maggie2 | Notes on Buffy 1.07: Angel

Notes on Buffy 1.07: Angel

Standard disclaimer: I'll often speak of foreshadowing, but that doesn't mean I'm at all committing to the idea that there was some fixed design from the word go -- it's a short hand for talking about the resonances that end up in the text as it unspools.

Standard spoiler warning: The notes are written for folks who have seen all of BtVS and AtS. I'll be spoiling through the comics as well. Basically -- if you are a spoiler-phobe and haven't seen or read it all, read further at your own risk.

Standard Credits: I've written the material in black; Strudel (aka my Bro) writes in blue;

local_max writes in purple. Or at least, that's what they've done when I finish editing and formatting!

Angel, aka Buffy’s Love Life part 3, in which Angel Shows His True Face, and the Greatest Romance of All Time is Launched.

Things aren’t what they seem. We’re coming in for the first big pay-off on that, so it’s appropriate that the episode opens with the first two plays on the theme.   First we see Collin, the anointed one who looked like an innocent. Next Darla enters -- the vampire dressed like a school girl who we thought was going to be the first innocent victim of the show. Strudel: Note that Darla suggests that she's picked her costume because Angel is now into high school girls. Max: Which is particularly disturbing when you consider that Darla had picked out the high school outfit before Buffy's first day at Sunnydale High. Was Angel stalking Buffy at school back at Hemery long enough for Darla to notice?

Prior to the reveal almost everything Angel says is laden with meaning, starting with “good dogs don’t bite”. It’s fun to watch how carefully they threaded the needle of screaming he’s a vampire without having him say or do anything that could be used to prove he was a vampire.    A fairly well-executed plot twist (unlike many that follow).

Max: Now now, Maggie, what could you be referring to?  Maggie, hmmm...

Romance which is not what it seems, but which really is a romance. Willow is firmly set-up as the B/A cheerleader. She’s all romantic about it, rose colored glasses. Except the one time she accidentally strays into the observation that Buffy is going to age and Angel isn’t.   The episode quietly reminds us that the differences are even more profound. Angel’s had a fully adult hot sexual relationship with a woman (Darla) and now he’s playing with the chaste sixteen-year-old. His apartment is that of a sophisticated adult, full of books and objets d’art. Elegant. The contrast with Buffy’s room couldn’t be more pronounced. The episode has a running gag with Buffy’s complete lack of interest in history. While Angel reveals some very hard truths about his past as a vampire with a soul, including killing his own family, he still lies when he tells her that he hasn’t fed from a living human since being cursed. He lies at the top of the episode as well when he tells Buffy he wasn't following her (he was). Strudel has a long dissertation of just how much Angelus is on display here below.

Max adds: The contrast between Willow and Xander's reactions to Buffy & Angel are I think significant beyond just their respective roles in the A/B/X/W quadrilateral in this season. They both have an obvious investment in how Buffy and Angel works out, because Bangel spells the end of Bander. But I think their attitudes on Angel, morally, have a lot to do with their different views of the world: Xander stands in judgment that Angel is a vampire ergo evil, and we find him in this "judgment" position quite often, including of Buffy; Willow just wants everything to work out in a way in which everyone is happy, regardless whether it's "right" or not.

That said, Buffy and Angel are genuinely drawn to each other. Buffy offers to let Angel kill him, and he really can’t even though he admits he wants to. Instead, he stakes his sire and century-long lover. And the ending scene really is poignant, with both of them knowing they should walk away, but not being able to do it. They kiss and her cross burns into his chest. We are getting two stories here. It’s about the way romantic lenses can obscure reality ---- these two could never be happy in a house with a picket fence. There is nothing about these two that could make a real relationship work or make sense. The gauzy romantic lens is being called out or subverted in many ways. But the romance is still affecting as romance. .

The final affecting image sets up the big reversal to come: Angel may have a temporary burn mark on his heart, but Buffy is the one who is going to walk away with a permanent scar. She may be tempting him to live, but he ends up seriously damaging her capacity to live fully.

Local-Max: How temporary is the burn? Angel burns for 100 years after Becoming, but still (arguably) recovers to open up his heart to Cordelia a year or so before Buffy tells Spike she loves him. Depending on how one reads season eight, that might not have been enough for her. Of course, how much Angel does open up his heart to Cordy is another matter--c.f. whispering Buffy's name in "Awakening."

Angel as a hero watch. He finally saves her! Twice! Go Angel!!

