rusty_halo | Babbling

Current Mood: tired

Entry tags:

Babbling

Psst ...

Note to

drujan: You must go read

thedeadlyhook's LJ. You will love her perceptive commentary on the Buffyverse, particularly on Buffy. She's also the one who wrote those wonderful reviews at Just Stake Me.

Note to

soulmate815: The wonderful Spike & Joyce story I was telling you about is DeNile by

indri. (If anyone else out there hasn't read this one yet, go read it! It's one of my favorite stories ever.)

Yesterday I bought 20 postcards at a gift shop near me ($.35 each) and spent two hours writing notes on all of them, to various people at Fox, ME, UPN, TNT, and certain media outlets. Just need to get postcard stamps tomorrow and I'm set. Now, c'mon everyone, you too. Just pick up some postcards; you'll find addresses here among many other places.

I bought my ticket to the Creation Buffy/Angel con in Jersey in March. Looking forward to seeing

rockgoddes and

redeem147 and others there. :)

To do:
Figure out if I'm going to Toronto Trek or not
(If so) figure out Toronto Trek hotel room/roommate situation
(If so) get Toronto Trek plane tickets

Figure out how long I want to stay in Vegas
Reserve WriterCon hotel room
Find WriterCon roommates
Get WriterCon plane tickets

I think

jaydk is going to handle our DragonCon hotel and airfare, but I must check with her about it.

I spent four hours tonight in the most boring class ever. We watched this movie that was so boring I couldn't *stand* it. I started braiding strands of my hair into little braids, and then braiding the little braids into bigger braids, because I couldn't sit still.

I forget the name of the movie; it was from 1969 and was about a psychologist who talks crazy women into having sex with him (or not) and films it all with a hidden camera. All you see is clips from the hidden camera. Mostly it's these weird women jumping around naked and screeching, and lots of really irritating pretentious selfish people talking about nothing.

Sudden change of topic...

So, let's review:

Action: Giles and Jenny start to get back together after a period of separation
Result: Jenny dies horribly

Action: Angel gets his soul back, reunites with Buffy, she tells him she loves him
Result: Angel dies horribly

Action: Joyce's romantic life starts to pick up, she gets flowers from a suitor
Result: Joyce dies

Action: Tara and Willow have a happy reunion after months of separation
Result: Tara dies horribly

Action: Buffy finally admits to Spike that she loves him
Result: Spike dies horribly

Action: Angel and Cordelia rush to express their love for each other
Result: Cordelia ascends, setting in motion the events that lead to her death

Things aren't boding so well for Fred, are they?

As much as I admit that Joss Whedon's shows are some of the best on television, he's got his own formula and it's pretty damn predictable.

I also sort of wonder what this means. People start to get together romantically, and misery ensues. Is it a negative comment on romance? Sex = death?

Or is just a way to drive the knife in as deeply as possible, make it hurt extra when the person dies because we see how much promise their life had? Which is kind of disturbing on a couple of levels. First, the implication that a death isn't quite so meaningful if the person's life wasn't full of promise when the person died. Second that romantic love = your life's potential. Romance gives life meaning? Why does romance signify happiness/potential?

The only time I can remember significant death where this didn't happen was with Jonathan and Anya. (Though it's debatable whether the writers even considered Anya's death significant. And she does get back with Xander shortly before, but that's not her big poignant moment, which is her realization about humanity blah blah blah.) In their cases, we saw how much they'd grown as people, and that's what made their deaths hurt so much. I like that method better, though, because the poignance is emphasized by showing who they are and how they've grown as individuals, not just because they're romantically involved with someone.

Meh. I'm just babbling because I'm tired, and it's too much effort to go get ready for bed, and I really ought to update my website before I go to sleep ...

Speaking of which, visits to my site went *way* up this week. I guess it's the Angel cancellation publicity? *cries*

And speaking of that, there are big ads for "One Tree Hill" and "Smallville" all over my neighborhood, and all over the NYU area. No ads for "Angel," though. Gee, maybe the *lack of promotion* could have something to do with that show's comparitively smaller ratings?

And speaking of Smallville, could that show possibly be any more lame? I retract every nice thing I've said about it. The last few episodes have been like bad after school specials. I love Lex, and Lionel, but the minimal time they get is so not worth it.

