![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
red_satin_dollTake a Moment: by
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
lanoyee. Gen, Buffy, Tara, Dawn. A "deleted scene" , post-"Grave"; Buffy bids a friend good-bye. Spare, elegant and melancholy, it's a scene I wish had been in the show. One of the things I love best about BtVS is how unsentimental it is generally, but sometimes, what I want and what I need are one and the same; no one else can determine that for me. This story gives me both, and it honors one of the most overlooked friendships in the Buffyerse: Buffy and Tara.
lanoyee recently began transferring some of her female-centric & Buffy-centric meta from her tumblr to her LJ "Take a Moment" was written shortly after a conversation
lanoyee & I had about Buffy & Tara in particular, i.e. Why doesn't anyone talk about their relationship? About Tara's role in Buffy's story? Because it's not something I need to fanwank out of thin air, or squint to see: It's right there onscreen; they have a connection to one another that Buffy never shares with Anya, or at least until "Selfless" brings the "Xander's Lie" arc full circle. pocochina thankfully mentions their connection in her 2011 meta character study of Tara, summing it up in quick, vivid strokes in just two paragraphs.I'd call Buffy & Tara my OTF (one true friendship) except that's bullshit: aside from Buffy being my favorite character in the 'verse (and possibly in fiction, period) when it comes to this show, I may prefer certain things but I don't "OT_" anything. But FUFAW (Favorite Underappreciated Friendship Among Women) is pretty unwieldy, and sound like either a disease or something two cats would do in an alley.
Tara may not get a lot of time on the show, and she and Buffy rarely interact directly but she plays a key or essential role in some of the best episodes of the series, and when she does, she not only sings, she soars: "Hush", which both mirrors and flips Buffy and Willow's first encounters in "WTTH"; "Who are You", in which she is the only character to realize that Faith isn't really Buffy, and she's never even met Buffy before; "Restless", as a dream guide to Buffy her connection to Dawn, as a sister, becomes explicit; "Family" begins with Buffy verbally committing to protect Dawn from Glory after learning that Dawn isn't "real", and ends with Buffy and Dawn protecting Tara from the Maclays and naming her as one of their own: "Who do you think you are?" / "We're family." (I recently rewatched that episode waiting for a conversation between Buffy and Tara at the end at Tara's birthday party, and was shocked to realize it wasn't in the episode at all, but rather from
snowpuppies's fic "Here Comes the Sun" )Speaking the words: "family" "sisters" "Summers blood" makes the commitment as physical and as real as mixing her own blood with Dawn's in BT.
Not in blood alone, but in bond.
The relationships between the women of the Buffyverse aren't an afterthought, something set to the side, they are absolutely central to it; and unlike most tv and movies shows I grew up with, the women of the Buffyverse don't relate only to the men, who in contrast enjoy rich friendships with one another. (Remember the popularity of the "buddy movie" esp in the 1980's?) That, for me, is one of the strengths of the Buffyverse. The women matter, and they matter to one another, as literal and metaphorical mothers, sisters, daughters, rivals, friends, and allies. They love, and choose to love, even when it's painful and difficult to do so.
And this may be behind my frustration or impatience with Angel, Riley and Giles. Yes, they have to leave, yes I get it, blah blah bitty blah. They can't stand the "fire" of love, so they get out of the kitchen, out of "women's space" literally and figuratively. I could devote an entire meta just to "Joyce's kitchen" as symbol of the Mother Principal, of Mater. The room where Buffy fights to protect Joyce in "Angel" and "Ted", where they have their worst fight in "Becoming Pt 2", where Joyce reaffirms her admiration and pride in Buffy in "Helpless", is also the room we associate with Tara's pancakes, and Spike fights for Buffy in "Touched". (The Mother Principle is not about literal gender.) It means something. They "chose" Mater and reaffirm the importance of love - raw, real, and messy love in all it's aspects, not the illusion of "romance". They bear witness to one another: you're important. You matter. I love you. I believe in you. Yes you fucked up, but you can do better next time. I understand you - or maybe I don't, but I can offer you comfort.
It's why we don't see Angel and Riley in the final battle in "Chosen" nor should we. It's why Giles absolutely has to "bend his knee" to the Warrior of the People, the Queen - and thank the stars that she is a benevolent one - if he expects to stand next to Buffy at the end. Or rather, behind her, in the final scene.
And it's one reason - of many - why Tara's absence in "Chosen" hurts so deeply; she earned the right to be there. Not as Willow's lover, not as a "perfect, faultless human being" (which she isn't, despite the tendency to canonize her as saint), and not even as Buffy's friend but as a powerful woman in her own right.
If I don't go into the politics overmuch here it's because I have a LOT more to say on the subject and am saving it for the moment; but also because it's dominated the discussion re: Tara for over ten years. Rage or silence and little in between the two. If I focus on her death, then I fail to celebrate her life, and it's worth celebrating. Her very existence as the first three-dimensional lesbian character in a realistic lesbian relationship is worth celebrating. And deserves a much better legacy than shameful silence and lack of any such characters that still exists - or rather, doesn't exist - in US television ten years later.
As long as we share her story she'll never lack for mourners and lovers, but if we fail to do so then she "dies", utterly and completely.
no subject
Date: 2013-06-19 03:01 am (UTC)I had to explain the whole idea of reclaiming language to her, and how Tara calling herself a dyke is completely different than, say, Warren calling her a dyke. And then pull out the deleted bits of dialogue from the Buffy/Tara conversation in the shooting script Dead Things, when Buffy's bemoaning that no one understands what it's like to have a relationship you have to hide from the world, and Tara replies, "Sweetie, I'm a fag." (I give Stephen DeKnight points for effort, and take them away again for incorrect terminology.) Even if the bit got cut, I felt that it provided a certain amount of evidence that Tara is perfectly capable of being blunt when the situation calls for it.
She still didn't like it, but I felt it was really important not to soften Tara's language in this scene, stood my ground, and left it in. I very rarely completely chuck out my betas' advice, but in this case, I really felt I would weaken the scene if I changed things.
no subject
Date: 2013-06-20 01:00 pm (UTC)Well I know naught about CousinJean (other than that they've written a lot of Spuffy stories), but I received much the same lecture back in the early-mid '90's when I jokingly referred to myself as a "baby dyke" to a gay friend in his 50's. He was genuinly upset and to him it was tantamont to using the "n" word. And gave him the same "reclaiming" explanation. I'd come out (finally) around '92, joined a lesbian support group where a 60-something grandmotherly type who had just come out as I had cheerfully called herself a "baby dyke"; there was Bechdel's Dykes to Watch Out For, "dyke detector" (instead of "gaydar") etc etc. I didn't have any "bad" associations with it.
If using "dyke" is bad, then what about the ubiquitous pink triangle symbol reclaimed from the concentration camps? The word "lesbian" comes from the island of Lesbos and sappho but gained currency as a term because of it's use in French 19th century pornography written by men. (I have a friend who hates that term, but only because she thinks it sounds like a disease, not because of the history.) Context is everything.
I wonder if it has anything to do with when (what decade/timeframe) someone came out? I don't know the history well enough but I'm guessing that "dyke" was reclaimed in the '80's alongside "queer"?
Tara replies, "Sweetie, I'm a fag." (I give Stephen DeKnight points for effort, and take them away again for incorrect terminology.)
*nods* I always wondered who spoke up about that (in my head I like to think Amber herself), although the line could have been altered with "dyke" or just "lesbian" and been fine. I'm wondering if it wasn't in the end more of a "cut for time" thing than any.
I very rarely completely chuck out my betas' advice, but in this case, I really felt I would weaken the scene if I changed things.
Good for you. Tara's growing confidence is explicitly her arc (from "I'm trying out some spicy talk" in S5 to "Still having trouble with that cramp? You might want to put some ice on it.") and if she came out in the '90's, as we can assume, then it'd be more odd than not if she didn't use the term at least once.
I've always told my best friend, when I'm reading drafts of her novels, that my opinion is just that, an opinion. (Although I am right 99.5% of the time and she always comes around. *lol*)
no subject
Date: 2013-06-20 02:10 pm (UTC)CousinJean was straight (so far as I know), and my age or even younger, but she struck me as someone who was a little... sheltered, perhaps? I suspect that the only association she had with the word was that she knew it had been used as a slur. (She became notorious later because she had the very bad idea of asking her friends list to support her financially for a year so she could have her fantasy wedding and take time off to write the Great American Novel, and maybe if she had time she'd finish her fanfic WIPs too, nudge nudge wink wink. This got translated in a lot of peoples' minds to "Pay me to write fanfic," which caused a HUGE kerfuffle, and she dropped out of fandom. We'd mostly fallen out of touch at that point, but it was quite weird.)