Angel/Angelus. Both the Scoobies and the vampires use the names interchangeably. The accent is on Angelus as the evil version, but Angel in the past is referred to as Angel. The reveal has Angel’s demonic face appearing in an uncontrollable way. Darla goes on to say he can only suppress his true nature for so long. Angel doesn’t disagree with her on this point. He visibly has to restrain himself from succumbing to the temptation to dine on Joyce when the opportunity presents itself. And we actually get a fairly accurate description of what is going on here. Angel is a demon; the soul is simply a conscience. Without it he doesn’t care about the harm he does. With it he cares enough about the harm to try to reign in the strong desires to do harm (both towards Joyce and towards Buffy). The idea that Angelus is an entirely separate person is going to come later, but I think it’s clear both from what is said and shown here and what is said and shown in AtS that the idea that they are separate entities is a fiction that is convenient to everyone in the aftermath of Angelus’s actions in season 2. Just last week we saw a dry-run on the process of setting up a convenient lie about the demonic behavior of our friends.

Max: Another revealing moment is when Angel describes the Gypsy girl he murdered as "dumb as a post"--sounds like he still sees the world much the way Angelus does. Maggie replies: Worse, when we see the scene of his interaction with the gypsy girl over on AtS, she's all trussed up and terrified -- it's not like he actually interacted with her as a person enough to have any basis for judgment at all.

Family. Max: We see that not only is Angel demonic, but for the first time here we are shown that demonic vampires have a sense of family. Darla implies she loves Angel (in AtS she would not use the word love, but there's clear feelings there) and they were an item for a century-plus; the Master describes himself, Darla and the Anointed as a tight family unit, with Angel the prodigal son who will hopefully return to the fold. The Master goes into a rage at having lost Darla because she's his favourite--the only time we see the Master upset over something besides another of his plans being foiled. Vampires can feel real feelings, as it turns out. Buffy is identified by the Master as slowly destroying his family.

The other person who is identified with destroying families? Angel. He killed his family and everyone they knew. And Darla sets Angel up to kill Buffy's only (at this point!) close family, in the form of Joyce. Darla knows that this is a kink of Angel's: we later find out that Angelus killed Drusilla's family before turning her, and enjoys greatly repeating his initial destruction-of-family. (With the knowledge that Darla made him, we also get the creepy Oedipal subtext wherein one mother feeds Angel another mother.) What motivates Buffy to kill Angel is not some abstract worry about his nature (she's still gossipping with Willow about how nice her kiss with Angel was after his vamp-reveal) but the actual threat Angel poses to her family. And while Angel never does kill Joyce, he does pose a threat to her again and again, either directly ("Passion") or indirectly ("Becoming," in which fighting Angel causes a rift in Buffy & Joyce). But in the end, Angel doesn't kill Joyce (or Buffy), but kills Darla, who is the closest family that Angel has in the world right now. Angel is associated with families all the way down the line; he can't help but form them and he can't help but destroy them--whether his own or others'.

I won't go on about it for now, but note that Angel's immediate threat to Joyce contrasts with that other vampire's complete inability and disinterest in harming her.

In season eight, we have the return of the Master and Angel, but Buffy's only blood-family in the mix right now is not Joyce, but Dawn.

Nice resonance. After Angel’s revelation of his demonic face causes her to scream, Buffy explains the scream to her mother by saying she saw “a shadow”. She’s just seen how close the shadow lies to the surface of the safe ordinary world. But the shadow really is always lurking – here metaphorically; in season five literally. Max: And she says it to her mother, too, who in season five will learn something about shadows (on CT scans). Maggie: Exactly.

Other nice resonances: Max: Willow, to Giles, when he describes The Three, is upset that Giles always seems to know things and she doesn't. Giles: "Well, you weren't here from midnight until six researching it." WILLOW: "No, I was sleeping." Very early we're pointed to Willow's desire to know everything without having to put all the work in that's required in order to acquire that knowledge.

Also, in the early snarking between Xander and Cordelia (which helps set up their romance), Xander loudly claims that her dress doesn't make her look like a hooker. Darla, whom we learn later was a prostitute in real life (and never quite stopped defining herself in opposition to that--c.f. "It was my payment" in "Epiphany"), is also wearing a dress that doesn't make her look like one.

Summary on Buffy’s Love Life. She only has eyes for Angel. Since the lure has nothing to do with anything that suggests compatibility, it seems like we could ascribe it either to Angel as the mysterious romantic figure, or to Angel as the other being in Buffy’s life stranded between the demonic and the human. I tend to think it’s both. Also, there's chemistry -- they have a basic animal attraction to one another.

More on Angel/Angelus: Strudel: We have three cross burnings we can juxtapose. The Master grasps the cross to show his mastery of pain. Angel endures the searing of his flesh for the sake of Buffy's kiss (sigh, how romantic). Spike will later drape himself over a cross while reeling from the burdens of his new soul. The first, the Master's, is about power, the last, Spike's, about repentance. What of the second? While it looks like, on the surface, that Angel accepts the pain in the name of love, my thesis of the moment is that Angel's acceptance of the burning cross is really just the Angelus version of the Master's painful power grab, the difference being Angelus's preference for gaining power through manipulation. I admit, this is a deeply, harshly, cynical read of Angel at this moment, when he appears to be achieving the height of romantic devotion. But perpend:

Angel as a demon watch. For form's sake, I will refer to Angel as Angelus, just to set the stage rhetorically. In the first scene, we see Angelus doing what he has been doing for years, spying on Buffy. This time, it's at the Bronze. Now, finally, after all these years, this lurking seems to be of some benefit to Buffy since Angelus does manage to arrive on the scene to save Buffy from the Three. Go Angel, we can finally cheer, but this is Angelus's m.o. too, since he gets Buffy to believe that he is a full-fledged ally in the fight against vampires. Step one in any con: gain their trust. Together they flee, and, just as Angelus might have drawn it up in his long hours contemplating how best to insinuate himself, they escape the Three by ducking into Buffy's house. And in the panicky moment, Buffy invites Angelus in. It seems so natural and benign, doesn't it? But then we immediately start getting the hints about what an enormous breach this is. We learn immediately of the invitation-only rule that applies to vampires and the sanctity of home (Buffy worrying over Joyce -- "There's a lot of weird people [vampires] outside at night ... I just feel better with you safe and sound inside, [with a vampire who will shortly be mortally tempted to kill you]"). Angelus has already breached that sanctity, getting his invitation from a deceived Buffy, an invitation that will be echoed when Darla (and who else comes closer to Angelus than Darla?) deceives Joyce to walk through the same door.

The deceptions continue throughout their dialogue. Don't worry, he tells her, vampires can't come in unless invited (implying he isn't one). Why were you there? "I was just out walking." Why do you hunt vampires? "They killed my family." (Yeah, yeah, he doesn't say that, but he lets Buffy believe that). He also has to pretend he can eat the dinner she got for him. And he avoids telling her how old he really is. Yes, we can understand the deceptions, but let's face it, this is all pure Angelus, and, with Angelus, conversations can barely move an inch without him needing to walk a fine line with the truth.

Angelus then penetrates the inner sanctum, Buffy's bedroom. Buffy has him look out her window while she gets undressed, but we have to wonder how many times has Angelus peered in those windows to watch her. After all, he's been watching her for a long, long time before he even makes his presence known to her. "You even look pretty when you go to sleep," he says when she's changed for bed. That's a funny way to say she's pretty in her PJs, which makes me think he's actually saying he has seen her go to sleep before (this line also prefigures one of Angelus's creepiest messages to Buffy in Season 2, the drawing of her asleep). Even when denying that he read her diary (is that remotely plausible?), he highlights his lurking skills by saying he hid in the closet -- but he didn't just hide; ever the spy, he watched Joyce straightening up the room. It's not clear this is a tenable story (is Joyce really going to straighten up Buffy's room and move her diary?), but Angelus moves the inquiry away by saying how much he's wanted to kiss her.

And here is where we get to the ick. All along, we've been watching as Angelus slowly lures Buffy in, with the coy messages, the gruff chivalrousness, the darkly handsome brooding. He's got her where he wants to and now the conquest is getting closer and closer. I think Xander nails it when he calls the gentlemanly chaste sleeping on the floor routine "the oldest trick in the book." And so, Angelus has lured her in, and now he proceeds to the kiss. Right away, anyone with a brain, especially anyone with the experience of an immortal watching the frequent waxing and waning of mortal lives, will know how wrong this is. Sixteen year-old Willow stumbles into this recognition ("it's kind of novel how he'll stay young and handsome forever, although you'll still get wrinkly and die, and ... oh, what about the children?"). Angelus even says this is impossible and should not be, but takes not a step away from Buffy. He doesn't pause or pull away when they cross this line.

Now, admittedly, the next part of the seduction is a bit harder, what with Buffy wanting to kill him and everything. As I watch Angelus with the crossbow pointed at him, I see no real concern that he's about to get dusted. He's a poker player and he's going all in when he stands before her, defenseless, and confesses a smattering of his crimes (including 'fessing up that he's the one who killed his own family). It's an audacious and gutsy gamble -- unless you think that he's seen Buffy's cards. I think he has. He knows (and not just from the diary -- Angelus reads his victims well) he's got her wrapped around his finger and that she will be looking for reasons not to kill him. I don't know that the text proves this point one way or another, but Angelus does not look scared or desperate when facing Buffy at this crucial moment. He looks like he knows he's going to win. And indeed, he does. And once again when they kiss, with her now knowing she's kissing a vampire, he once again says this cannot be, and he once again takes not a step away. She's the one who has to step away. Yes, yes, he's got the burn on his chest, but what's pain in the pursuit of this, the hardest conquest? (Think of it this way, if Spike had one-upped Angelus by bagging himself a Slayer or two, wouldn't it be an even bigger coup if Angelus could bed one?) If this is Angel the hero, this is a hero Angelus would be proud of.

