moscow_watcher (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
moscow_watcher) wrote2007-12-09 05:11 pm
moscow_watcher) wrote2007-12-09 05:11 pm
Entry tags:
Buffy issue 9 summary, analysis and spoilery speculations
Summary:
Brian K Vaughan uses any opportunity to delve into Faith's past and into her head. This issue starts - again! - with a flashback, this time dedicated to Faith's relationship with Mayor. Obviously he wants to draw a parallel to Gigi's relationship with Roden who now orders her to kill Faith. But Gigi, who has already swung her axe, conveniently hits Faith with its helve. She is mad at Faith at lying to her about her name, her goals, but most of all, about her nationality: "You're not even English?"
Is it written as a joke? I'm at loss here.
Gigi's rage is so devastating that she conveniently plunges her axe into a stone statue. Um, mister Vaughan... have you ever had an axe in your hands? I'm a woman, but even I occasionally hack twigs and branches for campfires. And I know that a metallic blade can't go into a stone.
OK, I accept it as a "suspension of disbelief" moment. Statue looks prettier. And it beautifully constrasts with the dynamics of the fight.
Meanwhile, Willow, following Buffy's order, phones Giles who is still trying to penetrate the mystical barrier around Gigi's estate. Buffy, furious, tells Giles that Faith tried to kill her. Giles has no time to explain - he has to save Faith, so he cuts Buffy short and asks her to put Willow on the line. Buffy feels betrayed.
Meanwhile, Faith-Gigi fight goes on, Gigi conveniently flies through the air and runs herself on her own axe. And, before she dies, she conveniently absolves Faith when the latter says she never meant to kill her - "Yeah. But it's like the song goes..."
Roden immediately tries to recruit Faith to kill Buffy, but, naturally, she rejects his offer and hits him with a Twilight's guidebook he offers her. Furious, Roden tries to kill Faith with a stone fist he conjures up from the earth, but cavalry in the person of Giles arrives in time and saves her. The battle between Roden and Giles is short and ridiculous: while Roden is conveniently standing there and posturing, Faith throws Roden's Twilight's guidebook to Giles, he immediately finds the necessary spell, puts the "mystic field" inside his opponent and Roden's head bursts.
Cut to the next morning. Back in Giles' apartment, Faith declares that she has decided not to quit. She has got her Big Moral Lesson and she wants "to play social worker to the slayers. Maybe I could help walk a few bad girls back from the brink". They decide to work together.
Meanwhile, somewhere in the jungle, a military helicopter lands on a tiny stone plateau. A woman in a military uniform with a Twilight sign on her palm requests the audience. A creature whose boots we saw back in issue 1 descends from above.
According to the woman, whose name is Lt. Molter, "their man on the inside" has reported that Buffy Summers was still alive. Flying Boots, who looks like Terminator in an iron mask, tells her that actually, Gigi and Roden were his targets. He plans to manipulate his enemies "into waging this ugly war, a tactic crucial for bringing the age of magic to a close".
"Night falls soon enough", he promises.
Analysis:
The second arc, as well as the first one, works OK as long as the reader doesn't overthink and overanalyse it. Analysis is a tricky thing here: a reviewer may easily turn into a whiner who complains about the lack of Shakespearean depth in a Shreck movie.
Well...
Brian K Vaughan loves Faith and this story is clearly her show. She's the star and everything else exists to showcase her ability to fight, quip and demonstrate the generosity of her spirit. I read comments from people who disliked her on the show but started to like her after this comic, and it's understandable: Faith really shines here.
But, unfortunately, Faith's greatness comes at the expence of everything else. Other characters's dialogs are either bland or sound like badfic snippets, like "Buffy's narrow ass lives to fight another day".
Vaughan's attempts to spice up Buffy's dialogues end up in some weird choices - "Faith and her droogs", for example. Buffy doesn't strike me as a girl who reads Burgess or watches Kubrick. (Well, she could hear that word from Spike - after all, his chip was a Clockwork Orange rip-off) :)
OTOH, Faith's culturological references sound spot-on ("Conan the librarian" - hee!) while Giles' "maybe I could be the Steed to your Peel" works mainly as an opening to Faith's priceless reply "I hope it's not as gross as it sounds". Have I mentioned that Vaughan loves Faith? I hope Joss will give him the spinoff rights.
Jeanty demonstrates some improvement - his Mayor looks great and Giles has several good panels. Faith is drawn better than in the previous issues, but Jeanty's alternate cover is incredibly ugly! Still there are some inspiring visual decisions in the issue, like Faith-Gigi fight taking place at sunset, with the blood-red sky as a backdrop.
