The Late (Not So Great) Buffy Summers
Mar. 23rd, 2005 10:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxI ended up in a discussion of Season 7 and the character of Buffy on someone else's LJ. And, as these things sometimes do, a debate began to form. The thing is, I really don't want to debate the issue. It's just that sometimes when saying that, it sounds like I feel that I can't defend my point of view. But it's really not that.
The thing is, why debate the issue? I don't have any desire to talk someone out of their liking the character of Buffy. I have no motivation to talk someone out of their contentment with the conclusion of BtVS. If you feel that way, good for you. I see no reason why I should try to talk you out of it, point by debateable point. By the same token, I cannot simply be "talked out" of my feelings on the issue. It's not going to happen. I know it's not going to happen, so I why argue about it? (Plus, the space I would need to express my feelings on the subject would be rude to a point beyond belief to post in someone else's LJ, so I simply couldn't respond there even if I wanted to debate the issue).
That said, my personal rambling talking points and musings on the subject of Miss Buffy Summers and BtVS...
Not Getting What I Wanted
It was mentioned that if I focused on "what [I] didn't get in Season (6)7," I would never "be satisfied" with the season. I understand what this person was saying, but I don't think it works that way. The fact of the matter is that I wasn't satisfied with Season 7. I wasn't satisfied with what I got. If I had been, I wouldn't have been so pissed off that I watched only one scene in "End of Days" when it aired, and I wouldn't have been cursing a blue streak when I initially read the script for "Chosen." Being cognizant of and even identifying the specifics of why I felt dissatisfied, isn't creating the disatisfaction. The disatisfaction was there in a very visceral form. At this late date all I do is catalogue and categorize my BtVS issues in an effort to understand them (which is usually part of the effort to write fanfic. Identifying what was true in the characters as they existed and what I needed to be satisfied with their stories... and how to bridge that gap is what fuels my writing.
And it's not that I expected or even need for the show to be perfect. I've been disappointed in other shows. I adored the X-Files, and, let's be honest, its final season was crap. However, that disatisfaction with the final couple of seasons doesn't color my view of its characters. It didn't sour me on the show. I still enjoy it, the memory of it, and the things which attracted me to the show are things that still attract me in reruns. Forever Knight's finale was atrocious. Even worse than Chosen. It was one giant "fuck you!" to the audience and undermined the entire series... and yet, it still didn't sour me on the characters the same way BtVS did (I never had cared for Natalie. It did change my view of Nick--stupid ponce. But my love of Lacroix and Janette remains). I don't have to "get what I wanted" to end a series still having enjoyment in it. But something about BtVS makes it one of two instances where my disatisfaction with the overall scope of the story is intense enough to have lingering effects. BtVS changed some of my viewing habits and tastes. Whereas I once adored bickering/bantering relationships on screen, I now have real problems with enjoying them, seeing ugliness that I wouldn't have seen without the ugliness of what was done on BtVS. . .and I trace a lot of that to my disatisfaction with the journey I took with Buffy. It wasn't there before. It is there now. I didn't want or need "perfect" or to have exactly what I wanted. But I'm not satisfied with what I got. Just not.
(And btw, I'm okay with that. I don't angst over this issue. I find it a curiosity, and I examine it, trying to suss out exactly why I feel this way. It's an informative process. I find it a point of interest-- not angst-- and when I grow bored with it or something else grabs my attention, I move on. )
Buffy was depressed...
This issue features prominently in any pro/con discussion of Buffy. No one actually debates that Buffy was depressed in Season 6 (and part of Season 5 too, actually). The difference comes in with how people view her actions with regard to depression. How much does (or doesn't) depression excuse? How much is explained by her depression. How sympathetic is the audience to that depression in her. These factors (and the assumptions which come with them) tint and shade the context we give to Buffy in the latter seasons and often indicate our position regarding Buffy. We can look at that depression in two lights.
