Watcher Junior

Countdown to Slayage 5: Draft Program!

noreply@blogger.com (Kristen Romanelli) — Wed, 30 May 2012 17:22:00 +0000

Hooray! The day has come! The day when they post the Slayage 5 draft program!

~Page break for rambling etc-ness.~

From the very first keynote, I'm excited and a bit overwhelmed by what the WSA has put together this year. “Break Out the Champagne, Pinocchio”: Angel and the Puppet Paradox with Cynthea Masson. Yes, please!

And, of course, my first conflict pops up immediately after the Friday keynote by pitting three phenomenal sounding panels against each other. I want to hear about Lilah and Adele, but Cordelia and soliloquies are in parallel panels! Damn you, interesting academics and your fascinating scholarship! The 1:45 block is less of a question for me, though, because the Music of the Whedonverses is there. That is exactly my bag. Neil Lerner + Steve Halfyard = Panel touchdown.

...I spoke too soon. DAVID. How could you allow your panel to be at the same time as this?

It appears that David's presentation “Bring Your Own Subtext”: Surveying Online Fans about the Values Expressed by Joss Whedon’s Work is happening at the same time. Friends from Slayage 4 may remember what happened the last time I skipped on of his panels. Okay, so the struggle of choices continues, after all. The entire schedule continues like this for me.

I will say, however, I'm extremely glad to see that this is happening: Kris Woofter (Dawson C) — Watchers in the Woods: Ludic Reflexivity as Horror Criticism in Cabin in the Woods

Cabin is already making an appearance! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

In all, the program looks amazing, although it seems the WSA has constructed it to especially cause inner-turmoil for the conference attendee. How Whedon.

What are Angel's values?

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Wed, 30 May 2012 17:00:00 +0000

This week's survey will have you examine the values expressed by Angel, the television series created by David Greenwalt and Joss Whedon. (The comic series will be the subject of a later survey.) It will be interesting to see whether there are commonalities in the values expressed here with other projects. You'll be able to find out how it turned out the week of June 12.

Take the Survey!

Reminder about The Cabin in the Woods survey: The survey is still open! It'll remain open for one more week, then we'll provide preliminary results next week. We've gotten about 50 responses, so we thank all of your for your efforts! There's over 30 incomplete surveys, so don't forget to finish by next Tuesday!

What do I need to know about these surveys?: This survey is one way of quantifying your perceptions of the meanings of Angel. (Don't forget: restrict your answers to the values expressed by the television series!) If you would like to learn more about this type of survey, it's called a Rokeach Value Survey. This survey's validity has been extensively tested over several decades, so the questions have been shown to avoid bias and allow us to compare responses about a range of works.

The survey will ask you to indicate the extent to which you see each value to be important in Angel. For each question, rank the value's importance from 1 to 5 as represented by the film. There are no right or wrong answers. Fill out the survey to the best of your ability as an indication of what your perception of the film is. There are 44 multiple choice questions.

Each of those questions has a comments box. Comments providing your thoughts on the issues raised by the questions or why you made your decisions are welcomed and are an important part of the study.

Reminder about the schedule: We'll be posting surveys for each major work that Joss Whedon's been a part of over the next two months. Here's the schedule:

Angel: May 30 through June 12

Firefly: June 5 through June 19

Serenity: June 12 through June 26

Dollhouse: June 19 through July 3

Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog: June 26 through July 10

Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Season 8: July 3 through July 17

TBA: Angel (the comics), Buffy: Season 9, Much Ado About Nothing, Dr. Horrible 2.

As we did with The Avengers survey today, we'll post an overview of the results in two weeks, with more detailed information on responses to each question later. I plan on reporting the results to the Whedon Studies Association's bi-annual conference in July. We'll let you know what the scholars and fans at the conference think too!

A final reminder on privacy: KwikSurveys doesn't use or sell to a 3rd party any data collected. And since the survey asks no identifying questions about your demographics, I have no idea who you are or what your contact information is, so fear not.

The Avengers Survey Results!

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Wed, 30 May 2012 15:04:00 +0000

Today, we'll take a look at the results of The Avengers Rokeach Values Survey after two weeks. For those of you interested in results from prior surveys, there's a summary post here, which discusses the last major survey of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer fandom (by Claudia Rebaza) and summarizes the results of the Rokeach Values Survey on that series in 2010.