About the story. *le sigh*
The story works great as long as you don't search something deep and significant in it. It's good entertainment, well-paced and provided with a requisite Valuable Moral Lesson. But it's a story of convenient situations, easy choices and artificial conflicts.
I already pointed out at multiple convenient situations in the summary. The ultimale convenience is Vaughan's decision to make Gigi's death accidental. He saves Faith from a hard choice - either kill Gigi or let her go knowing that she may strike again. Obviously, writer is too attached to the character to put her in a no-win situation.
Maybe my problem is measuring up comics by TV show standards. Onscreen Faith (as well as all the other characters) had been constantly put in no-win situations and had to make hard and unpleasant choices. Compared to them this watered down resolution is a shameful cop-out that highlights the very nature of comic-vs-TVshow dichotomy.
There are two types of conflicts between characters in fiction - real and artificial. Real ones are based on characters' different worldviews. Artificial ones are based on misunderstandings. This is the latter kind of conflict, when good guys are angry at each other because of unlucky circumstances. Giles doesn't want to cooperate with Buffy or anybody else in the castle either because he suspects there is a mole there or because he's overprotective. So he chooses Faith. Buffy finds out about his undercover operation in the worst possible situation and snaps at him, demanding the explanation. He can't waste time on explanations when Faith's life is in danger, so he snaps at Buffy, etc.
The problem with artificial conflicts is that they produce artificial resolutions. In the person of Gigi Faith killed her own metaphorical dark side and obsession with Buffy. What has changed? Instead of killing baby vampires she will be mentoring girls who kill baby vampires? I'd rather see her actively fighting.
Spoilery speculations.
1. So, there is a spy in Buffy's inner circle. If I were trying to figure him out using logic and common sense, my prime candidate would be Giles, because during his battle with Roden he acted as a person who knows the Twilight guidebook by heart. But logic and common sense are hardly applicable to BtVS (using logic and common sense I can easily prove that the real Doctor in As You Were is Riley). I'm pretty sure that Core Four are immune. Dear Xander fans, don't sweat and relax - this is a story of convenient situations, easy choices and artificial conflicts. The spy is either inadvertent (for example, New!Initiative managed to hide a bug in Xander's eyepatch) or an extra nobody cares about. Or he hasn't been introduced yet. (Just like the kiss of true love from a character who wasn't there in the room?) :)
2. Is Flying Boots the Big Bad of the season? Joss says he is. Anyway, by now the hierarchy of seasonal villains is already quite complicated to add another one. First we saw Amy and Warren; then we discovered New!Initiative; then we met Roden; now it looks like they are just pawns in Flying Boots's game. His official goal - to get rid of the magic - sounds as a trick to lull military's vigilance. After all, he's able to levitate! Could he be somebody we know? Easily. Military subplot and the promise of Riley return make Adam the best candidate.
3. Curiously, the detail that tortures me the most is the red demon on Faith's t-shirt on the last panels. It looks like the last-minute addition because it's obvious that it wasn't drawed but was copy-pasted from somewhere. The picture of demon doesn't follow the folds of the fabric of the t-shirt. I wonder if it was added to make the panels more vivid or the red demon is a foreshadowing of something sinister happening to Faith?
Bottom line: Interesting albeit not completely successful attempt to bring a bit of Avengers cool to Charlie's Angels universe.
no subject
I think you can find as much as you look for. If I remember your review of the first issue correctly you’d already determined to see the comics as a S1 style romp so kudos for consistency. However you’ve commented on posts (by myself and stormwreath) which do see greater depths to the series without contesting those points.
He saves Faith from a hard choice - either kill Gigi or let her go knowing that she may strike again.
Or play social worker to her:-)
Not all stories about the same stylized moral dilemmas, which are arguable better addressed by philosophers than creative artists. Is The Gift a bad story because Buffy escapes the ‘hard‘ choice she made in Becoming? Is Chosen a cop out because she doesn’t have to kill Spike? Or more to the point is Selfless being too easy on Anya by letting her live? The hard choice she has to make between her life and those of the frat boys’ supplies an all too predictable moral lesson, what makes it a great story rather than a simply competent one comes in the coda and it’s not about any ethical dilemma but about a moment of self-understanding that leads to her rejecting Xander’s completely sincere offer.
