We could go back and forth on your interpretations. I just don't think it's at all obvious that after spending 7 years defending the world from apocalypses as the only slayer and without any hint that she wanted to rob banks to get high tech weapons or anything like that Buffy has suddenly arrived at a world where the ONLY way to save the world is to rob banks to get high-tech weaponry. That's a case that needs to be made. Or, if it's all so good, why is she lying to Willow about it? etc. etc.
But that brings me to the real point. We aren't being told how she got there, which means we can't judge her actions. The money line in your comment is:
I don’t believe the Buffy we’ve known would balk at stealing from the rich to save the lives of her poor Slayers (and ultimately those of the rich as well).
But that's assuming what's in question. Is this the Buffy we've known? As I said, she feels guilty enough about it to lie to Willow. Willow's been quietly hinting at some other issues that suggest that Buffy HAS changed -- her being far more comfortable with the idea of killing humans, for example; or her having no way of distinguishing between her and the bad guys beyond attaching a label to herself.
Because we aren't told how she's got here, we have no basis for having a real discussion about what's really going on. You assume that BECAUSE Buffy is a good person and a hero there must be perfectly good explanations for her choices. Others of us look at bank robbing and other signs of real changes in her priorities and so on and wonder if the actions don't shed more light on the person than the other way around. But it could really go either way. And if that's the case, just how on earth does Joss expect us to seriously engage the question of the consequences of choices we can't even characterize because we don't know what drove those choices.
Which is why I'm banking that Allie's statement is either in error, or is misleading in someway (probably unintentionally -- he's unintentionally misled on other issues recently).
no subject
But that brings me to the real point. We aren't being told how she got there, which means we can't judge her actions. The money line in your comment is:
I don’t believe the Buffy we’ve known would balk at stealing from the rich to save the lives of her poor Slayers (and ultimately those of the rich as well).
But that's assuming what's in question. Is this the Buffy we've known? As I said, she feels guilty enough about it to lie to Willow. Willow's been quietly hinting at some other issues that suggest that Buffy HAS changed -- her being far more comfortable with the idea of killing humans, for example; or her having no way of distinguishing between her and the bad guys beyond attaching a label to herself.
Because we aren't told how she's got here, we have no basis for having a real discussion about what's really going on. You assume that BECAUSE Buffy is a good person and a hero there must be perfectly good explanations for her choices. Others of us look at bank robbing and other signs of real changes in her priorities and so on and wonder if the actions don't shed more light on the person than the other way around. But it could really go either way. And if that's the case, just how on earth does Joss expect us to seriously engage the question of the consequences of choices we can't even characterize because we don't know what drove those choices.
Which is why I'm banking that Allie's statement is either in error, or is misleading in someway (probably unintentionally -- he's unintentionally misled on other issues recently).