Some thoughts on "Harmonic Divergence"

[maggie2]

 

    

A really great and thought-provoking issue. Lots of layers and harmonic convergences. It’s also likely to be one of those episodes that take on a different shape depending on how the story unfolds afterwards. But here are some preliminary thoughts:

     First,  the surface of the story is a brutal critique of modern media. Any story can be spun in any direction. It’s not just “reality” TV that does this, it’s the journalists as well (see Anderson Cooper calling it “keeping them honest” when he brings in the person who’s spinning the story to come in and keep spinning.) 

     But one layer down we have to ask how this story is being spun. Harmony, recall, was a borderline figure in the battle between good and evil. She tried at W&H to be one of the good guys. And while she failed, she could rightly argue that nobody gave her a chance. Is it a coincidence that her first line here is “But I want in”? Or that the bouncer, who is suspiciously drawn to resemble Angel, tells her that he can’t help her and that animals are not allowed in the club? A lot of people have wondered about whether or not there wasn’t a tinge of racism to the idea that vampires are just evil (and slayable) while humans are not slayable no matter how horrible they can be. Surely a Warren is less redeemable than a Harmony. The point is underscored when we observe that in this issue Harmony goes on to embody the kind of “ambiguous evil” that Giles doesn’t think is worth fighting in Into the Woods. She’s sucking on people but not killing them; making them weak but it’s a weakness they choose. Definitely not a good thing. Maybe even an “evil” thing. But does it merit the death penalty? Cause that’s what La Cuchilla tries to impose on her. We are spun through Buffy’s POV, so it is natural for us to be horrified when Harmony kills her would-be assassin. But was it murder? Or was it self-defense? Or a bit of both? 

     We can also look at the scene when La Cuchilla breaks out of the gang. Her heroic escape. But it’s not clear from the picture whether she just knocked the girls in the gang unconscious, or whether she killed them. How many of us even pause to ask what happened to those girls? Or consider, what does Andrew tell La Cuchilla to convince her that vampires should be expunged from the world? They aren’t nice people, he says (no empathy or connection); they prey on the weak.   Plenty of humans meet those descriptions.  Buffy has at times met both those descriptions in the past, with the lack of connection part being a live issue in this series. We don’t think humans should be slain for having hard hearts and a bit of ruthlessness; yet we are to cheer when La Cuchilla leaps from Andrew’s description to the conviction that vampires should be exterminated. If she went after a garden-variety vampire it wouldn’t be so jarring. But she goes after Harmony, who is the very representation of the ambiguity of vampires in the ‘verse. We are meant to wonder about this, I think.

     Don’t get me wrong, though. I don’t think we are meant to seriously think that the slayers are villains. But I do think we are meant to see (a) why it’s plausible for some people to take them as villains and (b) that ambivalence is, perhaps, the appropriate response to those who use lethal force against characters who are “persons” in every meaningful sense of the word. That ambiguity has always been at the heart of the series. Espenson nails it beautifully here.

Comments

[candleanfeather.livejournal.com]

Here via Beer_good_foamy.

Great post. Your last paragraph really nails the ambiguity of the status of the vampire-characters sufficiently developped to be perceived as persons, or with visible human sides. One has to remark that Buffy was never never shown killing one of these (Dru escapes, Dalton is killed by the Judge, Spike... we know), except for the vamp prostitute, but then it was shown as problematic (and perhaps Holden, but the comedic aspect of the scene brushes any seriousness away).J Espenson's interview makes clear that it is also an angle that has to be taken into account.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Thanks! You are right that there's a special weight on Holden's dusting. And I do think it was meant to be problematic. Some of the real serious points in the 'verse were made in "light" fashion. For example, the Scoobies couldn't distinguish Buffy from the Buffybot. You'd think we should dismiss it cause it's comedy -- but the next season raises lots of questions about whether the Scoobies really see Buffy.

[candleanfeather.livejournal.com]

Hi, back again, I hope you won't mind, but if you have a little time, perhaps you'll be able to answer to my curiosity, which some of your remark awoke: though you're right to note that "Some of the real serious points in the 'verse were made in "light" fashion" (and somehow it's the case here as he reveals Spike's murders), I'm not convinced Holden's death was meant in itself to be problematic. So how do you see that?

May I friend you? I'd like to be able to follow your posts. In regard to my LJ, it's not very busy but I write meta from time to time and some fanfic.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Friend away -- but as you can see, I don't post much either. Though I do keep meaning to post more.

I'd have to watch CWDP again to give a proper answer about whether there are cues in the show that say we are supposed to see it as problematic. But I recall that there's that sad music by Angie Hart, and a montage at the end showing all of this to be pretty much of a downer. In the text, they have this exchange:

HOLDEN: Oh, it makes every kind of sense. And it all adds up to you feeling alone. But, Buffy, everybody feels alone. Everybody is, until you die. Speaking of... you ready for our little death match?

BUFFY: I suppose. Thanks, for listening.

HOLDEN: Oh, you know, there's some things you can only tell a stranger.

BUFFY: You're not a stranger...

(Buffy Dialogue Database: such a handy website).

She goes on to dust a guy who is not a stranger to her, to whom she has told her most intimate secrets. That's ooky. It's even ookier when we realize that she told him her most intimate secrets BECAUSE she was going to dust him. So she uses him as a PERSON, with the 100% full intention of disposing with that person afterwards. And this exchange which establishes him as "not a stranger" moves immediately to the reveal that Spike is killing again. Which is heavy matter of itself. So, yeah, I think we are meant to take it seriously.

As I come to think of it, though, this is NOT the first PERSON Buffy has killed. Two episodes prior, she runs Anya through with a sword. And that is definitely meant to be disturbing. So much so that they don't quite let that death stick. So I do think it's an issue. One that really doesn't get addressed again in season 7, but which is gurgling up here in season 8.

[candleanfeather.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the explanations. I won't follow you in your conclusion about why she confides to him, but there sure was some sadness interlaced with the comedy in their encounter.

Thank you also for the friending. :-)