Most likely the line was cut for time, but it's possible that it was cut for other reasons. One of the really contentious subjects in fandom when seasons 5-7 were airing was that some fans like to draw an analogy between Buffyverse demons and Persecuted Minority Group Of Choice. They could fairly point to some episodes, especially on AtS, which encouraged that reading. But other fans were outraged at this, because Buffyverse demons and vampires are not just misunderstood and persecuted, they're, y'know, evil, with the killing and eating people stuff. Lots of angry meta was posted by both sides. I don't think that the ME writers had their finger on the pulse of fandom or anything, but it's not beyond possibility that someone pointed out that drawing an explicit parallel between vampires and gay people might be a trifle problematic in the eyes of some. Or that someone just decided that this could drum up too much more sympathy for Spike in an episode where they'd already had to re-shoot the alley beating because Joss thought fandom would never forgive Buffy if they kept the beaten-to-hamburger makeup from the first takes.
Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-02 12:29 am (UTC)Huh. I think I saw something similar, if not this exact thing, on
Then again my sweetie said "Why don't you ask for donations for your writing?" and I was like, uh, no I don't have that much content I'm not that good....That idea flies right out the window when it comes to myself. *lol*
One of the really contentious subjects in fandom when seasons 5-7 were airing was that some fans like to draw an analogy between Buffyverse demons and Persecuted Minority Group Of Choice.
I can view the show through any variety of interpretations and say, ok, I see where that person is coming from - but not that one for some reason. And in theory, it's not too far off from the way I view the show, i.e. the lens of dysfunctional family dynamics (the methods of oppression and fucked-up-ness are basically the same but on a wider scale) but I still can't. I've had one or two of those discussions and it doesn't work for me. In a limited sense? Yes, here and there. But it feels like a stretch a lot of times.
When I watched S1-2 I definitely saw how they were using the dynamics of being "in the closet" with Buffy, and it was amusing but I didn't think they were saying anything about gay people; just that it was a convenient template, just as horror and high school movie tropes were convenient to borrow. But, I could be wrong.
they'd already had to re-shoot the alley beating because Joss thought fandom would never forgive Buffy if they kept the beaten-to-hamburger makeup from the first takes.
And Christ on crumpet, maybe if he'd listened to that little voice of reason just ONCE....
*/end snark*
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-02 02:36 am (UTC)(My personal opinion is that people who pay Mark to squee incoherently are wasting their money, but it isn't the same thing as paying for fanfic. But that's just me.)
I think the demons = PMGoC thing got a boost from Angel: the Series, where there were a lot more neutral and even goodish demons than there were on BtVS. There was episode in the first season where a group of nasty, Nazi-like demons was trying to exterminate another tribe of basically harmless demons. And another episode in second season where a group of humans was trying to exterminate all demons, whether they were nasty or harmless. Plus you have a main demon character (Lorne) who's coded gay, and was a very popular and sympathetic character. But it doesn't work for demons overall.
BtVS's scorecard on racial issues was Not Good. :P
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-04 01:03 am (UTC)You're right; I really hadn't thought that through all the way. I guess that was my gut-level (or knee-jerk) reaction to the mediocrity of the comics.
This has caused some odd arguments where some newbie fan runs across the concept of print fanzines and has a hissy fit because OMG money changes hands.
Huh. I read in the NY Times recently that printed fanzines undergoing something something of a resurgence.
I have heard that in some fandoms the concept of commissioning fic the way you might commission fan art is starting to pop up, so maybe this is changing.
Is money changing hands re: fanart? I've commissioned that banner from
My personal opinion is that people who pay Mark to squee incoherently are wasting their money,
*LOL* I looked at his site once or twice a year ago and just didn't see the appeal. Especially the OMWF post, which was simply a video pointed at his face as he "reacted" to the episode. Oh PUH-LEEZ.
But it doesn't work for demons overall.