I think this is another story more about psychology and character than abstract philosophical notions. I don’t read Faith as killing her metaphorical dark side in Gigi, but as being being shown a funhouse mirror of the girl she used to be and the temptations she succumbed to from father figure to existential pride. Gigi’s death isn’t cathartic so much as a second chance, a chance for Faith to make different choices and find that she has changed. It’s less of a metaphorical shorthand but it recalls Spike’s being finally able to feel his soul.
Real ones are based on characters' different worldviews.
Buffy and Giles do have long established different views on whether the means justify the end. When Giles tells Buffy he doesn’t want her to be any part of what he and Faith are doing why do you think she lets the issue go telling Willow to help him? Since she clearly believes that Faith was working undercover with him and also knew Gigi’s intentions it seems most likely that she stops asking what’s going on because she’s figured it out. What Giles didn’t want her to have any part of was stopping Gigi, becoming the killer of another Slayer. It’s also more complicated than their argument about Spike because even if Buffy were to accept the necessity of lethal force against Gigi her current position as the heroic figurehead to 500 girls (the key link in The Chain) means that she can’t be seen to be involved. So I don’t think it’s a misunderstanding keeping them apart but an all too clear understanding.
no subject
Yes, I'm trying to stay optimistic by not raising my expectations too high.
However you’ve commented on posts (by myself and stormwreath) which do see greater depths to the series without contesting those points.
I saw enormous potential when I read issue 5. The only issue that made me cry. The only issue that really is on a par with the finest TV episodes, IMHO. Funnily, the majority of fans dimissed it as mediocre. :shrugs:
Or play social worker to her:-)
Good point. :-) - But not in Jossverse. Heroic sci-fi epic is hardly a genre for stories about social work.
I agree that Faith's arc ends as a story about psychology and character. But it ends as social drama while in the beginning there was strong tragic potential in the arc. I hoped for a bigger-scale conflict and more heartwrenching resolution.
So I don’t think it’s a misunderstanding keeping them apart but an all too clear understanding.
Interesting interpretation. I hope Buffy-Giles conflict will be addressed in the next issue. Because, frankly, what I see on the page doesn't convince me that Buffy understands the situation as you describe it. I only see her hurt and feeling betrayed. Maybe SMG could play a wide range of emotions here, but a drawing can't convey it.
no subject
But why does she feel betrayed? Quoting
"As for Giles, this is the guy who she forgave for systematically hypnotizing her, sticking a needle in her arm, lying about it, letting her continue to patrol in this state and subsequently playing a part in almost getting her mother killed. As far as betrayals go, it's hard to top. She forgave him for wanting to kill her sister! Did they not watch EOD? Chosen? They were totally on good terms."
ETA: She also forgave him for leaving her when she most needed him, and for trying to kill Spike behind her back.
As for Giles not 'wanting her a part of this', she very nearly murdered Faith at the end of S3 (aged 18!), to save Angel's life. (Not to mention killing Angel himself in S2.) And she *quipped* about killing Caleb. If it really was a matter of apocalyptic proportions, Buffy would *totally* kill Gigi, and I can't conceive that Giles wouldn't know that. (And interestingly, Wesley got *Faith* to help him capture Angelus, because he knew she wouldn't kill him!)
Oh dear, now I'm ranting again. Very sorry. Do ignore. I just can't get the pieces to fit...
no subject
If it really was a matter of apocalyptic proportions, Buffy would *totally* kill Gigi, and I can't conceive that Giles wouldn't know that.
And yet she wouldn't kill Spike and Giles *totally* knows that. Moreover, even if she would can she, as the public face of her organisation be seen to do so? Would Giles think that was a good idea or something to be avoided at all costs?
no subject
I think I used 'betrayal' because that's what moscow used in her post. The thing is, we've seen a situation like this before, and Buffy was anything but emo:
Angel: "And you can't possibly know what she's going through."
Buffy: "And of course, you do? - I'm sorry. I can't be in your club. I never murdered anybody."
I don't get why Buffy is behaving like a 12 year old, whose father says that she's not his favourite anymore. She a grown woman for crying out loud, and she stopped needing/wanting Giles to look after her *years* before.
And yet she wouldn't kill Spike and Giles *totally* knows that.
Well if you're proposing that she's in love with Gigi, then I'd *love* to hear your theory! ;) But - she said she would be ready to kill *Dawn* to save the world (which was the issue in 'The Gift'). As for Spike, then she killed Angel once - I can't blame her for balking at the same situation. And Spike wasn't evil.
Moreover, even if she would can she, as the public face of her organisation be seen to do so?
Oh obviously she couldn't do it herself. Heck Gigi has pictures of her all over her bedroom. But as the leader she has every right to know what goes on, and - although she wouldn't like it - she'd certainly agree that taking out Gigi would be necessary if it'd stop an apocalypse.
I just don't get emo!Buffy and sneaky!Giles - this is stuff we have done before, and we really need a good explanation. (Issue 10 perhaps?)
no subject
I know why you used 'betrayal' I was just pointing out that what you were critiquing was moscow's interpretation of the text not the text itself.
Angel: "And you can't possibly know what she's going through."
Buffy: "And of course, you do? - I'm sorry. I can't be in your club. I never murdered anybody."
After which Buffy could only appear more like a twelve year old by adding nah, nah, nah,nah, nah to the end of her line. Whereas in the comic as soon as she figures out what Giles has been up to with Faith she hands him over to Willow with instructions to do what she can. You can read her (literally) black mood afterwards however you want but as stormwreath and I have both tried to point out there are perfectly adult justifications for it.
Well if you're proposing that she's in love with Gigi
That's a very Gilesian interpretation of why she wouldn't kill Spike. That she was a woman blinded by her emo to the risks he presented. (And she said she would let Dawn die not kill her.)
She'd certainly agree that taking out Gigi would be necessary if it'd stop an apocalypse.
Would she? Or would she question the need to kill Gigi rather than at least attempt to reform her as you and others vehemently insisted Faith should have done?
no subject
Sorry. I actually don't have a problem with Buffy feeling betrayed - that's perfectly natural. It's her *reaction* to this that rings false. A betrayed Buffy gets *angry*. Sure you can fanwank it any way you like, but she looks devastated, like Giles was being really, really mean and now she just wants to go off and have a good cry. As others have said, maybe Jeanty misunderstood what he was supposed to draw. *shrugs*
That's a very Gilesian interpretation of why she wouldn't kill Spike. That she was a woman blinded by her emo to the risks he presented.
Well the reason I *like* the situation, is because it isn't as simple as Giles sees it. Yes Buffy is probably in part blinded by her emotions. But Spike is also someone she's trying to save ("I believe in you, Spike"), someone she feels guilty for using, someone who is a great fighter (the best beside her) and (de-triggered) could invaluable*, and someone she trusts and cares about - the same she does her other friends. What about Willow f.ex? Who 'can't even do a locator spell without getting black roots'. Willow gone wrong could do far, far more damage than Spike, and yet there's no conspiracies against her (remember 'The Killer in Me'? Willow was unstable, and couldn't control her magic). She could have wiped out the Potentials with a flick of her wrist. Can you imagine what would have happened if Giles had tried to have *her* killed?
Would she? Or would she question the need to kill Gigi rather than at least attempt to reform her as you and others vehemently insisted Faith should have done?
Well we don't know, but judging from s8 so far, Buffy would have less qualms than f.ex. Willow. "All's fair" as Dawn says... s8 Buffy is a tough cookie. Or so I thought.
Honestly I can't make heads or tails of anything. Maybe BKV just doesn't know Buffy very well.
*And it turns out she is right: Save the vampire with a soul, save the world. ;)
no subject
So when you asked if I were proposing that Buffy were in love with Gigi you meant to ask whether I were proposng that Giles believed Buffy to be in love with Gigi? Meaning that Giles should think Buffy would allow him to arrange Gigi's assasination because he believes she's still a little girl who would only have qualms if such an order had someone she had personal feelings for as its target? But I thought you were primarily arguing that Giles knew and respected Buffy better now and that was why it was out of character for the comics to have him keep her out of the loop.
Alternatively Giles does now respect that Buffy's big picture view of not beating evil by doing evil (or killing off potential allies) is based on more than emotional entanglements and concludes that finding him arranging Slayer assasinations without trial will provoke a similar reaction to the one he got when he setting up Spike's summary execution. But Giles does believe in the power of Buffy's name and in the message about the 'chain' of sisterhood and thinks it vital to protect that and not to draw her into his behind the scenes wetworks. He never assented to her crack about the lack of communication being such a bad thing.
I don't know what Buffy is thinking anymore than I knew what miss psycho pep squad really felt about the constant clomping of teenage girly feet in Potential so I look forward to the next issue with great anticipation. But it strikes me that another reason for Buffy's black mood after hearing Giles's refusal to involve her is that she now realises how badly she misjudged Faith and feels guilty about that.
no subject
Umm... it was supposed to be a joke.
I just find Giles to be an enigma. I wish we'd get inside his head, 'cause I can't. (And that's v. unusual - getting inside character's heads is what I love doing. Without that insight, what's the point?)
I look forward to the next issue with great anticipation
Me too. I'm just not raising my hopes very far.
But it strikes me that another reason for Buffy's black mood after hearing Giles's refusal to involve her is that she now realises how badly she misjudged Faith and feels guilty about that.
Well that's a neat idea. I don't think that's it, but it'd be nice.
no subject
*suddenly has a mental image of Spike in a cheerleader outfit*
gah!
no subject
In S3, Giles was Buffy's beloved father figure. She had a vested interest in forgiving him - and he was so contrite after 'Helpless' that it was easy to do. His betrayal in 'Tabula Rasa' was much harder for Buffy to forgive; but she managed anyway (in 'Grave'). But his betrayal in 'Lies...'? I'm not so sure. I have watched EoD... the only interaction between Buffy and Giles is a sarcastic comment from her about the good guys' lack of communication skills. Hardly good terms. (The same episode also has Faith saying "you and I can never get along" and Buffy accepting that without argument).
Yes, they were friendly enough in 'Chosen', at least after Buffy explains her plan to defeat The First... but still, exception for impending death situations. Personal rivalries tend to seem less important the night before the Apocalypse, or in the first triumphant flush of victory.
Buffy is struggling with the isolation and responsibility of leading an organisation vaster than anything she's known before; and she takes her responsibilities seriously. Giles is undermining her, demonstrating lack of trust in her. No wonder she feels betrayed.
no subject
It's hard to argue because we don't know Giles' current status regarding the Slayer organization. He says to Faith that he's the Watcher Council, but it can either mean that he's in charge of the whole Slayer organization or that he's the one and only member of the Council left and Buffy's organization has nothing to do with the "Council".
Inexplicably Giles has enough power and contacts to provide Faith with authentic American passport even after breaking contact with Buffy.
But I think that Vaughan had never asked himself how it was possible so I won't either. And I suspect that Joss is intentionally keeping the reader in the dark about Giles' current rank in the slayer organization. I suppose Joss plans to use Giles as a wild card in his schemes and to do that needs certain wiggling room.
no subject
Or he'd already arranged for Faith's new identity and passport before the mission started?
no subject
And here he is, 18 months later, and he *still* hasn't got the point? Maybe he's senile. Or - maybe that's why she looks so stricken! He's got Altzheimers! They had similar conversations 5 times before, but he can't remember it - and she knows there's no point arguing, because he thinks she's 16!
The same episode also has Faith saying "you and I can never get along" and Buffy accepting that without argument
*throws hands up in frustration*
That scene is - like every other scene in that episode - a long, extended period of two characters giving and receiving support, re-building old bonds. It reminds me most of all of Spike & Angel: We might not like each other all that much, but we *understand* each other/we're not alone. And that is - literally - priceless. Buffy has struggled *all* season with being the sole person in charge, and we saw how it weighed on her. Now - thanks to 'Empty Places'/Touched - Faith has gone through exactly the same thing (right down to getting some Potentials killed). And - Faith lets Buffy know that she 'gets it', and Buffy lets Faith know that feeling crappy and guilty is just normal. It's how she feels all the time.
And as for 'accepting it without argument', then Buffy's reply is: "Also, you went evil and were killing people." Ergo, since Faith is no longer evil and killing people (and in fact is now the only person who understands her), Buffy is saying that they have a chance for getting along.
I *love* this scene:
BUFFY: But you're right. I mean, I... I guess everyone's alone. But being a slayer? There's a burden we can't share.
FAITH: And no one else can feel it. (beat) Thank God we're hot chicks with superpowers.
(Oh and if you point to 'there's a burden we can't share' to prove your point, then I'm going to have your head examined, OK? There 'Cause next you'll be taking 'I signalled her with my eyes' literally.)
Giles is undermining her, demonstrating lack of trust in her. No wonder she feels betrayed.
You know, I'm just going to blame Jeanty. It's either that or accepting that this girl ain't Buffy. At least not a Buffy I care to know or read about. (It happens all the time in fic. Sometimes I even rant - last time that happened I broke almost every Spuffy shippers' heart on my flist. *sigh*)
no subject
I think we're in violent and bitter agreement on that part, actually. Faith and Buffy were finally able to open up and be honest with each other, after all the passive-aggressive snarking and punch-throwing of the past few days (mostly on Buffy's part, I have to say). They affirmed their common ground; they (re)discovered that they're more alike than any other two people. But they weren't friends again all of a sudden. The potential for friendship was re-opened, I agree; but acknowledging the past and agreeing to make a fresh start is only the start of the process, not the end. It takes more than a joke about being hot chicks with superpowers to do that.
Would I personally have been happier if Joss and Brian had decided to let Faith's incipient reborn friendship with Buffy blossom over the last 18 months instead of apparently being still-born? Maybe so... although "and they all lived happily ever after" makes a better ending to a story than a beginning and middle." But that's not the route they chose.
no subject
I didn't say that. At least I don't think I did, and if I did, that's not what I meant. I pointed out the potential, and - on Buffy's side - I think she now understood Faith far better than before (thanks to S6 etc). The major outcome was that they knew they could rely on each other - a little like Buffy knew she could trust Spike at the end of S5. She might have personal problems with him, but she knew where his loyalties lay.
Would I personally have been happier if Joss and Brian had decided to let Faith's incipient reborn friendship with Buffy blossom over the last 18 months instead of apparently being still-born? Maybe so... although "and they all lived happily ever after" makes a better ending to a story than a beginning and middle."
My problem isn't that they didn't go the friendship way. My problem is that they skipped the story. Using Spike again, it's like the last ep we saw was 'The Gift' and now suddenly we're at 'Beneath You', but don't have a clue what happened in S6. Because the Buffy/Faith interaction in 'No Future For You' is not the result of a 'stillborn' friendship - Buffy's reaction is as violent and angry as it was when she found Faith in Angel's arms. And I can't for the life of me think what happened to make her behave like that - and I doubt we'll be told. They gave us the end of a story, after the merest hint of a beginning, and if I'm to care about a potential friendship gone wrong, I have to see it go wrong. Does that make sense?
ETA: Although a 'Happily ever after' is nice, that's not what I want/need. If Buffy had fallen into Faith's arms, sobbing with relief, I wouldn't have been satisfied either. I'm willing to follow a story in almost any direction as long as the writer makes it believable.
It also occurred to me that 'season 8' is misnamed. It should be 'season 9'.
no subject
I was agreeing with you there too, then. :-) I've just watched that scene again - twice - and what I see is a wary respect and recognition of what they've got in common.
Actually, I did see something else... when Buffy says her line about a 'burden we can't share' and Faith adds 'and no-one else can feel it', the camera closes in on Buffy's face and an odd expression passes across it for a moment. I wonder if that's when she got her idea about sharing the Slayer power?
Buffy's reaction is as violent and angry as it was when she found Faith in Angel's arms. And I can't for the life of me think what happened to make her behave like that
I'm going to echo what idiotnighthawk posted in my journal. She's just been kidnapped, thrown up, had a homicidal Slayer attack her, and just when she'd overpowered her enemy Faith intervened and saved Gigi's life by throwing Buffy out of a second storey window. I think a little anger is understandable... And Buffy doesn't get really furious until Faith claims she's working with Giles, which Buffy naturally interprets to mean that either Faith is lying or Giles was deceiving Buffy.
And yes, it effectively is season 9...
no subject
I think it niggled something at the back of her mind, but it didn't blossom until her talk with The First later on.
She's just been kidnapped, thrown up, had a homicidal Slayer attack her, and just when she'd overpowered her enemy Faith intervened and saved Gigi's life by throwing Buffy out of a second storey window. I think a little anger is understandable...
And if that was where it ended, then I *might* just maybe be able to understand it. But issue 9 pretty much puts paid to the idea that it was just the shock and confusing that caused her to lash out. And her extreme reaction to 'I don't want you to be part of this' is still so jarring that it annoys me even more than the artwork. If this was an ordinary fic I'd have walked away long ago. Dunno why I can't this time. I think it's a cross between curiosity, masochism and hope springing eternal.
And I *so* shouldn't be here... *looks at stack of Christmas cards and sighs*
ETA: And yes, it effectively is season 9...
The thing is, I didn't watch Season 3 when the show first aired, which caused some confusion later on. (*g*) However, this I was able to remedy and filling in the blanks was hugely enjoyable. I can't do this with the comics, and I worry that in many cases there quite simply isn't a coherent back-story.
no subject
Or a year-long clinical depression, BtVS bends genres like prepubescent gymnasts.
I hoped for a bigger-scale conflict and more heartwrenching resolution.
You mean you wanted her to kill Gigi or let her go? However, given the obvious alternative of rehabilitation (as with Dana) either of those would only generate angst by making Faith artificially stupid. Moreover Faith doesn't know Gigi well enough for killing her to generate any more drama than not being able to stop her from dying - she's no Angelus.
I only see her hurt and feeling betrayed.
Hurt is an emotion, betrayal is a set of circumstances leading to such a state. I see the hurt (although it looks more like numbness/resignation to me) but I don't intepret what went before as betrayal.
no subject
Good point. But I've got the impression that season 8 is closer to season 1 than to season 6 in spirit.
You mean you wanted her to kill Gigi or let her go?
I wanted a situation on a par with Bad Girls. Ambiguous (in BG it's left unclear if Faith has actually saved Buffy by killing Mayor's deputy), grey and tragic. With Buffy, Faith and Gigi there Vaughan had a lot of possibilities.
I don't intepret what went before as betrayal.
I'm copy-pasting from my reply to Stormwreath down the thread:
It's hard to argue because we don't know if Giles and Buffy work in the same organization and who is the boss. If Giles is Buffy's subordinate and he organized an undercover operation behind her back - that's betrayal. If he's the boss, he doesn't have to report to her about his operations. And if he works solo or in a small reformed Council (Giles as CEO, Trafalgar as his deputy and some witch as coven liaison) then it's just bad planning.
no subject
Based on what other than your original determination that it should be so?
in BG it's left unclear if Faith has actually saved Buffy by killing Mayor's deputy
That's a slightly radical interpretation of the text. Saved Buffy from what? The drama comes from Faith having accidently killed an innocent bystander and her refusal to face any consequences for that or admit that anything of any significance had happened.
I think the tragedy of Gigi's death is similar to that of Cassie in HelpBecause, frankly, what I see on the page doesn't convince me that Buffy understands the situation as you describe it. I only see her hurt and feeling betrayed.
So now we agree about the betrayal aspect being completely uncertain?
no subject
They look like season 1 characters. They act like season 1 characters. Crucial plot points, like the kiss of true love, are borrowed from fairy tales.
That's a slightly radical interpretation of the text. Saved Buffy from what?
From death, apparently. Buffy herself perceived Finch's gesture as an attack and Faith followed her lead.
Writers never explained why Allan Finch has rushed at Buffy in a vampire-infested alley. But it was previously established that he worked for the seasonal Big Bad, knew that his boss is evil, worked for him at least a year eliminating threats to mayor' life. In his previous scene Finch has got a harsh telling-off from the mayor about the lousy security. Now, his actions look like an attack: he hides in the dark then suddenly grabs Buffy's shoulder. Possibly he was planning a trap for her. Of course, it's also possible that he wanted to switch sides and become her ally. Or he wanted to offer Slayers work as mayor's bodyguards. But in any case Allan Finch was working for a bad guy and his behavior looked suspicious and threatening. When Faith staked him she honestly believed that she's saving Buffy. And maybe she did.
So now we agree about the betrayal aspect being completely uncertain?
Of course. It's just my personal perception of what I see on the page.
no subject
I'm not going to argue the finer points of the art, it's a non-photo-realist style. But neither hair nor clothes are anything even approaching their S1 styles.
They act like season 1 characters.
In what way? The only resemblance I can see is the friendship between Buffy, Willow and Xander but that was there at the end of S7 and Giles's role is completely different.
Crucial plot points, like the kiss of true love, are borrowed from fairy tales.
The kiss of true love was a minor distraction not a crucial plot point but there are more varieties of magical creature around. However, S1 involved no more fairy tale elements than the later seasons so rather than a regression I see it as a sign of broadened horizons, they've left the suburbs behind and the wider world is a strange place.
Writers never explained why Allan Finch has rushed at Buffy in a vampire-infested alley.
In Conseqences the Mayor implies Finch was intending to betray him while shredding the paper trail he's accumulated and Buffy voices similar suspiscions.
he hides in the dark then suddenly grabs Buffy's shoulder.
Actually she grabbed him. Faith and her were in the middle of a battle with the Illuminati and just before Finch turned up their tactics were for one to pull out a vamp and the the other to stake him.
When Faith staked him she honestly believed that she's saving Buffy.
As soon as Buffy saw Finch was human she yelled at Faith to stop and as soon as Faith saw that her victim wasn't a vamp she went into shock there was never any indication in the way the scene was shot and acted that Finch was anything other than a hapless victim. Faith never tried to justify what she'd done as self-defence and Doug Petrie's commentary is very clear that the scene is a turning point because they'd killed an innocent human and thus committed murder (albeit accidently).
no subject
F.ex., Buffy stops talking with Giles because he has sided with Faith. When I look at the situation "from the outside" I realise that it must be a plot necessity for the next story. But - could writers handle it more subtly? Both Buffy and Giles act like 12 years old.
In Consequences the Mayor implies Finch was intending to betray him while shredding the paper trail he's accumulated and Buffy voices similar suspiscions.
Yes, it's one of the possibilities. But it was never made clear and I suppose writers intentionally made it that way. It was very easy to avoid the ambiguity and make the message clear: by providing dying Finch with a line: "Buffy... I have to... warn... you... the mayor is..." or something like that.
Actually she grabbed him. Faith and her were in the middle of a battle with the Illuminati and just before Finch turned up their tactics were for one to pull out a vamp and the the other to stake him.
Um, no. They were walking down the alley, Finch was hiding in the shadows. He grabbed Buffy first. She perceived his action as an attack, threw him against the wall and the next moment Faith staked him.
there was never any indication in the way the scene was shot and acted that Finch was anything other than a hapless victim.
I suppose it's subjective. I see a lot of indications: Finch waiting for Buffy in a suspicious place, hiding, suddenly and unexpectedly grabbing her... I suppose that was Joss' goal - to create a complex psychological situation without obvious heroes and villains.
There are interesting comments on that issue by 2maggie2 and shapinglight down the thread. (http://moscow-watcher.livejournal.com/54172.html?thread=360348#t360348)
Faith never tried to justify what she'd done as self-defence
Because it wasn't self-defence. Faith thought she was defending Buffy. Or, rather, helping her.
Doug Petrie's commentary is very clear that the scene is a turning point because they'd killed an innocent human and thus committed murder (albeit accidently).
I have to re-listen the commentaries. If Petrie insists that Major's deputy is innocent why didn't he made it clear onscreen? And why did he choose a Big Bad's minion as an innocent victim? Why didn't he use a random homeless man?
no subject
You've got several threads worth of arguments here about whether that was the case or whether she had other reasons. However, whatever she really feels she still tells Willow to do everything she can for Giles, which is pretty mature of her. That incident aside we have a Buffy who is confidently leading her squad into combat, concerned about their responses to seeing their first victims, inspiring their loyalty, fully in control of the raid on the not!Initiative base (including ensuring that the soldiers are healed) and negotiating on equal terms with Generals. All very adult and a big advance on her S7 attempts at leadership.
It was very easy to avoid the ambiguity and make the message clear: by providing dying Finch with a line: "Buffy... I have to... warn... you... the mayor is..." or something like that. At that stage no-one had any suspiscions of the Mayor, he's only been revealed to the audience so such a statement as well as being a laughably obvious stage device would have provided one reveal too many for the scene. We'd still have only had Finch's word for himself so conspiracy theorists still wouldn't have been convinced. If Finch were attacking Buffy on the Mayor's behalf how was he expecting to do anything other than lose painfully, there's no indication he has superpowers? And the Mayor is the opposite of concerned that any plan of his has failed he seems perfectly happy with Alan's demise.
Um, no. They were walking down the alley, Finch was hiding in the shadows. He grabbed Buffy first. She perceived his action as an attack, threw him against the wall and the next moment Faith staked him.
Um, yes. I just watched the scene. She senses someone hiding in the shadows, pulls them out and throws them against the wall to where Faith can complete the manoever (which is a direct copy of the previous staking but with the players reversed). Faith dives in, Buffy shouts for her to stop from behind her but Faith doesn't pull back until the stake's gone in and she can see the blood and lack of dust and realises that it wasn't a vamp.
I suppose that was Joss' goal - to create a complex psychological situation without obvious heroes and villains.
Which he achieves simply by making it clear that it was an accident in the line of duty and that Buffy would have been the perpetrator just one dusting before. It isn't the staking or its specific motivations that shows Faith as morally flawed (but perfectly sympathetic), it's how she acts after it.
Because it wasn't self-defence. Faith thought she was defending Buffy. Or, rather, helping her.
In English the term self defence can apply to a group as well as to an individual. Whatever, Faith never tried to justify what she did as defending or helping Buffy either.
If Petrie insists that Major's deputy is innocent why didn't he made it clear onscreen? And why did he choose a Big Bad's minion as an innocent victim?
It was clear to most people. Using Finch works better than a random stranger because of the possibility that he may have been trying to help. His being linked to the Mayor makes it credible that the body is identified and on the news so quickly and leads Buffy and Faith to investigate the Mayor's office where they finally spot Wilkins and Trick in conversation with one another.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)