Let's start with the question of who you are...
Over 300 people took the survey on what they thought the values of Whedon's blockbuster were, with more than 2000 unique visitors to the site. What's interesting is that more than 700 people took the Buffy the Vampire Slayer survey, with roughly equivalent number of page views. There were many more comments written for the series too. The Avengers may have been #1 at the box office, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer remains #1 in fan commitment.

But we have many series and films still to go, so take the survey on The Cabin in the Woods, and check in later today for the survey for Angel.

Most of the page views came from Whedonesque, with about 200 coming from Google Reader. As with the prior survey, it's fair to say that we've mostly measured the opinions of the Whedonesque Avengers viewer.

Prior surveys have found an international fandom for Whedon; that worked out well for him with The Avengers, didn't it? Claudia Rebaza's demographic survey found about 1/3 of her respondents came from outside the US and we duplicated that result with the 2010 Buffy survey having 31 percent coming from outside the US. This time? It's again about 1/3 of the page views coming from outside the US, with The Avengers online fandom coming from, in order, UK (about 15%), Canada (~7%), and China (~3%), with under a 100 page views from each of Australia, Germany, Russia, Sweden, France, and Brazil.

As a media studies professor, I'm more interested in is getting some indication of how the "Bring Your Own Subtext" principle that Whedon asked of his Buffy audiences applies across all his works. The networks and studios get much more demographics info than we could ever gather. The intersection of audience demographics, cognition, and popular culture is really the purview of my peers in communications studies and marketing. You and I are more interested in the diversity of subtexts that online fans brought to The Avengers and other Whedonesque works, right?

What are the values you perceive in The Avengers?
For you, this film celebrated enlightened individualism, meritocracy, and national security:

First, what's interesting here is that while you felt that courage, helpfulness, competence, and freedom were frequently valued by Buffy the Vampire Slayer, national security was rarely a value.

A few of you expressed some ambivalence about the national security value, suggesting it was global rather than national and that the need for heroes itself suggests flaws in the military status quo. The stats back up the perception reflected in those comments, as national security's "always" values was the only one of the group to be below 50%. (Myself, I regard the film as American, despite its global distribution and the Black Widow's back story. The source material is American comic books, the actors known for their English-language movies, its shooting locations were mostly New Mexico and Ohio, the planetary invasion's in the US...)

Two regarded Tony Stark and Bruce Banner being key to understanding how the film represented the values of being helpful and working for others' welfare. One remarked that Bruce seemed to have learned this lesson between Hulk 2 and The Avengers. Two comments disagreed on Tony, with one noting the impact of Coulson's death on him while the other described him as the exception that proves the rule, "missing the mark greatly."

With the value of freedom, independence, and free choice, there was much consensus, with two posters noting Loki's psychic abuse of Hawkeye a noted example. One of you described how the film promoted the value of courage of your beliefs through the thinly-veiled reference to the Holocaust between Loki and the old man, while another poster noted that "I think that sometimes courage gets confused with brashness or fearlessness." One respondent provided an essay on this topic, writing:

"Absolutely. Captain America had all but let go of his patriotism (symbolized by his costume), thinking it "old-fashioned" (read: not relevant), but Coulson told him that sometimes people need a little old-fashioned. And when Cap saw Coulson die because he believed in everything the Avengers (and, I would argue, in particular, Cap) represent, it showed him how much concepts of good, justice, honor and patriotism meant to the man. And in the end, when that woman remembers how Captain America saved her, he sees the symbol he has become and how important that is, even in a more cynical age (maybe even moreso). Tony Stark didn't really know what he believed in, other than that it was pretty awesome being Iron Man (and a "genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist"). But Coulson's sacrifice for the greater good got him to dig deep within himself and find the hero at his core, so much so that he was willing to sacrifice himself to save others. Thor had to find the courage to join a group of humans and fight his own brother, whom he loves, to save the world. And Bruce Banner has to stop running from the Hulk, whom he fears so much that he attempted suicide to get away from him, and embrace him, using him as a tool for good. Coulson sacrificed himself because he believed in the Avengers. Even Nick Fury defied the top brass and tried to stop the planes from nuking Manhattan because he believed it to be wrong. I'm sure he could have been in a lot of trouble for that (but he won't be, because he's Samuel L. Jackson and he'll do whatever the hell he likes, thank you very much!)."

Three respondents found the values of capability, competence, and effectiveness to be the point of the movie, mentioning Black Widow in particular.

What values aren't in The Avengers?
For you, this film was unconcerned with depicting the values of cleanliness, mature love, salvation, and financial assistance:

In the survey on the values in Buffy, salvation was one of two qualities on which there was absolutely no agreement. Cleanliness was no more central in The Avengers than in Buffy, while mature love and tangible assistance were more portrayed in the series.

With salvation, one poster remarked that Whedon's well-known position on organized religions and God made this an interesting question, while another took the affirmative stance with a quote from the film: "There's a lot of blood in my ledger." Posters were mostly amused and confused by the question about cleanliness, remarking on the swath of destruction the superheroes leave, how clean they keep their labs, and whether the carrier was sufficiently shiny to count. Respondents commented that the primary function of SHIELD was to provide tangible assistance to the heroes.

The two comments on mature love both dissented from the survey results. One wrote that "while it occupied little screen time, it was fully on display in the single represented couple: Pepper Potts and Tony Stark" Another praised how "Black Widow and Hawkeye were intimate but not romantic or sexually involved."

Where did you have significant disagreement?
Personal assistance was the primary area of disagreement among respondents, with inner harmony showing significant dissent on its frequency.

Two posters quoted the film when it came to errands and transportation: "Coulson!" and "Better clinch up, Legolas." One commenter noted that Bruce Banner/Hulk was the poster child for how the film represents inner conflict as making us human.

Since this post might start to try your patience if it went longer, we'll post the values that were frequently represented, sometimes represented, and rarely represented later this week.

Cabin in the Woods: Goddardian? Whedonesque?

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Tue, 22 May 2012 18:17:00 +0000

This week's survey will have you examine the values expressed by The Cabin in the Woods, directed by Drew Goddard and co-written by Goddard and Joss Whedon. While all films and series are the product of artistic collaborations between designers, editors, producers, actors, directors, and writers, this will be the first work we'll study in which Whedon was not a credited director. This horror film was the directorial debut of Goddard. The two of them had collaborated before when Goddard wrote and produced for Angel and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. (Goddard also played the Fake Thomas Jefferson in Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog.) It will be interesting to see whether there are commonalities in the values expressed here with other projects. You'll be able to find out how it turned out the week of June 5.

Take the Survey!

Reminder about The Avengers survey: The survey on The Avengers is still open! It'll remain open for one more week, then we'll provide preliminary results in the week of May 29th. We've gotten 306 responses, which is amazing and we thank all of your for your efforts! There's over 80 incomplete surveys, so don't forget to finish by next Tuesday!

What do I need to know about these surveys?: This survey is one way of quantifying your perceptions of the meanings of The Cabin in the Woods. If you would like to learn more about this type of survey, it's called a Rokeach Value Survey. This survey's validity has been extensively tested over several decades, so the questions have been shown to avoid bias and allow us to compare responses about a range of works.

The survey will ask you to indicate the extent to which you see each value to be important in The Cabin in the Woods. For each question, rank the value's importance from 1 to 5 as represented by the film. There are no right or wrong answers. Fill out the survey to the best of your ability as an indication of what your perception of the film is. There are 44 multiple choice questions.

Each of those questions has a comments box. Comments providing your thoughts on the issues raised by the questions or why you made your decisions are welcomed and are an important part of the study.

Reminder about the schedule: We'll be posting surveys for each major work that Joss Whedon's been a part of over the next two months. Here's the schedule:

Angel: May 29 through June 12
Firefly: June 5 through June 19
Serenity: June 12 through June 26
Dollhouse: June 19 through July 3
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog: June 26 through July 10
Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Season 8: July 3 through July 17

TBA: Angel (the comics), Buffy: Season 9, Much Ado About Nothing, Dr. Horrible 2.