Depression in terms of storytelling
First off, I don't think season long depression was a particularly good story choice in a television series format. Depression, even in reality, is not easily observed. Living with someone in depression isn't easy, and isn't the least bit enjoyable for the people around the depressive. This holds true for an audience watching it over the looooooong course of a 22 episode season spread out over eight loooong months. Of particular difficulty is the fact that depression distorts perception. How the depressive views their circumstances is not exactly rational. In a television format we are not, and cannot be in the depressive character's shoes. We do not see the world through that character's eyes. We are the observers. Perhaps it is possible in a novel format to see through the character's eyes and thus sympathize fully with the depressive character. However, this story was not told in a novel format. It was TV. We, the audience, can only observe the character. We, the audience, see her actions in objective form (with a degree of subjectivity, certainly, but we don't view the world through the depressive's POV). We see the character's world more rationally than the character does and this effects how we view her behavior. This in itself makes us view Buffy's actions differently than Buffy does. Now, add in the fact that Buffy became utterly impossible to read and emotionally remote. A story which is already difficult to convey because of emotional distance is compounded in its difficulty by a character (and/or actress) who witholds expression, who doesn't relate, who doesn't openly emote very often, and who virtually incapable of articulating her feelings in a comprehensible fashion. This culmination of factors makes me think that any story which depends on observing depression for an extended period of time is doomed to lose a lot of its audience along the way. A lot of people are going to lose sympathy and empathy and patience with the character no matter how realistic depression as an emotional disorder happens to be.
Quite simply, from the outside looking in, characters in depression are frustrating to watch at best and infuriating at worst. And a season of it can become an excruciatingly aggravating viewing experience.
It doesn't work particularly well from a plotting standpoint. While it is valid to say that someone in a depression isn't going to have an epiphany and just get better... again, in a storytelling format that doesn't work so well. It may be emotionally realistic from a clinical psychological standpoint because she just couldn't pull herself out of her funk. But from a plotting standpoint, it's an unwise choice and not particularly effective. It wears out the patience of large portions of the audience. It's repetitive to have a character repeatedly realize the same essential point -- "Hey, I'm depressed and detached!" The audience "got" that point way back in November. The character having this realization for the nth time in May ceased to have any compelling drama for substantial portions of the audience. It also means that on an emotional level the plot was moving at a glacial pace. Drama doesn't really increase with repetition. It decreases. So by Buffy repeatedly doing the "I'm in a bad place, I've lost the fire, I don't know why I do these things" over and over and over again, it wasn't compounding the drama, it was bleeding it out, hemmoraging it onto the floor until at the end it was just this pallid corpse of a dramatic point. The metaphor of climbing out of the grave was quite obvious... and emotionally hollow for many, because the issue ceased to have dramatic resonance 10 epiphanies ago (or at least it ceased to do so for many if the tone of the boards and the show's dwindling ratings toward the end of the season were any clue. The slow bleed of ratings from series highs at the beginning of the season to the plummeting depths by ep 20 [ratings the show never substantially recovered] shows that somewhere in this the character of Buffy lost her hold over the audience). So even if it can be argued that Buffy's inability to pull herself out of her black funk is psychologically valid, on a pure plotting level it wasn't one that sustained the interest and empathy of many segments of the audience.
Audience Empathy with Depression...
A lot of the rhetoric surrounding latter season Buffy revolves around empathizing with her depression. Is it an experience people can empathize with? It's not a universal experience, but, you know, even if you've experienced depression, I don't know that means that you empathize with Buffy's depression. I've been depressed in my life, really depressed. And, I did cut Buffy slack for depression. . .to a point. And I recognize that she was depressed. But when push comes to shove... I don't like her for being depressed. And what's more, I don't excuse her actions because she was depressed.
Yes, she was depressed. And yes, depression is something to sympathize with. But depression (in my eyes) does not cover everything Buffy did. And it certainly doesn't excuse what Buffy did. Depression is a mood and it can be self defeating. It can make someone stagnate. It can make someone curl up and hide. However, depression doesn't mean it's okay to take your anger at yourself out on others. It just doesn't. And that is what Buffy did. Depression doesn't have to look like that. Depression doesn't mean having to use someone else. Those are particular (and particularly offensive) coping tactics that do not reflect well on the person doing them. And they are not reflective of the psychological state of being depressed. They are a particularly ugly choice of expressing psychological issues that are not depression dependent. They can be associated with depression, they are not caused by depression. They are examples of other psychological issues which can piggy back on depression.
Yes, Buffy was depressed. . . but she was also fucked up. These are two different issues that happen to compound one another. Abusers are depressed. Depression doesn't explain abuse. Kids and postal workers who go on mass murdering sprees are depressed, depression isn't the cause of the murdering spree. Depression is a state. Taking that depression out on someone else is a choice. Buffy was depressed. How she coped with it, was a choice. I don't dislike her for being depressed. I dislike her choices.
Buffy's situation was tough. Buffy's situation was sympathetic. Buffy's depression is unfortunate. But facing adversity in and of itself isn't heroism. It's really bad luck. Buffy had a really bad situation and a lot of adversity. But that's something to pity not to admire. Heroism is in how one chooses to face adversity not in the adversity itself. So because that Buffy was in the midst of clinical depression facing many obstacles is pitiable, it doesn't make me admire her. To admire her I look at how she faced those obstacles and how she dealt with her depression.
She didn't deal with depression well. She was emotionally dishonest with her friends, never openly discussing her issues with what they had done. She never sought professional help (no, talking about it in CWDP doesn't count. She didn't seek help and it was another instance of 'talking in a dead man's ear doesn't make it real.' She says it, denies it, and erases it by killing the vamp all in one set of scenes. This is not a theraputic breakthrough). She chose to use Spike (and regardless of whether he allowed it, embraced it, or said it was okay, it's not okay. That only means that Spike had issues of his own. He was a co-dependent. I don't blame Buffy that Spike allowed her to use him. That's his messed-up co-depence. I blame Buffy that she did use him. Her choice. That he said she could use him doesn't excuse that she chose to actually do so. And I don't have to like or excuse her for it. I can look at the way she chose to deal with her situation and think... um... not admirable of you, Buffster. I don't think I like you very much.
Buffy was flawed...
When pointing out Buffy's failings it usualy leads to the truism of "Buffy was flawed..."
Yes, I think most can agree that Buffy is flawed. Still, when it's said as in context of "you want a perfect heroine" I think there's a failure to communicate. Saying it that way presupposes that I want or need a perfect heroine, which may be an incredibly wrong supposition.
In point of fact I don't want a perfect heroine. I usually actively dislike perfect heroines. It's just a matter of whether I find the characters flaws ones that create a character that works for me.
I look back at the heroines I've really loved over the years, perfect isn't what I would use to describe them. Scully wasn't perfect. She was repressed and she denied herself, but I never, ever lost sympathy for her. Now, admittedly Scully was more perfect than Buffy. She was relentlessly strong, resourceful, and independent. She was relentlessly honorable. So maybe some might like to categorize her as perfected. So I look to Aeryn Sun. Aeryn Sun wasn't perfect. She had a past far, far more dark than Buffy's. Aeryn commited terrible crimes. She was also repressed, difficult, remote. . .and I didn't lose sympathy with her. Again, though, she had such an unshakable sense of honor and heroism that maybe (if someone squinted hard enough) they could say that she was perfected in some respects.
So then I have to look at my other favorite heroines (and sadly, it's perhaps part of the industry problems that I begin to reach toward soaps). On soaps, I generally loathe the "good girl" heroines. The heroines I've loved are the out and out bitches. I loved Another World's Vicky Hudson... who schemed, plotted, and slept around. When I loved her best she was the "bad girl" not the heroine. And I loved Another World's Lorna Devon, leather-clad rock-bitch who resented her parents, and stuck it to the "good girl" and who was tormented and terrible... and incredible and strong. These characters were the out and out "bitches" of the show, not some perfected heroine. And yet... I was in total sympathy for them. The same goes for All My Children's Kendal Hart -- she's a bitch with trust issues and disastrous relationships with men and her family and... I'm in total sympathy with her.
I don't expect heroines to be perfect. Don't want them to be. But I do want to feel for them. And I can understand a lot, excuse a lot. It's just the strange alchemy of characters whether a character's flaws are ones that fit wity your kinks, what you can excuse, what you can continue to sympathize with. It's partially performance (some actresses are just more gifted at keeping you on their characters side) and it's partially a case of writing because...
It's Not Just SMG
Over the years I've become... not a SMG fan. BUt my problems with Buffy aren't about SMG. I have real issues with SMG's performance over the last couple years of Buffy. I think acting choices (and, yes, editing choices) have a part in my discontent with Buffy. But it's not just a matter of SMG. SMG did in fact play one aforementioned bitch Kendal Hart. I liked SMG's Kendal Hart (albeit not as much as I like the current Alicia Minshew Kendal Hart who... is actually amore sympathic version of the character). But even then as terrible and awful, vindictive, misguided, fucked up as Kendal was (then and now), I liked Kendal. So, why did/do I like Kendal but dislike Buffy? There's something to that. And it's not that Buffy was flawed (all my favorite female characters are). It's not that she was emotionally remote and repressed (Scully and Aeryn were that). It's not that she could be bitch from hell (Vicky, Lorna, Kendal) are bitches on wheels.
