am I supposed to interpret it? When Jonathon changed the world (no matter his reason), we were told it's wrong because it's wrong to change the world to accomodate one person. But it's fine to do it when it involves children, despite the all around and multitude of violations of free will, body and agency. And it's never presented as wrong by the show and it's characters. They just accept it so we should accept that every child is a blessing.

I'd call that a radical interpretation of the text.

How is that even remotely the same? A goof like the reflection is one thing. But not to show your heroine anywhere during a battle (while showing everyone else on different parts of the battle field) that determines the fate of the whole freaking world? It's not anywhere even remotely in the same ballpark. That's way past a goof like the reflection thing.

It's still a mistake. It may be a more noticeable mistake than the reflection thing but it's still in no way intended to be taken as having some sort of meaning within the story.

 

[RomanticSoul]

I'd call that a radical interpretation of the text.

Well yeah. You have your interpretations, I have mine. We all look at art differently. And I don't know how else I am to interpret the story when Connor and Dawn's stories are all about the violation of other people's mind, body, life, agency and free will. If you are ok with what's done to others just so those 2 blessed children can exist then you should also be on Jasmine's side and support her plan IMO.

 

[Holden Webster]

Whedon thinks it's ok to do that because 'every child is a blessing'.

Did you feel Angel's deal with WRH is presented as unproblematic? Does he not get a lot of criticism for it?

Also, Giles represents your perspective on Buffy, and he is the one who kills Glory, ensuring she does not return.

 

[EarthLogic]

Well yeah. You have your interpretations, I have mine. We all look at art differently. And I don't know how else I am to interpret the story when Connor and Dawn's stories are all about the violation of other people's mind, body, life, agency and free will. If you are ok with what's done to others just so those 2 blessed children can exist then you should also be on Jasmine's side and support her plan IMO.

But how on earth do you extrapolate from the introduction 2 specific mystical children who fulfil particular functions in the narrative to conclude outright that Joss thinks 'all children are a blessing'?? 😵 He's not the Pope!

 

[RomanticSoul]

Did you feel Angel's deal with WRH is presented as unproblematic? Does he not get a lot of criticism for it?

He gets more criticism for mind-wiping his friends/colleagues despite there being no evidence of it being his idea. He gets much less criticism for inflicting Connor on an unsuspecting family that did not consent.

But how on earth do you extrapolate from the introduction 2 specific mystical children who fulfil particular functions in the narrative to conclude outright that Joss thinks 'all children are a blessing'?? 😵 He's not the Pope!

Because it's fine and accepted by the narrative via the characters. While every other time these violations are expressed as evil and wrong. After all, Jasmine is no different than the stuff that happened around Dawn and Connor (all the same violations are there) yet her actions and existence are wrong. Clearly in her case it's wrong to change the world. Same in Jonathon's case. And others.

I mean, the monks are powerful enough to change reality on a grand scale (mass mind-altering, giving The Key a form) so they should be powerful enough to just open a portal and let Glory go home or expell her from Earth's dimension. Boom. Problem solved. If the puny beings of AtS can open portals every Sunday, surely the monks could. But nope, they found it better to steal Buffy's eggs (without her consent), I mean blood, create a child with her eggs (without her consent) and then forced Buffy/Joyce to take care of and protect said child (without their consent) and putting their life in mortal danger which definitely killed Buffy and probably killed Joyce. And topped it off with altering the minds of hundreds, if not thousands to accommodate Dawn's place in the universe without their consent. And they didn't even have the decency to pay child support. But it was accepted as the 'right thing' by the narrative via the characters. All these violations? Pft who cares. The child is what matters, nothing else. Just ask Buffy in The Gift who chooses Dawn over the world.

 

[EarthLogic]

I mean, the monks are powerful enough to change reality on a grand scale (mass mind-altering, giving The Key a form) so they should be powerful enough to just open a portal and let Glory go home or expell her from Earth's dimension. Boom. Problem solved. If the puny beings of AtS can open portals every Sunday, surely the monks could. But nope, they found it better to steal Buffy's eggs (without her consent), I mean blood, create a child with her eggs (without her consent) and then forced Buffy/Joyce to take care of and protect said child (without their consent) and putting their life in mortal danger which definitely killed Buffy and probably killed Joyce. And hey didn't even have the decency to pay child support. But it was accepted as the 'right thing' by the narrative via the characters. All these violations? Pft who cares. The child is what matters, nothing else.

Wow. There are a load of baseless assumptions there. First of all there is absolutely no evidence that the monks extracted Buffy's eggs! They said blood, so we must assume blood as we have no evidence to the contrary. You've just made that up completely. Next the idea that Joyce's tumour was caused by the memory changes is fanon - it's a decent theory but a theory nonetheless. There's nothing in the story that links the spell to her illness. Finally the narrative is not saying 'the child is what matters'; that's simply not the theme of the story. Joss wanted Buffy to have someone to care about as intensely as she did for Angel so her gave her a blood relative that she would protect just as fiercely. Metaphorically-speaking Dawn represents Buffy's humanity so her saviour of Dawn in a season where she fears her role as a Slayer is making her a cold killer is important to reaffirming Buffy's connection with her human side and all that it encompasses: love, compassion, selflessness.

I simply don't see how you manage to boil this all down to 'the child is all that matters'.

 

[RomanticSoul]

Wow. There are a load of baseless assumptions there. First of all there is absolutely no evidence that the monks extracted Buffy's eggs! They said blood, so we must assume blood as we have no evidence to the contrary. You've just made that up completely. Next the idea that Joyce's tumour was caused by the memory changes is fanon - it's a decent theory but a theory nonetheless. There's nothing in the story that links the spell to her illness. Finally the narrative is not saying 'the child is what matters'; that's simply not the theme of the story. Joss wanted Buffy to have someone to care about as intensely as she did for Angel so her gave her a blood relative that she would protect just as fiercely. Metaphorically-speaking Dawn represents Buffy's humanity so her saviour of Dawn in a season where she fears her role as a Slayer is making her a cold killer is important to reaffirming Buffy's connection with her human side and all that it encompasses: love, compassion, selflessness.

I simply don't see how you manage to boil this all down to 'the child is all that matters'.

OMG. I said blood in my post. IT'S RIGHT THERE. Eggs was used, because that's what the real, non-magical equivalent would be in a non-supernatural world where there is a thing called medical rape.

And for the record, as we have had this discussion plenty of times before on this forum. You can't prove Joyce's tumor/death had nothing to do with what the monks did. Just like I can't prove that it did. So I'm allowed per the show, just like you, to come up wth my own explanation.

I give up. I'm tired of people ignoring what I write or trying to spin it into something I didn't say, or call me crazy or what I write fanon just to dismiss my opinion. Whatever. I'm done.

 

[The Ferg]

I mean, the monks are powerful enough to change reality on a grand scale (mass mind-altering, giving The Key a form) so they should be powerful enough to just open a portal and let Glory go home or expell her from Earth's dimension. Boom. Problem solved. If the puny beings of AtS can open portals every Sunday, surely the monks could. But nope, they found it better to steal Buffy's eggs (without her consent), I mean blood, create a child with her eggs (without her consent) and then forced Buffy/Joyce to take care of and protect said child (without their consent) and putting their life in mortal danger which definitely killed Buffy and probably killed Joyce. And topped it off with altering the minds of hundreds, if not thousands to accommodate Dawn's place in the universe without their consent. And they didn't even have the decency to pay child support. But it was accepted as the 'right thing' by the narrative via the characters. All these violations? Pft who cares. The child is what matters, nothing else. Just ask Buffy in The Gift who chooses Dawn over the world.

I think you're putting a moral judgment on what the monks did, but the show doesn't even really delve into that idea at all. It's more about how Buffy (and co) deal with the fallout of what the monks did (Dawn) in a moral and ethical manner.

 

[AlphaFoxtrot]

The Key is a mystery, the Captain of the Knights said as much, (and he seemed to have the best idea of anyone as to what was going on in season 5) and that would presumably include how it became flesh. Also remember, Buffy is a selfless Champion of the Powers that Be, which is a nice way of saying, she drew the short straw. Sure, you get superpowers, but you also get kid sisters who sometimes appear out of nowhere.

 

[Mrs Gordo]

Spoiler: Big Photos from ATF

I'm sorry but no one in this world will ever convince me that Angel goes from the above to - screw the world and my kid I'm gonna go live in Eden. There is a disconnect there that is nothing short of stupid.