Is the show what we make of it or what the writers intend?

[dexeded]

Not sure if I should put this in the Bronze or here, so mods feel free to move this. My question is, to reiterate the title, is the show what we make of it or what the writers intend? For example, in the script for after Buffy slept with Parker, she was saying that her mistake was that she kept telling herself that it wasn't about Angel when it was all about Angel--but this part of the script was cut, because of a lack of time. Does this mean that was most definitely her reason for sleeping with Parker? Or simply that she fell for his charms? Another instance would be the the end of 'Chosen', when Buffy tells Spike she loves him. I'm fairly sure Joss and some other writers like Jane Espenson said that at that moment, Buffy was really in love with Spike (or something like that), so does this Word Of God make it true? What about the fact that Buffy rarely visited Angel on his own show, because of the seperate network problems? It's still canon that there was barely any communication between them, if only because of the WB and UPN issues.



(...My post seems confusing upon rereading it. So, er, just ask if you need clarification.)



I think there's a lot of leeway for us to interpret the show as we see fit, though I know I'd be using a lot of what the writers say as evidence against some view that somebody else has.

 

[Ripper666]

Uf yes I think your question confused me a little bit. If I understand your question right, you want to know if we interpret the story the way the writters want to?
(Hope that's it)
So I think of course there are moments in BTVS which you can hardly interpret in a different way as the writters wanted us to think about them/it!
On the other hand I think that there are much more scenes inwhich everybody can think his or her own thoughts, not important if they are right or wrong. I think that's a great fact. Just because of this we can discuss here in BB or with friends about BTVS or Angel.

 

[zobothehobo]

I think it depends on exactly what you're talking about. There are scenes that are very important to the writers (like that scene in Chosen), and they should be taken the way the writers say. These are the scenes the writers will talk about. In commentary, the writers will talk about the meaning of this or that scene or also in interviews. The fact that they said something about it meant that the meaning was important enough to be stated. However, there are other scenes that are left open for interpretation, like the cookie dough speech/scene.

 

[Icarium]

The intention is irrelevant. The whole point of art is to manage to convey your message. If it were as easy as telling the viewers/readers what their reaction is supposed to be, anyone could be an artist/writer. Joss can give twenty interviews saying he intended Scene X to be seen in a certain way, if I think he has failed to convey that message, I couldn't care less what his intentions were, unless I want to mock him about how much he has failed. For instance, Chosen is obviously intended to be a glorious victory based on Buffy's "brilliant" plan but bad writing makes me see it as an incredibly luck and undeserved victory against a foe that was too stupid to live and a victory that had nothing to do with Buffy's plan.

 

[Hale Caesar]

I think the stories are what people interpret them to be. The writers give us material, and as fans we decide what we believe to be true. In "Chosen" when Buffy says she loves Spike, I interpret that as her just wanting to comfort Spike I believe she still loves Angel. I hope this helps you answer your question

 

[Willow My Love]

The problem with amazing shows, and amazing fans, is people are going to interpret things differently, no matter WHAT the writers intend. And I'm sure some aspects of the show have way more meaning to some people than anyone intended. That's one thing I adore about this show. It really does make you think, while still being funny and entertaining.

 

[badwolf]

See with that scene in Chosen I absolutely believe everything Whedon ever said about it. That she did love him, that he believed her. And thus Whedon is God. 🙂

But I suppose everything's open to interpretation and the material is put out there for us fans to love or to hate, or in my case to completely disregard and pretend no such thing happened (if I hated it, ha!). But while I have my own views on certain things on the show, I generally go with what the writers intended, but certainly I don't always like it. It would be like disregarding the comics as canon, and while I could easily do that as many fans have done, I choose not too. The writer's say it's canon, so it is.

 

[WannabeWatcher]

Really interesting question!!

I think if the viewer has knowledge of how a scene/character/storyline was intended to come across then it should be taken on board but 'art' is a two way street - the creation and the 'audiences' reaction to it are sort of equally important -so individual interpretation inevitably comes first for the viewer.

As someone who hasn't created something for public consumption I don't know how I'd feel if it was my work....I'd guess I'd think what I intended is the true canon whilst accepting responses can't be controlled. If someone interprets it differently, that's their canon.

 

[Flannen]

I think any show, and books, films, art etc, have to be what you make of it. I don't enjoy a TV show or film, or read a book because I think I understood what the writer was trying to do; but because of how it speaks to and resonates with me, personally. Writers have a story to tell but they don't (and shouldn't) have control of how people respond or react to it, nor what they understand or take from it. There is always ample room for any person to interpret something how they wish, even if the writers/characters/everyone in the whole world says different, it doesn't matter. I think that you're personal understanding of characters, relationships and the whole 'verse that the show/book/film is in is entirely personal and thus you're interpretation of actions and events will be based on that and not what the writers tell you.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

Another instance would be the the end of 'Chosen', when Buffy tells Spike she loves him. I'm fairly sure Joss and some other writers like Jane Espenson said that at that moment, Buffy was really in love with Spike (or something like that), so does this Word Of God make it true?

Ha, this reminds me of a conversation that Flannen and I had once about "The Death of the Author" theory and audience reception and author intent and all that....good times, lol. I remember disagreeing with her.

My answer? Once an author writes something, and that work is put out there for consumption, the work is no longer his/hers. It belongs to its fans. The audience can and will do with it what we want, including interpreting it in any way we wish. Now, I didn't always believe this.

In regard to your concern about Buffy's "I love you" to Spike in Chosen, this is what I think; No, it does not make it true that the writers intended that, because in the end, it's about two things, 1.) how the actors played it and 2.) how the audience interprets/believes it. For me, it's obvious Buffy loved Spike. Some believe her words were hollow. Others who are on the fence find closure or comfort in Joss's words that Buffy did indeed mean what she said.

 

[nightshade]

I think it's what we make it, it's a piece of art and I believe art is open to interpretation

 

[Cast No Shadow]

I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to this, for example, lots of people think that Xander has a bad attitude towards women and female sexuality, which as long as you can back it up with evidence is a completely valid opinion to have, as it's what you make of it. However, the writers might think the complete opposite, and say that that isn't how they expressed Xander at all. That's also the writers prerogative, but I don't really think that the writer owns the characters more than the audience does.

It's like saying, is the way you see yourself the same as how others see you. You might see yourself as a fantastic human being, with a great sense of humour, whereas others might find you irritating and obnoxious.

Neither is right or wrong.

Hope that makes sense!

 

[kittenpoker]

It's like saying, is the way you see yourself the same as how others see you. You might see yourself as a fantastic human being, with a great sense of humour, whereas others might find you irritating and obnoxious.

Neither is right or wrong.

Hope that makes sense!

Right! I think this is a very complex issue and what you just brought up, adds more layers to it.
.
I fall into the up to interpretation camp for the most part in regard to art, but it's not a clear cut thing. (then again, what is?)

As far as how we see ourselves as opposed to how we are seen by others.... not only that, but we have motivations behind motivations and how does that affect things, or does it?

For example, I may hold the door open for the person behind me. I may do it, because I notice them and I just want to be helpful. Or, I may do it because I want them to notice my kindness and to give me the pat on the back "you're such a good person!" that I'm really seeking....

I guess that's strayed a bit from the is art objective or subjective discussion... sorry but once my wheels get turning it's hard for me to stay on track.

 

[SlayerFest]

I really don't understand that, "The writers say it's canon, so it is." mentality. That's like eating bits of rock because some boy on the playground tells you it's candy. In my eyes, Buffy was not in love with Spike. She totally said it to comfort it. I agree with whoever said that art is meant to be interpreted. How absolutely boring that must be...to think, "Whedon is god! Everything he says must be true!!" I over-analyze e.ver.y.thing. so it's impossible for me to accept some things because I think about it all in so many different ways...if that makes sense.

That's probably why I'm not such a huge fan of organized religion. I ask too many questions and come up with conclusions that seem to upset my religious family members. Hmph.

I ask "What if...?" too often to be able to accept every single little thing that Joss says is true, as the truth. Booooring. No...erm, offense to anyone who does. I mean, it is just a tv show after all 😉