It isn't that Buffy was flawed that made me disconnect and lose sympathy for Buffy. It's Buffy's specific flaws that led me dislike her.
It's like choosing a friend, in some ways. You like some people. You dislike others. It's not so much about who was better or worse, it's about what flaws and mistakes, choices and actions fit what you can accept and like. I grew to dislike Buffy -- because of the specific ways her flaws played out and because of her choices.
In Conclusion
So if I feel that way, why write her?
Because I find Buffy's situation sympathetic. I find her circumstances sympathetic. I find her universe compelling. So maybe if she made different choices...
Okay if choices are based on character then is she doomed to make the same choices again? If I change her choices am I changeing her? Is it possible to be in any way true to Buffy and have her. . . do something else?
This is what I struggle with when I write her. This is probably why I hit walls when trying to write her. I'm not trying to make Buffy become someone she isn't. But can she grow and make different choices? This is why I still find interest in writing her. This is the challenge she presents for me.
Strangely it is my dissatisfaction that presents the challenge. I don't write Farscape-fic. I'm content with Farscape and with Aeryn. I've written X-Files fic, but really, not the last couple of seasons of it (although I could be challenged to do so. I find Scully's repression interesting in its own right. It's not that I never became frustrated with Scully-- I did. It's that I never stopped empathizing with her). And, honestly, I won't be writing Post-Chosen Buffy (unless it's a sequel to Perfect Vengeance) because, I have no interest in writing Post-Chosen Buffy because she's one step too far for me. I don't know that a purely canon Post-Chosen Buffy can ever become who I would wish her to be. So I tend to continue with Post-Season 6 Buffy because somewhere in Season 6-7, the Buffy I could have admired for the way she faced adversity became lost.
For Buffy to be a heroine for me, she has to face that adversity in a different way. Having faced that adversity the way that she did and made the choices that she did and ending where she did in Season 7, I don't have interest in that Buffy. I want one a few steps back so that she can face those trials differently.
And that's probably why I can't be talked into being satisfied with what I got in Season 7. I wasn't. And I'm not interested in becoming so.
The thing is, why debate the issue? I don't have any desire to talk someone out of their liking the character of Buffy. I have no motivation to talk someone out of their contentment with the conclusion of BtVS. If you feel that way, good for you. I see no reason why I should try to talk you out of it, point by debateable point. By the same token, I cannot simply be "talked out" of my feelings on the issue. It's not going to happen. I know it's not going to happen, so I why argue about it? (Plus, the space I would need to express my feelings on the subject would be rude to a point beyond belief to post in someone else's LJ, so I simply couldn't respond there even if I wanted to debate the issue).
That said, my personal rambling talking points and musings on the subject of Miss Buffy Summers and BtVS...
Not Getting What I Wanted
It was mentioned that if I focused on "what [I] didn't get in Season (6)7," I would never "be satisfied" with the season. I understand what this person was saying, but I don't think it works that way. The fact of the matter is that I wasn't satisfied with Season 7. I wasn't satisfied with what I got. If I had been, I wouldn't have been so pissed off that I watched only one scene in "End of Days" when it aired, and I wouldn't have been cursing a blue streak when I initially read the script for "Chosen." Being cognizant of and even identifying the specifics of why I felt dissatisfied, isn't creating the disatisfaction. The disatisfaction was there in a very visceral form. At this late date all I do is catalogue and categorize my BtVS issues in an effort to understand them (which is usually part of the effort to write fanfic. Identifying what was true in the characters as they existed and what I needed to be satisfied with their stories... and how to bridge that gap is what fuels my writing.