Exactly. And it's because IMHO they are "borrowing" the issues for drama's sake rather than actually make a coherent point about them. But then a lot of shows do this. Or they have the one "racism is bad!" episode (I'm looking at you, Crossing Jordan) but they repeat some of the same old tropes and undermine their point: White people coming to the rescue of black people, etc etc. (Crossing Jordan was funny because the show takes place in Boston - when my partner lived in the midst of city-wide race riots and severe racial tensions - but for the episode about racism the characters go down to Mississippi because, clearly, racism only happens "down South". *headdesk*
BtVS's scorecard on racial issues was Not Good.
Yeah, MASSIVE fail on that one.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-04 03:28 pm (UTC)But all those borderline cases excepted, if you draw an original picture of a fictional character like Sansa Stark, then it's perfectly legal to sell it. One of the big draws at old-style science fiction conventions was the art show and accompanying auction, and these days, you can make a living doing art of people's RPG characters and furry personae. I've got friends who basically make their living selling fan art.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-04 08:19 pm (UTC)But people certainly get around that. It depends on whether or not the original artist/photographer catches it, and has the resources themselves to pursue action. This is of course where corporations have huge advantages over individual artists.
The whole copyright/trademark thing does get pretty complex, doesn't it? A few years back my partner and I tried to study it and even went to a legal group for artists in NYC, so we could figure out what to put down on the contracts with her clients, and there were only more questions than answers.
I've got friends who basically make their living selling fan art.
I'd better not mention this to my sweetie, who hopes to make an income in retirement from her paintings. (Which are good, but an actual income? Not so sure about that.) Unfortunately she's not a fan of anything in particular, so that would be a no-go.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-04 09:17 pm (UTC)Many of the artists I know who make a go of it as artists draw a lot of stuff that they're not fans of, because it's a paycheck. One of the most lucrative sources of income is commissions for furry porn. :/ And while it's a living, I'm not sure I'd call it a good living - no insurance, no retirement fund, etc. Most of them manage to pay the bills, but it's a way more financially precarious life than I'd want to lead. There's a reason I got a boring office job. *g*
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-04 10:47 pm (UTC)I have no idea WHAT that is - and I'm afraid to find out - but that phrase is making me laugh my ass off nonetheless.
Many of the artists I know who make a go of it as artists draw a lot of stuff that they're not fans of, because it's a paycheck.
She's really great at animals esp horses - she sold three copies of a bronze horsehead, sold equine paintings as recently as this year, was commissioned to do a relief of someone's cat etc - and lots of people encouraged her to stay with animal art but she wants to "do different things". Now she's doing downtown buildings, next week she might do landscapes again. Kinda hard to make a name for yourself as an artist if you're all over the map stylistically and in terms of subject matter. *sigh*
There's a reason I got a boring office job.
Oh definitely; most of the artists Judy knows (or knows of) either make their primary income through teaching - or are married to someone with a comfortable income and can support them. I guess she should have aimed her sights higher than me. She actually makes her living as a licensed physical therapy assistant; she had fantasies of quitting that when she took time off to return to art school ten years ago in mid-life, but went right back to PTA for the steady salary. She's just a couple years away from retirement.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-05 12:19 am (UTC)Furries are... well, the term encompasses anything from people who are fans of anthropomorphic animal cartoons, to people who think they are reincarnated ocelots, to people who have a kink for using plush toys or wearing animal costumes during sex, to actual zoophiles. The ones I know personally are on the funny animal cartoon end of the spectrum, but it's a very... interesting fandom. And a lot of them want to commission pictures of anthropomorphic foxes in Playboy poses, and are willing to pay through the nose for it.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-05 12:41 am (UTC)OH, I think I know what you're talking about! (But then I'm the one with a Winged!Buffy kink, so who the hell am I to throw stones, right?)
to people who think they are reincarnated ocelots,
But, I do reserve the right to chuckle about that.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-05 01:38 am (UTC)The otherkin subset, on the other hand... yeah. Chuckle, and perhaps roll my eyes when they complain about speciesist privilege.
Re: Sorry for the late response!
Date: 2013-07-05 05:27 pm (UTC)These folks obviously haven't watched "Lie to Me" I take it.
I googled "otherkin" and had the BEST laugh I've had in ages *ahem*, and then I read this bit on Wikipedia:
Religion scholar Joseph P. Laycock argues that the otherkin community serves existential and social functions commonly associated with religion, and regards it as an alternative nomos that sustains alternate ontologies.[3]
Note to self: Religion, freaky.