Maggie replies: I do think that's all in play -- Angelus is always inflected in Angel. But let us do recall that Angel has some good motives here. He's been moved by Lolita, er... I mean the teenage girl with the large heart. She really has inspired him to get into the game of trying to beat back the forces of darkness. That's his conscious idea, and it's plainly a better idea than moping around in alleyways eating rats. In this episode Angel does finally step up to the plate and do some saving. That his m.o. is pure Angelus just reminds us of the ginormous gap between who Angel aspires to be and who he actually is. That's what's so dangerous. Angel is in denial about who he is to himself, and that's what makes his denial to Buffy as effective as it is. Indeed, much as I'll emphasize Buffy's romanticized view of Angel as her knight-protector; Angel has a romanticized view of Buffy as the vision who called him out of the alley and onto the path of being a champion.

One quick note: Spike flat out says he always thought that bedding a slayer would be better than killing one in Wrecked, so you're not just making up that comparison. Cool!, I love it when I'm not just making stuff up!

So, yes, Angel has some ostensibly good motives here, but they are all filtered through Angelus. Help the girl? How 'bout let's seduce her? Do selfless acts of good? Who said anything about having to do that? It is worth remembering that Angelus has barely done a lick of good in his hundred or so ensouled years, so it makes sense that he's a bit of a novice at figuring out how to do the right thing. Unfortunately for him and Buffy, he's gotten off to the wrong start. Instead of becoming her ally, he decided to be her lover, which sets them on a disastrous course, and emotionally cripples Buffy for the better part of six seasons or more. Doubly unfortunate, we'll see that he actually starts learning about this heroic redemption stuff, but it comes too late to undo this disastrous first move of his. He became Angel too late to stop Angelus from screwing this up.

Max: Let's add staking Darla to the list. Angel is clearly very angry with her in his scenes with her. We don't know it yet, but it was Darla who rejected Angelus because of his soul, not the other way around. Angel's killing Darla at the end of the episode is a sacrifice that helps to prove to Buffy that he's on her side--"Look! I killed the love of my life for you! Isn't it romantic?" But Angelus has a good reason to kill Darla too--the moment he got his soul, Darla turned on him, the way she always turned on him when the going got rough. Now, after a century of leaving Angelus trapped with a soul, Darla wants to be best pals again, right when she's trying to marshal together an army for the Master, whom Angel both resents and fears. So staking Darla means Angel gets to feel like he's moved past Darla's influence and is a good boy now, and Angelus gets to kill the bitch, stick it to her and the Master, and close the deal with Buffy. Of course, while Angel doesn't talk about it much, we see in season two of his own series (and it's implied in "Becoming") that the revenge wasn't enough to get Darla out of his system. (Indeed, in "The Prodigal" Darla herself points out that killing someone does not free one from their influence.)

Anyway, Angel's seduction starts pretty early--you guys covered most of this in WttH/The Harvest, but I noticed also how in "The Harvest" Angel meets Buffy in the mausoleum, where the door leading to the underground is chained, locked and bolted. The Master et al. are planning on luring Buffy down as bait, so why would they lock the door? And why is Angel there in the middle of the day, when (if the door to the world below was indeed locked) the only way to get into the mausoleum was by the front door? We are left with two (not mutually exclusive) possibilities: 1) Angel has been waiting there since before dawn; or (the big one) 2) Angel is the one who chained and locked the door, and waited for Buffy to get there so that he could have another conversation in which to insinuate himself with her, while not helping her. Granted, it may just be an artifact of the plot (Xander apparently followed Buffy through the mausoleum but didn't notice Angel!), but it looks like Angelus-style manipulation.

Maggie adds: Season 8 has really plugged back into the darker aspects of Buffy and Angel -- hence this dark reading seems even more salient. But I want to underscore the poignancy of it. Angel *does* want to be Buffy's knight protector. It's the essence of his drama. The soul (and Buffy) give him ideals that are difficult for him to live up to given that he's burdened with a cursed demon at his core. The juxtaposition of his ideals and the damage he causes in trying to achieve them is what makes the guy such a compelling tragic figure.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

I certainly agree that Angel doesn't actually play the protector role -- the gap between what he is and what he's supposed to be is the point. But I think I'm going to have to stand pat on the basic draw for Buffy. She's already "the lights dim when he's around" before she finds out he's a vampire. We see the way she responds to him giving her his coat -- a protective gesture. It's not surprising to me that a girl who has to save the world might want to be taken care of. Buffy is no damsel, but a part of her wants to be. It's a complicated mix, but I think the evidence of a latent desire to be the damsel is overwhelming: she loves that he gives her his coat when she shivers; she pulls to him after the master is dead in PG even though he played a not particularly important role in the outcome; Halloween is all about wanting to be his damsel, and he hasn't fully talked her out of it at the end because in the next episode she's still mooning over Drusilla's dress; She runs to him for protection in Surprise when Spike sics the gang on her; her whole fear about Cordelia being ultimately attractive because she's such a girl. Oh, and the annoying little girl voice she uses with him. I'll keep pointing it out as we go forward, but Angel's supposed to be the savior. None of that has bad boy vibe to me.

That doesn't, of course, mean that's all there is. Motives being dense and all. Does she expect him to fail her deep down? That I don't see. But I do see him as reflecting thanatos along with eros for her. I think it's intoxicating to her that he represents both safety and threat. She has a lot of rage, and I think that's in the mix as well. There's the fact that the two of them are the only ones who straddle the demon-human boundary. Not to be underestimated, because it's clear that her 'otherness' is a problem for her. Note that these themes amplify for Buffy and I think that's part of why we open on season 2 with them as a 'couple' despite remarkably little interaction bewteen them for the rest of season 1. We'll see what you think when we get to Prophecy Girl. Anyway, her view of Angel is interesting. Not just Daddy. But definitely not not Daddy. I actually think the fact that she wrestles with the desire to be a girl to be protected and cherished is what makes her an interesting figure. She'd be less so if she were a Sarah Connors-style woman who most definitely does not need a man around sort.

Ouch. I never expected to go into this review thinking people would love Angel but I have to admit, I didn’t expect it to be this cynical or brutal :(

I appreciate that you acknowledge that Angel is very sincere in wanting to help Buffy but I gotta disagree with you about how manipulative he’s being here. I don’t think he’s playing games with Buffy or trying to seduce her, I just think he has very conflicting feelings about what he wants. He’s sincere about wanting to stay away from her or he wouldn’t have kept unseen for a year. His cryptic guy act in S1 is a lot about Angel trying to help Buffy but also keep her at a distance. For example, in The Harvest Angel tries to hide just how concerned he is for Buffy but the audience are privy to the truth;

BUFFY
You gonna wish me luck?
He says nothing. She looks at him a moment more, then heads into the darkness.
He stands there, not moving. Quiet concern on his face.

ANGEL
(softly)
Good luck.

I think his snarky smart-ass cover is as much for his benefit as it is hers. Angel has very low self-esteem so he’s trying to appear more confident than he really is and at the same time it holds Buffy at a distance, maybe even is meant to keep her uninterested, and it almost works;

BUFFY
I suppose some girls might find him good looking... (gets a look from Willow) ...if they have eyes, alright, he's a honey, but... it's just he's never around, and when he is, all he wants to do is talk about vampires, and... I, I just can't have a relationship...

It almost turns Buffy off him and his “shop talk” in S2 actually becomes something they argue about regularly. Even in “Angel” he’s telling Buffy that “I’m older than you, and this can't ever...” before he gives in to temptation and kisses her. And it appears he’s being totally sincere at the end of this episode when he says “he has to walk away from this” because we don’t see him again until Out of Mind, Out of Sight and he tells Giles that it’s too hard to be around her. He ends up getting sucked back in during Prophecy Girl but points for effort. Sorry, I’m getting ahead of us but what I’m trying to say is that I don’t believe Angel is playing games with Buffy. I think he’s giving mixed messages because he’s totally confused himself and is at conflict with what he really wants and what he thinks is appropriate. I just cannot see this as some elaborate scheme by Angel to manipulate and seduce her. IMO, if he’s guilty of anything it’s being too emotionally weak to stay away but at the same time I’m sympathetic to that because this girl is the first thing in 90 years that has truly sparked some life in him.

The Crush comparisons also don’t really work for me because I think the situations are just way too different. Angel only kills Darla when she’s endangering Buffy’s life and it happens way too quickly for me to see it as some calculated move on his part. If I were to compare it to anything in Crush it’d be the moment where Spike saves Buffy from Drusilla and knocks her to the ground. That was real and it was the moment Dru realised Spike really was out of her reach now.

The moment where Angel stakes Darla is one of those scenes that you really can’t appreciate until the following seasons add more weight to it. I think it marks a huge moment in Angel’s story where he makes a definitive choice about who he wants to be. He chooses the girl who took him out of the alley instead of the girl who lured him into one.

I've loved reading your thoughts as always but with this episode we just viewed it very differently :)

Vamps -- thanks for reading and for your comments! I think my brother (Strudel) is overly cynical. Our format may be a bit strange, but there are three voices here, not one.

I think all you say about Angel is actually right. I just think it's inflected by the things Strudel says. Angel does want to help Buffy. He has been inspired to leave the alley way. Absolutely. Yet it is also true that Angel lies to Buffy constantly. It is the case that he plays the mysterious stranger bit in a way that just is manipulative. He's in seductive mode from WTTH. The mixed messages might stem from his confusion, but part of his confusion is that he's Angelus trying to be Angel.

I think Strudel pushes it too hard, but the last line resonates for me: Angel is a hero Angelus would be proud of -- not in terms of aim, but in terms of method. You are talking about Angel's aims (his sincere aims); Strudel about how they get played out. What is great about the character is that he really is both. Your Angel and Strudel's Angel are the same guy.