And it's not that I expected or even need for the show to be perfect. I've been disappointed in other shows. I adored the X-Files, and, let's be honest, its final season was crap. However, that disatisfaction with the final couple of seasons doesn't color my view of its characters. It didn't sour me on the show. I still enjoy it, the memory of it, and the things which attracted me to the show are things that still attract me in reruns. Forever Knight's finale was atrocious. Even worse than Chosen. It was one giant "fuck you!" to the audience and undermined the entire series... and yet, it still didn't sour me on the characters the same way BtVS did (I never had cared for Natalie. It did change my view of Nick--stupid ponce. But my love of Lacroix and Janette remains). I don't have to "get what I wanted" to end a series still having enjoyment in it. But something about BtVS makes it one of two instances where my disatisfaction with the overall scope of the story is intense enough to have lingering effects. BtVS changed some of my viewing habits and tastes. Whereas I once adored bickering/bantering relationships on screen, I now have real problems with enjoying them, seeing ugliness that I wouldn't have seen without the ugliness of what was done on BtVS. . .and I trace a lot of that to my disatisfaction with the journey I took with Buffy. It wasn't there before. It is there now. I didn't want or need "perfect" or to have exactly what I wanted. But I'm not satisfied with what I got. Just not.
(And btw, I'm okay with that. I don't angst over this issue. I find it a curiosity, and I examine it, trying to suss out exactly why I feel this way. It's an informative process. I find it a point of interest-- not angst-- and when I grow bored with it or something else grabs my attention, I move on. )
Buffy was depressed...
This issue features prominently in any pro/con discussion of Buffy. No one actually debates that Buffy was depressed in Season 6 (and part of Season 5 too, actually). The difference comes in with how people view her actions with regard to depression. How much does (or doesn't) depression excuse? How much is explained by her depression. How sympathetic is the audience to that depression in her. These factors (and the assumptions which come with them) tint and shade the context we give to Buffy in the latter seasons and often indicate our position regarding Buffy. We can look at that depression in two lights.
Depression in terms of storytelling
First off, I don't think season long depression was a particularly good story choice in a television series format. Depression, even in reality, is not easily observed. Living with someone in depression isn't easy, and isn't the least bit enjoyable for the people around the depressive. This holds true for an audience watching it over the looooooong course of a 22 episode season spread out over eight loooong months. Of particular difficulty is the fact that depression distorts perception. How the depressive views their circumstances is not exactly rational. In a television format we are not, and cannot be in the depressive character's shoes. We do not see the world through that character's eyes. We are the observers. Perhaps it is possible in a novel format to see through the character's eyes and thus sympathize fully with the depressive character. However, this story was not told in a novel format. It was TV. We, the audience, can only observe the character. We, the audience, see her actions in objective form (with a degree of subjectivity, certainly, but we don't view the world through the depressive's POV). We see the character's world more rationally than the character does and this effects how we view her behavior. This in itself makes us view Buffy's actions differently than Buffy does. Now, add in the fact that Buffy became utterly impossible to read and emotionally remote. A story which is already difficult to convey because of emotional distance is compounded in its difficulty by a character (and/or actress) who witholds expression, who doesn't relate, who doesn't openly emote very often, and who virtually incapable of articulating her feelings in a comprehensible fashion. This culmination of factors makes me think that any story which depends on observing depression for an extended period of time is doomed to lose a lot of its audience along the way. A lot of people are going to lose sympathy and empathy and patience with the character no matter how realistic depression as an emotional disorder happens to be.
Quite simply, from the outside looking in, characters in depression are frustrating to watch at best and infuriating at worst. And a season of it can become an excruciatingly aggravating viewing experience.
It doesn't work particularly well from a plotting standpoint. While it is valid to say that someone in a depression isn't going to have an epiphany and just get better... again, in a storytelling format that doesn't work so well. It may be emotionally realistic from a clinical psychological standpoint because she just couldn't pull herself out of her funk. But from a plotting standpoint, it's an unwise choice and not particularly effective. It wears out the patience of large portions of the audience. It's repetitive to have a character repeatedly realize the same essential point -- "Hey, I'm depressed and detached!" The audience "got" that point way back in November. The character having this realization for the nth time in May ceased to have any compelling drama for substantial portions of the audience. It also means that on an emotional level the plot was moving at a glacial pace. Drama doesn't really increase with repetition. It decreases. So by Buffy repeatedly doing the "I'm in a bad place, I've lost the fire, I don't know why I do these things" over and over and over again, it wasn't compounding the drama, it was bleeding it out, hemmoraging it onto the floor until at the end it was just this pallid corpse of a dramatic point. The metaphor of climbing out of the grave was quite obvious... and emotionally hollow for many, because the issue ceased to have dramatic resonance 10 epiphanies ago (or at least it ceased to do so for many if the tone of the boards and the show's dwindling ratings toward the end of the season were any clue. The slow bleed of ratings from series highs at the beginning of the season to the plummeting depths by ep 20 [ratings the show never substantially recovered] shows that somewhere in this the character of Buffy lost her hold over the audience). So even if it can be argued that Buffy's inability to pull herself out of her black funk is psychologically valid, on a pure plotting level it wasn't one that sustained the interest and empathy of many segments of the audience.
