r2dh2
Never go for the kill when you can go for the pain
I don’t like it, but I can buy it. I have two issues with it though:
1. Buffy’s lack of moral conflict (ex-post).
I don’t like that Angel is the reason, but fine, I can go along with that, so no ex-ante moral-conflict is fine. I can also buy that they are dealing with the Mayor’s ascension, so there isn’t much time for reflection in S3. But I’d like to have seen some struggle in S4. I can also buy that the Scoobies move on, they are young, and life keeps happening. But Buffy had a huge moral conflict when she was covering for Faith in Consequences. Even if she was avoiding the thought, I feel that Giles, as her father figure, should have brought up the topic with Buffy when Faith recovered in S4. Buffy tried to take a human life – we can debate whether that was right or not, but I’m fine accepting that this happened — the act itself, however, is something huge, especially in a show that aims to explore the complexities of human choices.
Why no ex-post moral-conflict for Buffy?
2. What’s its meaning in light of Faith’s role as Buffy’s shadow/dark-self (the Iago to our Othello)?
I can understand that the Council’s unwillingness to help Angel was the last straw for her in this season, so she made the decision of leaving them, she “graduated.” More generally, she’s leaving high school, she is no longer a child, she’s now a young adult making her own choices. I also can buy that the way the “cure” was presented (“to drain a slayer’s blood”) initially lead us to believe that it meant to kill a slayer. But I’m having some trouble reading the metaphor behind the attempted murder… there must be something else.
The only way I can rationalize it somehow is that Buffy is presented with two options:
a) Let Angel die. Angel may not be human, but he has a soul. Putting aside his Angelous recent past, he is working with the Scoobies trying to save humans in general and trying to save the world from the Mayor. He’s part of the group and he is her lover.
b) Feed Faith to Angel. Faith is human and has had a difficult life, but she already made her “choices.” She’s siding with evil and she’s expecting to have a bigger role once the Mayor ascends.
Given the options, young adult Buffy puts the Council’s rules aside (“not helping vampires under any circumstances”) and makes her own choice, to kill fellow human. But I still think that I’m missing something here.
Any thoughts?
More generally, we have another thread regarding the AR in S6, so playing devil’s advocate here, was the attempted murder really needed for the story somehow? What am I missing?
1. Buffy’s lack of moral conflict (ex-post).
I don’t like that Angel is the reason, but fine, I can go along with that, so no ex-ante moral-conflict is fine. I can also buy that they are dealing with the Mayor’s ascension, so there isn’t much time for reflection in S3. But I’d like to have seen some struggle in S4. I can also buy that the Scoobies move on, they are young, and life keeps happening. But Buffy had a huge moral conflict when she was covering for Faith in Consequences. Even if she was avoiding the thought, I feel that Giles, as her father figure, should have brought up the topic with Buffy when Faith recovered in S4. Buffy tried to take a human life – we can debate whether that was right or not, but I’m fine accepting that this happened — the act itself, however, is something huge, especially in a show that aims to explore the complexities of human choices.
Why no ex-post moral-conflict for Buffy?
2. What’s its meaning in light of Faith’s role as Buffy’s shadow/dark-self (the Iago to our Othello)?
I can understand that the Council’s unwillingness to help Angel was the last straw for her in this season, so she made the decision of leaving them, she “graduated.” More generally, she’s leaving high school, she is no longer a child, she’s now a young adult making her own choices. I also can buy that the way the “cure” was presented (“to drain a slayer’s blood”) initially lead us to believe that it meant to kill a slayer. But I’m having some trouble reading the metaphor behind the attempted murder… there must be something else.
The only way I can rationalize it somehow is that Buffy is presented with two options:
a) Let Angel die. Angel may not be human, but he has a soul. Putting aside his Angelous recent past, he is working with the Scoobies trying to save humans in general and trying to save the world from the Mayor. He’s part of the group and he is her lover.
b) Feed Faith to Angel. Faith is human and has had a difficult life, but she already made her “choices.” She’s siding with evil and she’s expecting to have a bigger role once the Mayor ascends.
Given the options, young adult Buffy puts the Council’s rules aside (“not helping vampires under any circumstances”) and makes her own choice, to kill fellow human. But I still think that I’m missing something here.
Any thoughts?
More generally, we have another thread regarding the AR in S6, so playing devil’s advocate here, was the attempted murder really needed for the story somehow? What am I missing?