Why, thank you for patronizing me.
You're missing out on the later seasons of Buffy, based on, IMO, the views you've portrayed on here about those seasons that show a complete lack or missunderstanding of them, that's not patronizing, its just my opinion. I'm entititled to like the later seasons and want to promote them to other people, and defend my opinions about them without being judged as patronising. If you want to take the debate forward say something different to promote your own point of view rather than just reacting to what other people say.
🙂
But I'll answer you're previous post properly if you want to go round and round the same point some more:
Be that as it might (and I do agree that whether Spike wanted to save the world or not, him leaving Buffy to fight alone doesn't make much sense), a good writer doesn't force their characters to do something just because the genre conventions demand it. There needs to be a reason for a character's actions. This is a trap in which Joss fell again and again, especially with comic relief characters like Anya, Harmony and Andrew.
Well write your own show then, rather than wingeing about Joss's show
You mean I dreamt up Joyce dying, Hank abandoning Buffy, Xander's troubles in finding a job, Buffy, Willow and Xander being the school outcasts and the myriad of other very much real life problems that the characters had to face in previous seasons? Just because they failed utterly to deal with their problems in S6 doesn't mean they have never faced such issues before. Heck, the whole seasonal arc for Buffy is pretty much "When She Was Bad", only excruciatingly slow and about as interesting to watch as drying paint.
Hank abandoning Buffy! That was hardly a major storyline, compare to the drama of junkie willow. Joyce dying, was joyce dying, it was a difficult event for them, but it was about Joyce dying, not about having to face their internal demons. Them being outcasts? That was a good storyline for the first seasons, but that was about a childs dilemmas, not about an adult facing his demons, and they can't stay school outcasts forever otherwise it would turn Buffy into Dawson Creek, with them never growing up.
Technicality? Really? That's an odd thing to say considering the entire show is about this "technicality". Vampires are killed for being vampires, I wouldn't call it a technicality, it's certainly big enough factor to justify killing them and sparing human characters who have done the same. Even more importantly, no one in the show bothers to explore the ramifications of Spike being so "human". Even after he manages to get his soul back they continue to kill vampires. It's an exception for the sake of exception, not a gamechanger.
Once again I'll say, they tried to kill him on numerous occasions, but didn't succeed, they don't succeed in killing every vampire, some get away, Dracula got away too. Anyway this was not the point I was making. Being a vampire is a symbolism of human traits towards doing bad and lustful things, Spikes vampire status symbolises this and it is these internal demons he is trying to overcome.
As for the symbolism - things need to make sense in the story itself too. For instance Angel is obviously a metaphor for bad boyfriend in S2. Does that mean the writers should have refrained from having him kill anyone since the run of the mill bad boyfriend isn't a serial murderer?
I think you're getting off the point here, you have to explain better what you mean by things needing to make sense in the story itself too.
No, I meant the internal consistency of the story. If in one episodes vampires need an invitation to come in, then in another they don't without any explanation offered, that's an inconsistency. Same with vampires first being all about evil, then for no rhyme or reason, some become capable of "love" and getting back their soul. I have nothing against trying something new but a decent writer does that without violating the internal logic of their story. Any idiot can write a story that's contradictory.
He wasn't first of all evil, Spike always had some level of human characteristics even in season 2 we saw about him wanting to not have the world destroyed, other people have talked about this argument in alot more detail already. Also he loved Drusilla as soon as he appeared on the show. Once again about the decent writer thing, write something of your own rather than wingeing about others attempts. There is no internal logic violated, just your logic which seems to say good and bad are polar extremes that never touch, reality is, as we learnt in season 6, that the line between good and evil is very thin and ambiguous indeed. Well Joss must be an idiot then according to you, but I don't agree with that personally.
Nice try but that's not really what happened. Anya without her powers is pretty much like Spike with the chip. Her mentality didn't change, she still wanted to smite people and missed her murderous ways. She was only changed by her love for Xander. And she later chooses to stop being a demon. I am not saying it was a well told story or even one that I like but it was basically the same story as Spuffy, only with 95% less angst and nakedness and dumb speeches. And it lacked the great stumbling block of Spuffy since Anya was human, so whatever changes occurred in her they didn't violate the mythos.
There are some parralels between the stories and you've picked them out well, that just adds to the interest in these stories for me. However there are differences too, Anya originally became a human out of the blue, she later chose to stop her demon ways after having chosen to start them up again. Spike got lumbered with a chip and the change towards wanting to love and be human came gradually. I think this makes for an interesting story personally of redemption for them both but going in their own unique ways about it.
I'm sorry if you thought I was being patronising, it is quite difficult sometimes to find the time to make these long responses when you have other things on your mind that you're worrying about
🙂
