we really need to start a thread about all this! but just to finish this argument...Buffy knew she was going to win against the First so that whole last night thing means nothing!
So biting...whats up with that?
Bite Me!
- Thread starter white avenger
- Start date
we really need to start a thread about all this! but just to finish this argument...Buffy knew she was going to win against the First so that whole last night thing means nothing!
So biting...whats up with that?
white avenger
white avenger
The Night Before...
The point was, Buffy DIDN'T know that she was going to win. There could be only two valid reasons for her to send Angel away on that "second front" mission:
1) She was completely honest. For the first time in her career, she was facing the fact that she just might have met more than her match in the First Evil. The possibility was a valid one that a second front would be .necessary, and the best that she would be able to do was to slow it down enough to give Angel and his forces a fighting chance. If you accept that scenario, then, yes, she felt that she quite likely WAS facing the last night of her life, and she wanted to spend it with someone she loved, someone who could hold and give her comfort just as he already had before. Or
2) Buffy knew all along that the First Evil was as good as defeated. She was so sure of it, in fact, that she chose to send her "one true love" away so that she could hop in the sack and get some more "cold comfort from the cellar dweller." If she chose Angel over Spike, why didn't she send SPIKE away, and snuggle with Ol' Broody?
I personally believe that she chose to keep the best warrior she had and send the second string back to LA (who better to start a second front that the
second best fighter) because his presence in Sunnydale was neither wanted nor needed.
The point was, Buffy DIDN'T know that she was going to win. There could be only two valid reasons for her to send Angel away on that "second front" mission:
1) She was completely honest. For the first time in her career, she was facing the fact that she just might have met more than her match in the First Evil. The possibility was a valid one that a second front would be .necessary, and the best that she would be able to do was to slow it down enough to give Angel and his forces a fighting chance. If you accept that scenario, then, yes, she felt that she quite likely WAS facing the last night of her life, and she wanted to spend it with someone she loved, someone who could hold and give her comfort just as he already had before. Or
2) Buffy knew all along that the First Evil was as good as defeated. She was so sure of it, in fact, that she chose to send her "one true love" away so that she could hop in the sack and get some more "cold comfort from the cellar dweller." If she chose Angel over Spike, why didn't she send SPIKE away, and snuggle with Ol' Broody?
I personally believe that she chose to keep the best warrior she had and send the second string back to LA (who better to start a second front that the
second best fighter) because his presence in Sunnydale was neither wanted nor needed.
palabravampiress
Bidet of Evil
Umm... what's all this about biting = mating? I thought mating = mating. lol. Otherwise, what was the point of all that sex?
To be a bit more serious... we all know that the sensuality surrounding the vampire bite is there because Stoker used the bite as a metaphor for sex. I mean, that book is chock full of thinly veiled taboo concepts and actions; sex is just one (albeit an overt one). And yes, I do think Joss was following in Stoker's footsteps -- even *more* overtly -- when Angel bit Buffy. Anyone who didn't pick up on that must be a virgin and live in a cave (my apologies to all virgin cave dwellers). I don't even like Angel all that much, but if you've got to die, (or be nearly drained of your blood) it seems as though he can at least make it look good.
The fact that the vampire bite is often representative of sexual attraction and even the sexual act itself does not necessarily mean that the concept transfers over into the metaphysics of the Buffyverse so that biting a slayer = mating. If that were the case, Buffyverse vamps would be impotent (like Anne Rice vamps, for whom biting one another very much = mating). Why would one species (the vampire) need two mating mechanisms (the bite and normal intercourse)? Since Buffyverse vamps have proven themselves more than capable and also incredibly desirous of mating with Buffy in the good old fashioned way, I see no reason to assume that biting has replaced intercourse as the natural vampiric mating ritual.
That said, I do think that marking a slayer by biting her *would* be a big deal. It's sort of like tattooing your name onto her neck. I don't think it's "mating" so much as it is "mate guarding."
To be a bit more serious... we all know that the sensuality surrounding the vampire bite is there because Stoker used the bite as a metaphor for sex. I mean, that book is chock full of thinly veiled taboo concepts and actions; sex is just one (albeit an overt one). And yes, I do think Joss was following in Stoker's footsteps -- even *more* overtly -- when Angel bit Buffy. Anyone who didn't pick up on that must be a virgin and live in a cave (my apologies to all virgin cave dwellers). I don't even like Angel all that much, but if you've got to die, (or be nearly drained of your blood) it seems as though he can at least make it look good.
The fact that the vampire bite is often representative of sexual attraction and even the sexual act itself does not necessarily mean that the concept transfers over into the metaphysics of the Buffyverse so that biting a slayer = mating. If that were the case, Buffyverse vamps would be impotent (like Anne Rice vamps, for whom biting one another very much = mating). Why would one species (the vampire) need two mating mechanisms (the bite and normal intercourse)? Since Buffyverse vamps have proven themselves more than capable and also incredibly desirous of mating with Buffy in the good old fashioned way, I see no reason to assume that biting has replaced intercourse as the natural vampiric mating ritual.
That said, I do think that marking a slayer by biting her *would* be a big deal. It's sort of like tattooing your name onto her neck. I don't think it's "mating" so much as it is "mate guarding."
white avenger
white avenger
The bite scar more than likely is more a territorial thing than a "mate guarding" thing, because the three times Buffy was bitten, it was in the same spot, and the Master had no interest in mating with a Slayer and as for Drac, he strikes me more as the "bite 'em and leave 'em" sort of vamp. My dog marks the tree in our front yard in a similar manner, but , to the best of my knowledge, has never shown any romantic feelings toward it or any other oak tree (though he does seem more than a little interested in the left front tire on my truck).
The only times the bite is used as a bonding, mating, or claiming act is in fan fiction, unless I missed something in the two series.
The only times the bite is used as a bonding, mating, or claiming act is in fan fiction, unless I missed something in the two series.
Kean
Thats basically what mating is though...claiming something/someone as your own...look at us agreeing again!
palabravampiress
Bidet of Evil
Apparently, I gave you reputation points last time, so I can't write this in the reputation comments section. Anyway, what I was going to say is that I changed my mind. I think you're right. I don't think it has anything to do with mating rituals at all. Marking one's territory seems like a much better explanation.