Audience Empathy with Depression...
A lot of the rhetoric surrounding latter season Buffy revolves around empathizing with her depression. Is it an experience people can empathize with? It's not a universal experience, but, you know, even if you've experienced depression, I don't know that means that you empathize with Buffy's depression. I've been depressed in my life, really depressed. And, I did cut Buffy slack for depression. . .to a point. And I recognize that she was depressed. But when push comes to shove... I don't like her for being depressed. And what's more, I don't excuse her actions because she was depressed.
Yes, she was depressed. And yes, depression is something to sympathize with. But depression (in my eyes) does not cover everything Buffy did. And it certainly doesn't excuse what Buffy did. Depression is a mood and it can be self defeating. It can make someone stagnate. It can make someone curl up and hide. However, depression doesn't mean it's okay to take your anger at yourself out on others. It just doesn't. And that is what Buffy did. Depression doesn't have to look like that. Depression doesn't mean having to use someone else. Those are particular (and particularly offensive) coping tactics that do not reflect well on the person doing them. And they are not reflective of the psychological state of being depressed. They are a particularly ugly choice of expressing psychological issues that are not depression dependent. They can be associated with depression, they are not caused by depression. They are examples of other psychological issues which can piggy back on depression.
Yes, Buffy was depressed. . . but she was also fucked up. These are two different issues that happen to compound one another. Abusers are depressed. Depression doesn't explain abuse. Kids and postal workers who go on mass murdering sprees are depressed, depression isn't the cause of the murdering spree. Depression is a state. Taking that depression out on someone else is a choice. Buffy was depressed. How she coped with it, was a choice. I don't dislike her for being depressed. I dislike her choices.
Buffy's situation was tough. Buffy's situation was sympathetic. Buffy's depression is unfortunate. But facing adversity in and of itself isn't heroism. It's really bad luck. Buffy had a really bad situation and a lot of adversity. But that's something to pity not to admire. Heroism is in how one chooses to face adversity not in the adversity itself. So because that Buffy was in the midst of clinical depression facing many obstacles is pitiable, it doesn't make me admire her. To admire her I look at how she faced those obstacles and how she dealt with her depression.
She didn't deal with depression well. She was emotionally dishonest with her friends, never openly discussing her issues with what they had done. She never sought professional help (no, talking about it in CWDP doesn't count. She didn't seek help and it was another instance of 'talking in a dead man's ear doesn't make it real.' She says it, denies it, and erases it by killing the vamp all in one set of scenes. This is not a theraputic breakthrough). She chose to use Spike (and regardless of whether he allowed it, embraced it, or said it was okay, it's not okay. That only means that Spike had issues of his own. He was a co-dependent. I don't blame Buffy that Spike allowed her to use him. That's his messed-up co-depence. I blame Buffy that she did use him. Her choice. That he said she could use him doesn't excuse that she chose to actually do so. And I don't have to like or excuse her for it. I can look at the way she chose to deal with her situation and think... um... not admirable of you, Buffster. I don't think I like you very much.
Buffy was flawed...
When pointing out Buffy's failings it usualy leads to the truism of "Buffy was flawed..."
Yes, I think most can agree that Buffy is flawed. Still, when it's said as in context of "you want a perfect heroine" I think there's a failure to communicate. Saying it that way presupposes that I want or need a perfect heroine, which may be an incredibly wrong supposition.
In point of fact I don't want a perfect heroine. I usually actively dislike perfect heroines. It's just a matter of whether I find the characters flaws ones that create a character that works for me.
I look back at the heroines I've really loved over the years, perfect isn't what I would use to describe them. Scully wasn't perfect. She was repressed and she denied herself, but I never, ever lost sympathy for her. Now, admittedly Scully was more perfect than Buffy. She was relentlessly strong, resourceful, and independent. She was relentlessly honorable. So maybe some might like to categorize her as perfected. So I look to Aeryn Sun. Aeryn Sun wasn't perfect. She had a past far, far more dark than Buffy's. Aeryn commited terrible crimes. She was also repressed, difficult, remote. . .and I didn't lose sympathy with her. Again, though, she had such an unshakable sense of honor and heroism that maybe (if someone squinted hard enough) they could say that she was perfected in some respects.
So then I have to look at my other favorite heroines (and sadly, it's perhaps part of the industry problems that I begin to reach toward soaps). On soaps, I generally loathe the "good girl" heroines. The heroines I've loved are the out and out bitches. I loved Another World's Vicky Hudson... who schemed, plotted, and slept around. When I loved her best she was the "bad girl" not the heroine. And I loved Another World's Lorna Devon, leather-clad rock-bitch who resented her parents, and stuck it to the "good girl" and who was tormented and terrible... and incredible and strong. These characters were the out and out "bitches" of the show, not some perfected heroine. And yet... I was in total sympathy for them. The same goes for All My Children's Kendal Hart -- she's a bitch with trust issues and disastrous relationships with men and her family and... I'm in total sympathy with her.
I don't expect heroines to be perfect. Don't want them to be. But I do want to feel for them. And I can understand a lot, excuse a lot. It's just the strange alchemy of characters whether a character's flaws are ones that fit wity your kinks, what you can excuse, what you can continue to sympathize with. It's partially performance (some actresses are just more gifted at keeping you on their characters side) and it's partially a case of writing because...
It's Not Just SMG
Over the years I've become... not a SMG fan. BUt my problems with Buffy aren't about SMG. I have real issues with SMG's performance over the last couple years of Buffy. I think acting choices (and, yes, editing choices) have a part in my discontent with Buffy. But it's not just a matter of SMG. SMG did in fact play one aforementioned bitch Kendal Hart. I liked SMG's Kendal Hart (albeit not as much as I like the current Alicia Minshew Kendal Hart who... is actually amore sympathic version of the character). But even then as terrible and awful, vindictive, misguided, fucked up as Kendal was (then and now), I liked Kendal. So, why did/do I like Kendal but dislike Buffy? There's something to that. And it's not that Buffy was flawed (all my favorite female characters are). It's not that she was emotionally remote and repressed (Scully and Aeryn were that). It's not that she could be bitch from hell (Vicky, Lorna, Kendal) are bitches on wheels.
It isn't that Buffy was flawed that made me disconnect and lose sympathy for Buffy. It's Buffy's specific flaws that led me dislike her.
It's like choosing a friend, in some ways. You like some people. You dislike others. It's not so much about who was better or worse, it's about what flaws and mistakes, choices and actions fit what you can accept and like. I grew to dislike Buffy -- because of the specific ways her flaws played out and because of her choices.
In Conclusion
So if I feel that way, why write her?
Because I find Buffy's situation sympathetic. I find her circumstances sympathetic. I find her universe compelling. So maybe if she made different choices...
Okay if choices are based on character then is she doomed to make the same choices again? If I change her choices am I changeing her? Is it possible to be in any way true to Buffy and have her. . . do something else?
This is what I struggle with when I write her. This is probably why I hit walls when trying to write her. I'm not trying to make Buffy become someone she isn't. But can she grow and make different choices? This is why I still find interest in writing her. This is the challenge she presents for me.
Strangely it is my dissatisfaction that presents the challenge. I don't write Farscape-fic. I'm content with Farscape and with Aeryn. I've written X-Files fic, but really, not the last couple of seasons of it (although I could be challenged to do so. I find Scully's repression interesting in its own right. It's not that I never became frustrated with Scully-- I did. It's that I never stopped empathizing with her). And, honestly, I won't be writing Post-Chosen Buffy (unless it's a sequel to Perfect Vengeance) because, I have no interest in writing Post-Chosen Buffy because she's one step too far for me. I don't know that a purely canon Post-Chosen Buffy can ever become who I would wish her to be. So I tend to continue with Post-Season 6 Buffy because somewhere in Season 6-7, the Buffy I could have admired for the way she faced adversity became lost.
For Buffy to be a heroine for me, she has to face that adversity in a different way. Having faced that adversity the way that she did and made the choices that she did and ending where she did in Season 7, I don't have interest in that Buffy. I want one a few steps back so that she can face those trials differently.
And that's probably why I can't be talked into being satisfied with what I got in Season 7. I wasn't. And I'm not interested in becoming so.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-03-26 08:27 pm (UTC)