Totally random topic change again...

Oh, hey, check it out. My dad sent me pictures of my ~~babies~~ cats. Aren't they wonderful? The white one is Vanilla, who is 18 years old and very bossy. The striped one is Angel (named before the TV character existed!) who my dad calls "Penny" and everyone else calls "The Devil Cat." She is insane. Lucifer, the youngest, isn't pictured, because he thinks he's dog and the others wouldn't deign to let him hang out with them.

We had a conversation at work the other day which reminded me what a freak I am. We're writing this book about our favorite vegan products (don't ask, it's not my idea) and we have to all write something about whatever products we like. I suggested that we all write down our ideas privately, in a database-like thing, and then we can reply to each other, sort of like LJ comments. Converse in writing. Everyone else said, no, let's just have a meeting, talk out loud, and someone can transcribe it.

That idea is horrible to me. I would do sooo much better writing on my own than talking in person. In person I'm quiet and inarticulate and totally unable to communicate well. In writing I'm so much more able to say what I mean. (Not that I'm great in writing, but much much better than in person.)

Which reminds me that my colloquium is coming up. Oh, god, panic. It's where I have to talk about 25 books with three professors for two hours and if I don't pass I fail college. Now, see, if this were in *writing* I would be fine. In person, I'm afraid I'm going to be unable to speak, and then say something that's totally wrong and not what I mean, and not be able to clarify it because I won't have the words, and they'll all go "Dear god, how did this idiot get through four years of college?"

Anyway. My dad asked to see these the other day, and I figured I'd share them here too in case anyone cares. Let me know if you have comments.

Booklist (Word doc, 1 page)
Rationale (Word doc, 3 pages)

(The pre-1600 stuff is in there by requirement. I know it doesn't make any sense. *panics more*)

Now. Must find something to archive before bed.... Oh, I know! Doyle said I could archive her secret slasha fic. Okay ... off to archive.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I also sort of wonder what this means. People start to get together romantically, and misery ensues. Is it a negative comment on romance? Sex = death?

It means that apparently Joss has been reading way too much poetry by e.e.cummings. :-p

Honey, you only now just noticed that Joss thinks sex is bad??

He fucking states it out loud in Angel, S1, "Expecting."

Cordy: I learned that sex? Is bad.
Angel & Wes: We all knew that.

Joss is a very skillful storyteller with a big squishy creative right brain. But subtle he ain't.

LOL, no, I didn't just notice. I know it's a recurring theme, I'm just wondering what assumptions are behind it.

I just sort of wonder what the rationale is for "a person getting into a relationship shortly before death makes the person's death more poignant." Something about the act of being in a relationship -- what does that signify? What is it supposed to mean?

Death isn't usually a punishment for the relationship; it's not exactly cause/effect (except with B/A). Giles and Jenny getting back together didn't cause Joyce's death; in fact, if she'd gone home with him right away she wouldn't have been there to get killed by Angelus. Tara getting back together with Willow had little to do with her death; that was Warren (except in the most indirect way, in that Tara was at Willow's house and might not have been otherwise). Joyce dating Brian had nothing to do with her death. Spike's death had nothing to do with Buffy's "I love you"; he chose to die in spite of that, not because of it. Same with Cordelia's ascension; her love for Angel was one of the few things that might have convinced her to stay.

So romance/sex doesn't directly equal death in a cause/effect way. It's just used as a dramatic device to make a death more poignant. (At least, I assume that's why it's used. I can't think of any other reason they keep using that trope.) So why does romance make death more poignant? What does it signify? A person's value is increased by their being in a relationship? A person's potential? Is it just about the pain of the other partner? (certainly not for Joyce and Brian)

I guess death tends to hurt more when lots of people love the person, since all those who remain alive will suffer. But in these shows it's always romantic love. I mean, I don't think my death would have less meaning if I wasn't in a relationship at the time! Though, I suppose it might have less dramatic impact...

Well, I think the message Joss has sent is that sex is bad, particularly if it's kinky. But I seem to remember somewhere I heard or read him saying something to the effect of, when it's all going well, we HAVE to mess it up, or there'd just be happyhappy and no drama. Or something more coherent than that.

I had a plot bunny once, which was really more of a rabbit's foot, small and disconnected, in which Buffy actually caught on to the rules of the Buffyverse – that relationships were always doomed, that nothing good lasts (which, ok, I'm all over impermanence as a philosophical concept, but stuff falls apart fast in the Buffyverse). And having realized what the rules were, she just gave up on trying to build anything, like a relationship. She wasn't despondent or depressed – she just didn't want to play that game anymore.

caia

hen it's all going well, we HAVE to mess it up, or there'd just be happyhappy and no drama

Well, yes, but they don't tell happy stories anymore. They don't do *anything* positive unless it's for the express purpose of shattering it shortly after. Like the totally out-of-the-blue Wes/Fred this week. In the past, we had relationships that built organically, like Willow/Oz, or Giles/Jenny. It seemed like they were telling the happy parts of those stories as real stories, and even though they had sad endings, we can still look back fondly on the good parts. Whereas W/F is just an obvious "get ready for tragedy!" thing.

There's a difference between telling a happy story, and then shattering it for dramatic purposes, vs. only putting in something happy for the purpose of shattering it.

relationships were always doomed

Unless you're Riley and Sam. :P

I think the message Joss has sent is that sex is bad, particularly if it's kinky.

Well, yes, kinky sex is bad. You should feel ashamed for doing such dirty things. OTOH, vanilla sex, a la Riley, is good (see "Where the Wild Things Are") and Buffy's a bad girlfriend for not being satisfied by it (and it's all her fault that Riley left her! even though he was the one getting suck jobs from vamp whores).

And lesbian sex is wonderful and holy, since it's pure Womyn Power untainted by nasty violent male sexuality, and can only be destroyed by the mean nasty misogynist and his big phallic gun.

There's a difference between telling a happy story, and then shattering it for dramatic purposes, vs. only putting in something happy for the purpose of shattering it.

Unfortunately, it seems like they've caught on to the rules too. Darn them. ;)

Unless you're Riley and Sam. :P

Didn't you hear? Sam went ahead and got that female-to-male operation, and dumped Riley for a sweet little transgendered torch singer. Riley's currently a manwhore in Rio, sucking dick in exchange for... that other sucking. He occasionally gets very drunk, calls Buffy, and sings, "I can love you like that! I would give you my world! Move heaaaven and eeeeaaarth if you were my girl!" Then she hangs up on him, and his pimp takes his slurred grumblings about "ass-face" as an invitation.

No, seriously. Sam was a robot. Couldn't you tell?

And lesbian sex is wonderful and holy, since it's pure Womyn Power untainted by nasty violent male sexuality, and can only be destroyed by the mean nasty misogynist and his big phallic gun.

Help! I'm drowning in a sinkhole of irony! *climbs out*

*falls back in* It's so true, though! Not even magic roofie rape can sully the wonder of singy-floaty-girlsex.

*climbs out again* *shakes self like a dog*

caia

Well, yes, but they don't tell happy stories anymore. They don't do *anything* positive unless it's for the express purpose of shattering it shortly after.

Agreed. I think it's part of the (screwy) world-view that a lot of people have: that the only lessons worth learning in life are taught through pain and suffering. And that suffering and pain are therefore valuable, character-building experiences rather than obstacles that can lead to suicide or bitterness or becoming an abuser of others.

This is why the whole Giles Leaving Buffy rationale makes me queasy ... the message that Buffy has to suffer in order to grow up, rather than that she can be taught and encouraged and helped. I used to think that Giles left Buffy this way because the writers were too lazy to develop a more rounded, credible story for Giles's exit, but now I'm sure it's part of their overall world-view about the primacy of pain in personal growth.

But how funky is it that Amber Benson is dating Adam Busch. Got your phallic, misogynistic gun right here, baby. All a lesbian needs is the right man. I have conspiracy theories dancing through my head in which Joss forbade/threatened/blackmailed Benson and Busch so their relationship had to be concealed from the public so as to not undermine the lesbo-wicca-womyn-power-twoo-wuv message of Willow/Tara. (As opposed to the vastly less entertaining explanation that AB and AB only got together recently.)

I think it's part of the (screwy) world-view that a lot of people have: that the only lessons worth learning in life are taught through pain and suffering.

I think that's what it is, and that's what I have such a problem with. Within the Buffyverse, we basically saw pain take a bunch of well-meaning children and turn them into cold cruel heartless unpleasant nasty adults. Even Spike, who one could argue grew through suffering, really (IMO) grew despite suffering. If he'd gotten positive reinforcement instead of abuse during S6, he never would have had that mental breakdown or "needed" that stupid boring soul.

And even for pure dramatic purposes, constant pain just isn't all that interesting. If there aren't genuine happy periods to contrast with, the painful stuff doesn't have much impact. Constant pain is just as boring as it would be if everything was happy all the time.

have conspiracy theories dancing through my head in which Joss forbade/threatened/blackmailed Benson and Busch so their relationship had to be concealed from the public so as to not undermine the lesbo-wicca-womyn-power-twoo-wuv message of Willow/Tara.

LOL! See, I doubt it, because as much as Joss loved to bask in all the accolades he got for W/T, he really personally didn't give a crap about the lesbian/womyn power message. As he made abundantly clear in Seeing Red.

Okay, I just loved this post. BtVS musings, fandom updates, academic interests -- it's an interesting glimpse into your life right now. Plus -- kitties!

LOL, thanks. Kitties make everything better. :)

Aww, cute cute kitties!

Thanks. :)

Kitties!!!!!

Oh yeah and right now I'm sitting on three hotel rooms for Toronto Trek. You are taken care of.

Thank you! :)

Poosycats!

Poosycats with pawsies curled around their faces!

When is the colloquium happening? It sounds very grim ... but hopefully during that two hours you'll become so engrossed by the subject that your nerves will be soothed. Is it interactive? Or just you talking?

Aren't they so cool? How they can curl up like that and fit together so well. I love that these two get along--Vanilla is a loner, and she used to hate Angel, but they've bonded together in solidarity against the dog and the dog-wannabe. I'm really glad because otherwise Vanilla would be so lonely--when we first got the dog (Darth), she spent three years refusing to come down to the main level of the house because she hated/feared him. At least now she has someone to cuddle with.

The colloquium will be on April 6, I think. I really really need to spend time re-reading all these books very soon. It's interactive--they question you about the books and the ideas and stuff. (I'm glad it's interactive, because if I panic and freeze hopefully one of them can change the topic and give me something to say again.)

Oh, and what I meant to say, before I was distracted by the poosycats ...

Angel and Buffy rate brilliantly in Australia. Which is bizarre, because the local network puts no effort into presenting it:

- no advertising ... they don't even show the trailers (except sometimes they show it half an hour before the show starts) ... and when the new season started there was NOTHING to promote it on the "new season" blurbs

- no marketing ... the new season has had two small ads in TV Week

- it's shown at 10.30 at night (BtVS was at 10.45)

- the air time can vary, and it's quite unpredictable whether they'll have weeks off or a few re-runs thrown in. Sometimes these breaks correspond to the ratings breaks in the US, but sometimes not. The show is regularly delayed for programs that have run overtime, and pre-empted for sports events.

- all the WB shows are on different networks here, so the bulk WB promos can't be imported (ie: Smallville, Angel, Gilmore Girls and Charmed are on three different stations, and are aimed at three different demographics ... Smallville and Gilmore Girls are in early prime-time and advertised as family viewing; Charmed is mid prime-time and promoted for teenagers; Angel is on late at night and presumably intended for adults but has no promotion/advertising whatsoever).

And yet it rates its socks off.

I wonder what the cultural difference is that makes it so popular there. Maybe that it's presented as appropriate for an adult audience? Whereas here it's too adult for most teens, but most adults won't watch because it's a "teen" show. Or it could be this Puritan-like refusal to take seriously anything having to do with fantasy or the occult. (At least on TV; fantasy movies do wonderfully.)

Reagarding the character deaths, the problem,I think, is less the message, which I think is ambiguous, but the predictability. When two characters kissing leads the majority of the audience to expect a piano to fall on one of them, it kind of defeats the purpose of what Joss is trying to accomplish. Whereas I thought that probably the best death scene for any of his characters was Darla's, which rather than trying to pull the rug out from under the audience, just allowed things to follow to their natural conclusion.

Yes, Joss has become so predictable that it's a joke. Oh, someone's happy? Who's going to die?

I agree with you about Darla's death. I was thinking BtVS more than AtS, but yeah, looking back that really was done well and made sense. Like they were following things to the natural conclusion of the story, instead of just blatantly manipulating the characters/story to get to the conclusion they wanted.

The cats are adorable...but then I'm a sucker for the fuzzy little buggers (having three of my own).

I did find both your reading list and rationale interesting and I think you've got some solid material to work with. I would argue about the pre-1600 stuff not making sense. In many ways, the classics seem to codify our current world-view of gender roles and relations, much the way what we understand as modern marriage has its serious roots in medieval France. Manipulation of those roles is, of course, old as the hill, and Chaucer's Wife of Bath is clearly a parody of an existing and familiar phenomenon which we can still see today.

Okay, I could go on and on, because it is a subjec that interests me and one I've done some academic reading and discussion on, centered mostly on 16th Century England (hence my argument that pre-1600 does make sense becuase it makes sense to me).

I can understand the panic of having to discuss these with your professors; nerves have a way of reducing the most eriudite person to the level of babbling idiot. It looks like you do know you stuff, though. Maybe you can picture being on IM and the professors aren't the professors but their avatars? (Yeah, sounds crazy, but I'm hoping you can find a way to make the nerves work for you instead of against you.)

Aww, you have three cats? Awesome. :)

Oh, I didn't mean that the pre-1600 stuff was irrelevant, just that I don't know enough about it to use it sensibly. I'm really more interested in theory and popular culture, but the "seven books written pre-1600" is a requirement. So I had to include those even though I don't know them well enough to tie them in properly.

LOL about picturing the professors as IM avatars. Though I think IM would make me even more nervous--I get so terrified on there, worrying that I'm being rude by not replying right away, wondering what people really meant, etc. I like LJ comments because if I'm not sure what to say, I can spend an hour thinking about it and come back later. Thinking quickly is not my forte--I panic and say stupid things, or freeze.

In person I'm quiet and inarticulate and totally unable to communicate well.

The next time you say this I'm gonna come down there and swat you upside the head into the middle of next week. You have absolutely no problem expressing yourself verbally! I have no idea what you're talking about when you say things like this, because this so does not describe the person I've roomed and hung out with. You're exceptionally articulate, passionate and quick-thinking in conversation. So who on earth are you talking about here, your other personality? And when can I meet her?

Your white cat looks exactly like the one I had from age 6 weeks to 17 years...sob...miss my Tango!

Your observations regarding Joss and his happiness-can't-be-allowed mentality is bang-on. Even people I know who aren't spoiled said immediately after Fred and Wes's kiss last week, 'Uh oh, which one of them is going to die now?" Predictable, Joss, predictable.

So who on earth are you talking about here, your other personality?

Er, the personality I have when I'm around strangers or in large groups, I guess? Or when I'm around authority figures, such as, y'know, people who have the power to prevent me from graduating college.

Your observations regarding Joss and his happiness-can't-be-allowed mentality is bang-on. Even people I know who aren't spoiled said immediately after Fred and Wes's kiss last week, 'Uh oh, which one of them is going to die now?" Predictable, Joss, predictable.

Yup, I too was struck by how many unspoiled people were saying that. Joss is talented, but he needs to let his talent grow; otherwise he's just stagnating and repeating himself. (Though unfortunately I think Firefly was a real attempt at growth, so I'm sad that he wasn't able to follow through on it.)

Your white cat looks exactly like the one I had from age 6 weeks to 17 years...sob...miss my Tango!

Awww. *hugs* White cats are so beautiful, aren't they? Vanilla constantly astounds me; she's so pretty.

The wonderful Spike & Joyce story I was telling you about is DeNile by indri. (If anyone else out there hasn't read this one yet, go read it! It's one of my favorite stories ever.)

I can't tell you how much I appreciate reading this. I'm very glad that you continue to enjoy it, especially as I think you've read more fanfic than anyone else I know. And thanks for recc'ing it here---I woke up to two pieces of feedback, which is always a nice way to start a morning.

No problem. It's such a wonderful story; I'm glad you're still getting feedback for it. :)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Babbling

no subject

no subject

Re:

Re:

Re:

no subject

Re:

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re:

no subject

Re: