rusty_halo ([personal profile] rusty_halo) wrote2003-08-03 04:50 pm

(no subject)

I don't have a problem with complicated, flawed characters. I understand that Buffy endured a very difficult life that was bound to cause emotional problems. I liked and sympathized with Buffy quite a bit up until "Smashed."

However, when she began taking her pain out on other people, who didn't deserve it, I lost all respect for her. When she sobbed at the end of "Dead Things," not because she felt bad for hurting Spike, but because she felt bad for letting Spike taint her. When she didn't even flinch at the bruises on Spike's face in "Older and Far Away." When she never ever apologized to him for months of physical and emotional abuse, and never acknowledged to anyone (save a vampire who she proceeded to kill) that she was just as responsible for their fucked up relationship as Spike was.

Buffy could have regained my sympathy very easily if she'd shown any kind of remorse for the way she mistreated Spike. IMO - she didn't. And not only that, but the writing inplicitly excused all of her misbehavior. They harped on the AR over and over, but never once brought up the "Dead Things" beating. I'm disgusted by the double standard that the writers used in excusing all of Buffy's poor behavior. And for those reasons, I cannot stand the character.

I respect that others have the right to disagree. I have never once bashed or judged the people who like Buffy, and I would appreciate if they'd refrain from bashing and judging me. Accusing me of having "no compassion" and so on is just bullshit. You can't judge who I am from my opinions of a fictional character. It's like those people who call Spike fans "rape apologists" and "serial killer lovers." Quit making real life judgements about people just because they disagree with your opinion of a fictional TV character. Debate the opinion, not the person who holds the opinion.

Re: My take on Season 7 Buffy

[identity profile] rusty_halo.livejournal.com 2003-08-06 02:44 pm (UTC)(link)
I think that if you're going to use something that isn't pure canon, you have to explain it based on canonical evidence. Like, I think Spike could have been redeemed without a soul. I have an essay here with a whole list of canonical reasons that I feel that way. Others may disagree because they think I didn't make the case convincingly, but it's still basically a debate over canon (over different interpretations of canon).

If you don't support it with canon, you can say literally anything. You can say "Giles was weird in season seven because his brain got possessed by aliens." You may well feel that way, but unless you have some evidence for it (it can be controversial/debatable evidence, but still, some evidence) it's not very good material for use in a debate.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't find your pro-Buffy arguments convincing because I don't see any canonical evidence for them at all; in fact, I see the opposite in some cases (like Buffy's happy little walk into the sunlight right after Tara died).