Good point about the limitation of the Crush comparison. But I actually think it works. Unsouled Spike would only see the external similarities and not the way they are different. The greatness of the portrait of season 5 Spike is that he's aping good behavior that he doesn't understand. See Triangle where he wants props for not dining on the victims. He's so confused then. (Interesting that for both vamps the complexity drives from their effort to reconcile their core beings with their aspirations. Angel has the aspiration implanted with the soul, and has difficulty navigating things because he jumps to identifying with the aspiration and doesn't fully realize how much of himself isn't playing on that team; Spike internally adopts the aspiration, but without the soul he doesn't fully understand (or understand at all) what the aspiration is. All of this should tell you why I think the vampires are an essential part of the show -- their issues are so interesting!)

It's crazily good. Or at least I think so. The second arc (of four) is like a tour of all of Joss' weaknesses as a writer, but still entertaining; the third and fourth make up for it though.

Oh, You think You're really clever, eh? Pecking at my weakest argument! :-P

That the romance is also played as something real doesn't suggest to me that it's shown as healthy; very damaged, disturbed people do have feelings.

This is true.

But it kinda grates on my nerves that Buffy is stuck in that place - i don't need another gun toting, ass kicking woman who is infantilized in her emotional journey. And hey! Aycheb is totally right: to make Buffy stuck permanently, Whedon even bends Spike until he is "same-same, but different".

On a tangent (since i'm rambling about Spike anyways) i'd say that the depiction of the Buffy'n'Spike relationship is the one that strikes me as the truest a vampire/human relationship (season 6) could be: death and life mesh when death is seriously confused and frustrated and life is seriously depressed and hollow. All these Bella/Edward or Buffy/Angel human/vampire relationships are serious romantic bullcrap. Hurt, abuse and violence is how to do a vampire/human relationship if You take the metaphors seriously.

There’s a similar pattern to her relationship with Spike, he’s also the impossible one who then becomes the one who needs saving and then he leaves. There’s a reason she can’t tell them apart.

And here i thought if noone ever said it out loud - it had not to be true. Damn You. (Of course You are right - it is depressing.)

You said that beautifully!

Oh, it happens when i ramble: Of course Buffy/Angelus (late season 2) is a true depiction of human/vampire relationship, too.

Now you're dead to me. Sarah Connor is the most interesting female character, hell character period, in the history of interesting. Buffy I love like a daughter but Sarah is everything.

In the early seasons Buffy is only 16, her occasional reaching for protection and her complaints about her missing normal life seem to me to reflect a wish to go back to being a child not to become a damsel. Childhood is a biological state we grow out of, damselhood being a social construct not so much. Even as a child Buffy impresses Giles as the most capable one he's ever known. Even her relapses are ambiguous:

Angel's coat isn't a big woolen fatherly overcoat, it's a leather jacket - the very definition of bad boy. Halloween is about wanting to be the kind of girl she thinks he would have liked it's echoing his inferred latent desires not hers and her joyous relief when that particular spell ends "I'm back" is palpable. She goes to his place in WML part one to hide, not to be protected and in part two she saves him (because no-one messes with my boyfriend). In Suprise she goes to Angel's flat because she's afraid for him, he's the one that needs protecting. She's afraid again form him, of what will happen to him, when he's planning to take the arm on an overland trip.

Even in the earlier seasons and certainly by the later ones Buffy needs a man not to save her but for her to save. In S8 she gives into Angel when he plays the vulnerable card, when he admits to being terrified when all but begs her to try this thing because he can't be happy without her. In #35 when he offers her their own personal picket-fenced in universe, (safe, happy, no more deat,h no more fighting, just him) she immediately senses that it's a trap and can't get out of there soon enough. Brings him along because she's still trying to save him, give him a chance to redeem himself for whatever he's done. Buffy's problematic fantasy here isn't Angel the knight in shining amour, it's Angel the damsel, the man she has to persuade he might be worth saving.

Now you're dead to me.

In earnest,or hyperbole? Internet can be confusing about tone.

Don't mistake me about Buffy's desire for protection. It's not *who* she is. Not remotely. She actively resents it when it's forced at her. And she does do far more saving than being saved. But a part of her wants someone to take care of her. This is understandable and fully human. Nobody is entirely self-sufficient. And the confusion of gender roles just is part of Buffy's drama. It's not hardly her main note. It's just a note that I think objectively is in the mix.

Later on the fixation on Angel encompasses many other things besides. This note becomes less pronounced than it was in the beginning. Feeling bound up in his project of redemption is part of it. We'll see what you think of my read as the story unfolds. If you're still reading, that is.

Didn't mean to be disrespectful about Sarah Connor. She is very interesting. I don't think gender roles are purely social constructs that we just shuck off. That's why I think Buffy's confusion about how to navigate her strength is a compelling story. But I want to take back the implied diss on Sarah. She's not really dealing with gender role questions. But she's a compelling figure for what she is -- which I can't seem to manage to put in words at the moment. But I can certainly see why someone would see her as the most interesting character in the history of interesting.

Well, I'm also clever in avoiding the stronger parts of your argument. I want to reemphasize that I see your point about Kitty/Peter, though it's very latent for me, probably because my introduction to the character (outside of knowing that she could go through walls) was through Astonishing X-Men and she saves Peter pretty much immediately in that story. This ties in actually to aycheb's point about Buffy saving Angel (and then Spike), so.... I've picked up a TPB of the Dark Phoenix arc, which introduces Kitty, though, so once I read it I might have a different take.

On Buffy & Angel, I'm waiting to see how season eight plays out to talk definitively about what Whedon is doing with the story. On a meta level, the Buffy/Angel drama in season two remains a permanent part of both characters' stories because it is, ultimately, the thing that BtVS is most famous for. The Angelus arc is a big part of where the show's acclaim comes from, and a big part of why two shows continued on. I think Whedon is continuing to return to it because it remains alive in so much of fandom. If the world isn't over it, how could Buffy be? This is just speculation though.

I don't think it's so much a problem about Buffy running through some of the same story with Spike as she did with Angel. Buffy/Spike and Buffy/Angel are deliberately in contrast all through the line, and notably both Buffy and Spike, subconsciously, are using Buffy/Angel as a model for how to go about their relationship. Buffy is too scarred to open up her heart if it isn't associated intrinsically with pain and suffering. Spike has only seen Angel ever succeed with the ladies so he uses Angel as a model for how to behave. Buffy/Spike is a great story on its own but I think it also comments on and twists Buffy/Angel inside out like a pretzel. That means that it's going to cover some of the same (unfortunate) territory, though I'm not convinced that it validates it.

The big difference between Buffy/Spike and Buffy/Angel in terms of portrayal (as a vampire metaphor!), it seems to me, is that all elements (death and sex and life and hate and love) are present in Buffy/Spike at all (most) times. Whereas Angel and Buffy both buy into the Angel/Angelus split, so love and life are kept on one side and death and hate on the other--with sex as the gateway in between! Buffy/Spike is where the illusion that there is a line between Angel and Angelus (and Buffy/Angel and Buffy/Angelus) breaks down--though it seems that Buffy hasn't been able to fully process it, even by season eight.

I'd like to add that I'm ambivalent about the very dark read of Angel--which is something that I don't think got across very well in my comments. I do think that the read is plausible, and worth exploring. I think many details, like Angel's saying "Good luck," e.g., run against it. For my part, the reason it's worth emphasizing the possible read of Angel's dark side is specifically because it's de-emphasized in the show, and requires some digging. Angel's light side is visible here. The dark side is harder to see, but I think in play as well.

(Similarly, I love Willow--she's probably my favourite character--but I will probably go on about her dark side as much as possible, because while it's definitely present in the early seasons it's very well disguised.)

Great observation about Angel trying to keep Buffy away. I'd add that Angel's push-pull again has two readings: on the one hand this actually makes Buffy want him more, but on the other hand it is Angel's attempt to get her to stay away. Angel is a complicated fella, and I think both the valiant man and the seducer are in play.

In response to your series of comments, I think that Angel as daddy does get some fairly obvious play throughout the show; Buffy wants Angel to take her ice skating (like her father did), in "Helpless" Angel's description of himself wanting to protect her heart and warm it with his (cold body) seems to be connected with the episode's themes of parents failing their children. I tend to agree it's less about Buffy wanting to be a damsel as wanting to be a child, but it seems like the two are closely intertwined.

It is interesting that Buffy has a caretaking role for Angel. Certainly Angel wants Buffy to play mother/Darla in some key ways (though not as much as Spike wants her to play mother), and Buffy feels responsible for Angel as a parent does at several key points ("I Only Have Eyes For You," for example, and "Beauty and the Beasts" as you mention) but I don't think the two readings--Buffy as protector and as desiring protection--are remotely mutually exclusive.

And older bad boy and daddy figures also seem not mutually exclusive to me, especially when it turns out that daddy was a bad man himself. (This isn't a gendered argument, incidentally: Drusilla was totally a bad girl and a mommy to Spike, and similar for Darla to Angel.)

Satsu, Buffy, choose Satsu. You know it makes sense.

In earnest,or hyperbole?
In British. Nobody dies. Cake instead.

In any case, I'm talking the Sarah of not only both movies but also the TV series which you may not have seen and which gives her many more layers. I think her story does have much to say about gender roles but the main axis is mother/son. Hence (very predictably) my obsession.

On Buffy, I think your take is going to be quite different from mine if only because I don't see either Angel or Spike as quite as central to her story as you (and most people around these parts do). De nada.

Actually going ice skating is Angel's idea when Buffy admits she used to go to get away from her parents fighting. Also its convenient for Angel as they acknowledged when they made hi a hockey fan. Going to watch ice skating was the Daddy treat and she doesn't ask Angel, only Giles. By S3 Angel is very not Daddy which may be why she rejects the heart warming as gross.

All of these roles blur into one another at the edges, I just see very little of the father figurelasting beyond S2 in B/A at least from Buffy's side. I suppose though that, even though it's almost reached vanishing point, there's such a complete lack of father/daughter vibe between her and Spike that what there is with Angel may look more significant than it is by contrast.

Stop with the smart assing, already! ;-)

I think a major difference in the reading of the B/A relationship lies wherein one puts the emphasis to - season/timeframe wise.

I find a lot of support for Your arguments when emphazising season 3 as a defining hallmark of B/A, this is the season that plays B/A as 2 adults meeting (more than the previous seasons, anyways), as well as Buffy as the protectress from the beginning.

If putting more emphasis on season 2, eg. the picture shifts dramatically. I won't elaborate, since Maggie put it in better words than i ever could.

Now, i cannot speak for other people, but to me, the demphazising of season 3 when looking at B/A stems from the fact that i find not much pleasure in the forced angst during that time period. B/A went to the dark and interesting places already in season 2 - this "new and different" angst seems almost boring to me in comparison. I think i get where You're coming from - but emphazising B/A in season 3 means taking a lot of boredom as important stuff, to me. (It also takes away from the way more interesting Buffy/Faith dynamics.)

So, at least i know i'm biased, right? ;-)

Intellectually, i'm with You. But then, we do get into pop culture because of the pretty pictures, right? (And Jeanty will never sway me - JM on the other hand.... .)

...a damsel as wanting to be a child, but it seems like the two are closely intertwined.

I'd go so far to say a "damsel in distress" is a child. (An infantilized (wo)man.)

Well, I'm also clever in avoiding the stronger parts of your argument.

Aw, and now You try to kiss it all better. ;-)

If the world isn't over it, how could Buffy be?

Very poignant observation. Yes, more metacommentary by the writer - this time on fandom. But, really, this means the metacommentary overrides narrative and character(s). It also means the narrative moves behind the audience, instead of before the audience. It is a bit like - retelling yesterdays news (ideas), i suppose.

I don't think it's so much a problem about Buffy running through some of the same story with Spike as she did with Angel.

I was commenting especially on aycheb's point about the now. As in, season 8. Buffy builds up Angel into a hero - then he leaves. Later, Buffy builds up Spike into a hero - then he leaves (never returns, as told in season 8. Which is also the season when she cannot tell them apart).

If we only speak of the TV show, then You are absolutely right: Buffy'n'Spike are a deliberate contrast to B/A while also reenacting it (which makes it so good!).

Also yes to Your last paragraph with Your observations on B/A vs. Buffy'n'Spike: human/vampire layout.

I think I must have got the wrong end of the stick about the Crush comparisons. I thought people were saying it was a calculated move by Angel to make her swoon and seal the deal, so to speak. Whereas, what I think you're saying is that Spike was trying to imitate what he heard Angel did but didn't see the differences. That I can get behind, I just couldn't actually think Angel had any other motivations other than saving Buffy's life when he dusted Darla.

I can understand what you’re saying about Angelus creeping through. He’s always there. I just tend to think that a lot of Angel’s personality in S1 is an act and when we see that veneer crack (“Do you know what it’s actually like to have a friend?” ... “That wasn’t supposed to be a stumper”) it makes me feel sorry for him. Mostly because we know he’s ashamed of what he is and that he as a really low opinion of himself, so I don’t know if seducing Buffy is a conscious effort on his part or if he’s just playing a part to appear more confident than he really is. But, yes, he lies and he keeps things from her like when he says he hasn't fed on another human since the gypsy. I just can't tell if he's doing that to try and win Buffy over or if it's because he can't handle the truth, either.

And I agree that the vampires are a very important part of the show. They're very important to Buffy so they have to be! :)

I just can't tell if he's doing that to try and win Buffy over or if it's because he can't handle the truth, either.

Both, I think. With Angel, my answer is always going to be both!

Yeah that makes sense and I can certainly understand it. The great thing about these notes is that you guys are digging deeper and discussing the less obvious nuances in the writing, so it's much appreciated and I understand why you'd focus on this reading of Angel more.

I'd love to hear everybody's thoughts on Xander in this episode because I actually found some of his behaviour a little disturbing. I love Xander a LOT but his behaviour towards Angel has always irked me. He seems way too enthusiastic about killing Angel (and eliminating his romantic competition) and it never sits well with me. Giles also thinks "it is a slayers duty" but he's clearly more conflicted about the idea, whereas Xander takes way too much pleasure in the thought of it. I had a discussion about this on BF recently and not too many people saw anything wrong with it so am I alone in finding it kinda icky?

Yeah I think you're probably right!

Xander will come in for some heavy going when we get further into the series. Strudel isn't just harsh about Angel!!!

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 2 of 3

Notes on Buffy 1.07: Angel

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject