Why did none of the characters have siblings?

ashsummers

ashsummers

Slayer
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
120
Location
Emerald Isle
So there's something that always bugged me about BTVS and I'm sorry if this has been discussed before but I searched and nothing...so excluding Dawn, as she is you know, an energy ball and all, why did the main characters seem to have no siblings?

It doesn't seem realistic that Xander, Willow, Cordelia and Buffy (pre all that monk meddling) would all be only children.

Nor does it seem realistic that if they did indeed have siblings, they just wouldn't come up throughout the entirety of the series?

Even Oz, Giles, and Joyce don't seem to have had siblings. Though it would make more sense them not mentioning it with these characters as they didn't mention much else about their families.

Wait just remembered Angel had a wee sister in his human days, Kathy I think? But any mention of Spike's siblings? Or was it just him and his mother?

It seemed the whole concept of siblings was something they only remembered in season 5 and then they kinda over compensated introducing not only a completely fabricated sibling but the first demonic sibling, Glory. Then they had a whole family centric episode ('Family') with Tara's brother and extended family.

Why do you think there were so few siblings?

Does it even matter? Were friends more the focus?

Can you think of more siblings?
 
I imagine it was to make it simpler from a writing point of view? Obviously they didn't know exactly where a lot of these characters were going so the best bet is only children with distant parents.
 
Darlene according to the Buffyverse Dialogue Database. Just plug the name into the search bar.
 
I also remember that Joyce called her sister to tell her that Buffy got accepted to college near them in season 3.
 
Yeah i never really understood that either. It might have shown a different side to their characters which would have been interesting to see. The writers probably realised that in season 5 with the introduction of Dawn I kinda wish they hadnt though, wasnt mad on dawn, she was so annoying!
 
I always wondered why every single one of them was an only child. Tara isnt though. She has a brother. But all the rest are. I know its done so they dont have to write them in but still its odd.

And aww Angels little sister. I always hate that he kills her 🙁
 
I completely agree, and I always thought this was so weird, too... I mean seriously, it would have made the character seem a lot more real, and it could have opened up ideas for some cool storylines and characters.
 
L
LauraGiles
[No message]
It's not something I ever really thought about, I'm an only child so I found the characters easy to relate to. Particularly Buffy in the earlier seasons. It made sense to Buffys early storylines that she would be an only child. She had to deal with a lot of intense pressure from her mum to do well as she was the only child.

It would have made more sense to have characters with siblings, but I don't think it was necessary to the story at all. It could have ended up being a character overload. We don't really spend a huge amount of time with anyones parents either apart from Joyce.
 
LauraGiles said:
Yeah i never really understood that either. It might have shown a different side to their characters which would have been interesting to see. The writers probably realised that in season 5 with the introduction of Dawn I kinda wish they hadnt though, wasnt mad on dawn, she was so annoying!
Click to expand...

I always feel the need to correct anyone who brings this up that even though Dawn didn't appear until season 5, she was alluded as early as season 3 (Buffy's dream with Faith in Grad. Day pt 2). I don't know why I get so defensive about that topic, no offense LOL!

Yes, I think it would've been interesting to see some more sibling interaction, but then again we see very little of parents other than Joyce, so I think it probably just made it simpler. Even on Angel, Gunn's the only one I can think of with a sibling, and she was killed off right when they introduced his character.
 
caitaintdead said:
It made sense to Buffys early storylines that she would be an only child.
Click to expand...

^I agree it made sense to me to have the sibling a only child. She had alot to deal with and her character is important and to me made sense. As for the other character's i never really understood. I always actually thought how it'd of myabe been interesting to see the characters have siblings. brings more storylines to the show, I personally would have liked to see that. Plus it was weird to see them have no siblings as for all my friends have siblings except one so it was weird they all pretty much had none.
well except for joyce, angel(so sad he kills her🙁), and buffy later on in season 59which was weird but i grew to like).
 
Yeah I really don't think siblings would have been necessary for the plot and it was certainly simpler without them but I just found it odd none of the main characters had any siblings. They could of perhaps alluded to siblings but had them as distant figures like their parentals. Only 1 in 5 families in the states according to time magazine are 'only child' families so it seems odd.

Then again I think being an only child in Ireland is alot rarer. I've only ever known two. i asked my flatmate just there and she says the same. Her Dad in fact has 9 brothers and sisters and my boyfriends Dad has 11. Big families are kinda the tradition here.
 
The writers wanted the Scoobies to be a surrogate family. Would they be as closely knit and dependent on each other if they had siblings?

By the way, do any of them refer to each other as brother or sister at one point?
 
I remember Joss saying that in Buffy, families were supposed to be dysfunctional..that's why Giles never had a serious relationship with Joyce..because it would have given Buffy a father figure. They wanted to show the Scoobies are all they have and how american (in this case but all families really) families can drive you to feel like a family only with your friends so I guess the same can be applied for the siblings thing..it's not realistic at all, I agree but I guess that's why they wrote it like that..as The Unspoken said, the Scoobies were supposed to be a surrogate family.
 
The Unspoken said:
The writers wanted the Scoobies to be a surrogate family. Would they be as closely knit and dependent on each other if they had siblings?

By the way, do any of them refer to each other as brother or sister at one point?
Click to expand...

$10 says I'm closer with my blood family than anyone else on this forum, and I'm an only child. Also, TaylorSwift, I don't think being an only child is exactly dysfunctional...
 
The Unspoken said:
The writers wanted the Scoobies to be a surrogate family. Would they be as closely knit and dependent on each other if they had siblings?

By the way, do any of them refer to each other as brother or sister at one point?
Click to expand...

'Restless' comes to mind, when dream!Buffy calls Xander "big brother" which fits their relationship quite well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom