For Smashed, I think there's a lot of "not on screen = not canon" which I wouldn't necessarily argue with. But still the intent is stated in the script for that and I think that goes a little further than a scene that was cut.
Whether you think Spike wanted to make love to her or hurt her doesn't matter because it's been in the text not just in that season or that episode but pretty consistently since S5 esp FFL when he talks about Killing Slayers and then how he's in love with Buffy almost in the same breath. "It's the same damn thing to you vampires" and she's not wrong about that.
Spike's "philosophy" actually reminds me of fin de sicle "decadence" (Fleurs du Mal, Symbolist art, Edvard Munch, Montmarte, etc); or as a visiting Scottish professor put it when talking about the period, "sexy death".
He said it in a joking tone and I honestly don't find it very funny, because "women" (the fantasy versions) were depicted as the source of both and dark, terrifying, fascinating creatures - femme fatale, vagina dentata, and so forth. And this was occuring (1900) along the same time as the first wave of feminism - more women seeking higher education, the right to vote and so forth, which I don't think is an accident. (That's the sort of thing Joss is referring to as "reactionary blowback" in his letter "explaining" S8 - hah - but he got it terribly wrong anyway.)
Like people argue that Spike wouldn't have hurt that woman in the alley. No, the chip went off and as Spike himself said, it only goes off with the intent to harm.
If we had to list every such example we'd be here all day. Possibly an entire weekend. Spike would never hurt anyone? Never raped anyone? HUH? *SMH*
Thing is, the authors allowed it until it came to a head. I think they were too afraid of losing Buffy (perhaps it's an insight into their own flawed views of heroes?) to their own narrative.
Buffy the show or Buffy the character?
Oh, I'm a dude. I don't know if I'm feminist or not; I just ask myself questions about the reactions I have to things and try to be aware of my own projections.
Oh I'd definitely say you are. "The radical notion that women are people too" - that's the simplest version. It doesn't mean anti-male, and for me there's no fancy theoretical framework to it. It's intuitive. And it's amazing how few people are aware of their projections. That's really admirable that you try, so kudos.
I think in a lot of ways that's why I feel betrayed by Joss and his comics, because I know he knows better and is doing it anyway. Whether he's satirizing fandom or giving in to his own kinks and fetishes, it makes no difference because the result the same.
PREACH
I had no idea about comichron, so thanks for the link!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: sorry, I had to edit my reply 'cause I forgot something
Date: 2013-05-10 07:25 pm (UTC)Whether you think Spike wanted to make love to her or hurt her doesn't matter because it's been in the text not just in that season or that episode but pretty consistently since S5 esp FFL when he talks about Killing Slayers and then how he's in love with Buffy almost in the same breath. "It's the same damn thing to you vampires" and she's not wrong about that.
Spike's "philosophy" actually reminds me of fin de sicle "decadence" (Fleurs du Mal, Symbolist art, Edvard Munch, Montmarte, etc); or as a visiting Scottish professor put it when talking about the period, "sexy death".
He said it in a joking tone and I honestly don't find it very funny, because "women" (the fantasy versions) were depicted as the source of both and dark, terrifying, fascinating creatures - femme fatale, vagina dentata, and so forth. And this was occuring (1900) along the same time as the first wave of feminism - more women seeking higher education, the right to vote and so forth, which I don't think is an accident. (That's the sort of thing Joss is referring to as "reactionary blowback" in his letter "explaining" S8 - hah - but he got it terribly wrong anyway.)
Like people argue that Spike wouldn't have hurt that woman in the alley. No, the chip went off and as Spike himself said, it only goes off with the intent to harm.
If we had to list every such example we'd be here all day. Possibly an entire weekend. Spike would never hurt anyone? Never raped anyone? HUH? *SMH*
Thing is, the authors allowed it until it came to a head. I think they were too afraid of losing Buffy (perhaps it's an insight into their own flawed views of heroes?) to their own narrative.
Buffy the show or Buffy the character?
Oh, I'm a dude. I don't know if I'm feminist or not; I just ask myself questions about the reactions I have to things and try to be aware of my own projections.
Oh I'd definitely say you are. "The radical notion that women are people too" - that's the simplest version. It doesn't mean anti-male, and for me there's no fancy theoretical framework to it. It's intuitive. And it's amazing how few people are aware of their projections. That's really admirable that you try, so kudos.
I think in a lot of ways that's why I feel betrayed by Joss and his comics, because I know he knows better and is doing it anyway. Whether he's satirizing fandom or giving in to his own kinks and fetishes, it makes no difference because the result the same.
PREACH
I had no idea about comichron, so thanks for the link!