As we did with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer survey in 2010, we'll post an overview of the results in two weeks, with more detailed information on responses to each question later. I plan on reporting the results to the Whedon Studies Association's bi-annual conference in July. We'll let you know what the scholars and fans at the conference think too!

A final reminder on privacy: KwikSurveys doesn't use or sell to a 3rd party any data collected. And since the survey asks no identifying questions about your demographics, I have no idea who you are or what your contact information is, so fear not.

How Whedonesque is The Avengers?

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Wed, 16 May 2012 17:00:00 +0000

I thought it would be a neat idea to see what people think the values of Joss Whedon's film, The Avengers are, especially since several film reviewers have argued back and forth about how "Whedonesque" it is. So I made up a survey to see what the audience has to say, especially since we had over 800 respondents to the Buffy the Vampire Survey once it was promoted by Whedonesque.

Take the Survey!

This survey is one way of quantifying your perceptions of the meanings of Joss Whedon's film, The Avengers. If you would like to learn more about this type of survey, it's called a Rokeach Value Survey. It is designed to measure what you perceive to be the important values and forms of social support in Joss Whedon's film, The Avengers.

The survey will ask you to indicate the extent to which you see each value to be important in The Avengers. For each question, rank the value’s importance from 1 to 5 as represented by the series. There are no right and wrong answers. Fill out the survey to the best of your ability as an indication of what your perception of the series is. There are 44 multiple choice questions.

In addition, we'll be posting surveys for each major work that Joss Whedon's been a part of over the next two months. Here's the schedule:

The Avengers: May 15
The Cabin in the Woods: May 22
Angel: May 29
Firefly: June 5
Serenity: June 12
Dollhouse: June 19
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog: June 26
Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Season 8: July 3

TBA: Angel (comic series), Buffy: Season 9, Much Ado About Nothing, Dr. Horrible 2

As we did with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer survey, we'll post an overview of the results within two weeks, with more detailed information on responses to each question later. I plan on reporting the results to the Whedon Studies Association's bi-annual conference in July. We'll let you know what the scholars and fans at the conference think too!

A final note on privacy: KwikSurveys doesn’t itself use or sell to a 3rd party any data collected. And since the survey asks no identifying questions about you besides noting your IP address to prevent ballot box stuffing, I have no idea who you are or what your contact info is, so fear me not.

Joss Whedon Just Can't Win with the New York Times

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Sun, 06 May 2012 18:05:00 +0000

So, as you saw from the previous blog post, the reviewer for the New York Times compared The Avengers unfavorably to Serenity.

What's funny about that is that the NYT review of Serenity was pretty mixed. That review praised it as being better than the Star Wars prequel movie Revenge of the Sith, but also ends up describing the film as nice, unsurprising genre fare that's uninspired visually. Dargis wishes it had been as innovative as Firefly...

Which the New York Times didn't like either. Their blurb reads: "FIREFLY -- A baffling new series from Joss Whedon, creator of 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer,' with a young cast adrift in more ways than one. They're fighting a futuristic civil war in space; nothing makes a lot of sense, and the overt homage to cowboy themes seems an unlikely mix with the space stuff. Sci-fi in spurs? The cast of unknowns includes Nathan Fillion and Gina Torres. Fox, Fridays at 8 p.m., starting Sept. 20."

Their longer review by Caryn James: "Joss Whedon, who so breezily linked vampires with adolescent angst to create 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer,' has a new series billed as a 'sci-fi/western,' and this time the wrenching together of genres is tortured. In its rough first episode on Fox tonight, 'Firefly' is even more of a confusing mess than the description makes it sound. It's a crazy quilt of 'Star Wars,' 'Mad Max' and 'Stagecoach,' just to mention the most obvious films it calls to mind...." To be fair, at least she mentions that "Train Job" aired only because the two-hour pilot was shelved by Fox.

Her evidence that Firefly will get better? That week's premiere of Buffy the Vampire Slayer!

And, in case we've forgotten, O'Connor's review of the first season panned Buffy the Vampire Slayer in a 1997 article talking about how The X-Files and other shows should "not worry" about this supernatural show because "nobody is likely to take this oddball camp exercise seriously…." O’Connor goes on to describe the show’s audience as being "Humbert Humberts all over America" because the main character wears "hot pants and boots" and "changes from one skimpy outfit to another." He can’t seem to get past the concept of a feminine powerful girl as the main character, writing "What a bother, when there are split hair ends to worry about." He ends by saying, "The series is fun, but that’s a thought to make you really shudder."

So, to sum up: The Avengers isn't as good as Serenity, which wasn't as good as Firefly, which wasn't as good as Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which they didn't like. Whedon keeps racking up mixed reviews for not living up to his past work, which the paper of record's prior reviewer didn't really like the first time they reviewed it.

The New York Times prefers Serenity to Avengers

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Sat, 05 May 2012 13:01:00 +0000

The New York Times review of The Avengers compares the blockbuster unfavorably to Serenity, saying, "while “The Avengers” is hardly worth raging about, its failures are significant and dispiriting. The light, amusing bits cannot overcome the grinding, hectic emptiness, the bloated cynicism that is less a shortcoming of this particular film than a feature of the genre. Mr. Whedon’s playful, democratic pop sensibility is no match for the glowering authoritarianism that now defines Hollywood’s comic-book universe. Some of the rebel spirit of Mr. Whedon’s early projects “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” “Firefly” and “Serenity” creeps in around the edges but as detail and decoration rather than as the animating ethos."

Myself, I think that... SPOILER ALERT OF MAJOR PLOT ELEMENTS IN BOTH AVENGERS AND SLIGHTLY CABIN IN THE WOODS after the cut

...the concept of a blood sacrifice as being necessary to bind together groups and societies is pretty Whedonesque, with examples including Jesse from BtVS, Tina from Angel, and the entire setup of Cabin in the Woods.

Okay, so I guess it's also Greenwaltian... and Roman, if you believe their myths.

What do you think? Is The Avengers sufficiently Whedonesque?

"I'm gonna shock the world" (..."gonna show Bad Horse")

noreply@blogger.com (Kristen Romanelli) — Fri, 04 May 2012 16:36:00 +0000

Joss Whedon is certainly shocking the world now. After his run of bad luck with studios, in 2012, Whedon has landed. Just over 15 years ago, he broke into television production and directing (as opposed to writing) with Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and now... NOW...

The Avengers has already made over $281 million, internationally, and it's projected to reap $600 million, worldwide. I think we all understand how massive this is for Whedon. Next to this supergiant, Whedon had April's Cabin in the Woods, the loving deconstruction of horror films that he co-wrote and produced with Drew Goddard, which took three years and an exchange of studios to finally bring it to theatres.

And there's still more to come! His highly anticipated (at least by English major nerds like me) adaptation of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing, which he filmed at his Santa Monica home with several "Whedon regulars" — like Nathan Fillion, Alexis Denisof, Amy Acker, and Fran Kranz — is supposed to hit the festival circuit this year. A brief glimpse of Much Ado was shown during Whedon's interview on CBS Sunday Morning, renewing buzz about this independent project.

That's not even all! There's In Your Eyes, which he wrote and produced. There's the long-awaited Dr. Horrible sequel. 2012 is seeing a unprecedented level of activity from Joss Whedon, and I can't wait to see how lit up everyone will be at Slayage 5 this summer. And most of all? I can't wait to see the array of articles that will undoubtedly hit Slayage and Watcher Junior thanks to this flurry of new material.

"Buffy" article in FSMO

noreply@blogger.com (Kristen Romanelli) — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:25:00 +0000

I've had an article published in this month's issue of Film Score Monthly Online.

It's a "loving retrospective," as I think of it, on Christophe Beck's innovative music in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. What else, right? I've been a fan and reader of FSMO for about seven years (before it even had the "O" and was still a print publication), and I had copy edited some articles for a past writer. So, when my friend Justin asked me if I'd be interested in writing a Joss Whedon-related article for an upcoming issue, I said, "I most certainly would be!"

Although the original form of the article had to be modified due to circumstances beyond anyone's control, I feel like it came out as a good, well-researched piece. And there was research! Buffy is seven seasons long and over a hundred hours of viewing. Musically speaking, little over three of those seasons were pure Christophe Beck. It's a lot of material! So, I watched and rewatched several key episodes like "Surprise," "Passion," "Becoming," "Hush," and "Restless," and I also reread many of the essays in Music, Sound, and Silence in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Insights from writers and musicologists like Janet K. Halfyard were invaluable.

For a while, I wasn't sure how it would come together. I had been writing and researching on lunch breaks and in that window between midnight and 2am. Strangely, the bits written late at night before collapsing into bed were more cohesive than anything I composed during midday. My husband gave me some very helpful notes, however, that helped me refine some problem areas — most of which were written at 1pm. Lesson: Don't write during normal hours. Haha!

In the end, the article came out to just shy of 2,000 words and I'm very proud of what I submitted. The feedback has been very good so far, so I would call this a win.

Cross-posted to KB, For Now.

Joss Whedon and Theology CFP

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:22:00 +0000

The works of Joss Whedon—from his hit television shows Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, and Firefly, to his popular comic book writing on Fray and X-Men, to his upcoming and highly anticipated Avengers film—are among the most influential pop culture phenomena of the last two decades. They are also among the most provocative when it comes to explorations of religion, family, friendship, sexuality, forgiveness, redemption, hope, love, and other dimensions of the human condition. While several volumes have been written on Whedon’s opus from philosophical and cultural studies perspectives, relatively little attention has been given to the theological significance—and implications—of how he portrays these subjects.

We are soliciting abstract submissions for an anthology volume on Joss Whedon and theology. Accordingly, submissions should address any of the above topics or other themes pertinent to Whedon’s work through a broadly theological lens. We are looking for critical engagement from any religious (e.g. Christian, Muslim, Buddhist) or non-religious (e.g. atheist, agnostic, humanist) perspective and also welcome theological approaches informed explicitly by issues of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, class, etc.

Please send a 250-300 word proposal and your CV by email. Both should be in Word or PDF format. The deadline for proposal submission is March 14th, 2012. Finished essays will be due by June 30th, 2012 and should be around 5,000 words in length.

Materials and questions should be sent to Anthony R. Mills (cardinal.tony@hotmail.com), John Morehead (johnwmorehead@msn.com), and J. Ryan Parker (jamesryanparker@gmail.com).

Anthony R. Mills, Ph.D.
Independent Scholar

John W. Morehead
Independent Scholar
www.theofantastique.com

J. Ryan Parker, Ph.D.
Independent Scholar
www.poptheology.com

Call for Mr. Pointy nominations

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 21:20:00 +0000

We write to invite nominations of excellent scholarship in Whedon Studies for work copyrighted in 2011 to be recognized by the Whedon Studies Association’s Mr. Pointy Awards. Nominations can be submitted to the jury for:

• best article (including scholarly chapters in books, scholarly articles, scholarly essays online)
• best book (monograph or collection)

These articles and books should be on any aspect of the various Whedonverses, their audiences, or the work of Joss Whedon or that of his associates (e.g. other writers on a Whedon series, the music director of a Whedon series, an actor in a Whedon series, an editor of a Whedon film, etc.).

Nominations should be sent by WSA members by March 31 to Lorna Jowett, chair of the Awards Committee, at Lorna.Jowett@northampton.ac.uk. Please note that WSA members may not nominate articles or books they wrote/co-wrote and/or edited, although they may nominate articles from the book they edited if the articles were not written by them. WSA members may nominate book volumes to which they contributed an essay but did not perform larger editing duties. Only associates of the WSA may nominate.

David Kociemba
Secretary, Awards Committee

Buffy vs. Evil

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:13:00 +0000

The long awaited sixth issue of Watcher Junior is here!

Ensley Guffey, in "We Just Declared War": Buffy as General", examines the eight seasons through the lens of Military Studies. The most famous use of Military Studies to look at BtVS is Anthony H. Cordesman’s “Biological Warfare and the ‘Buffy Paradigm’” (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2002). That article uses BtVS as a lens to examine U.S. Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) policies and preparedness, rather than military science being used to examine Buffy. There's been other articles examining the series, whether it be through the literary inheritance of Beowulf, the traditions of the just female warrior, or simply a look at the weaponry on display in the series. But Ensley's paper uses John Keegan's The Mask of Command to critique the strengths and weaknesses of Buffy's leadership style, from her continual presence amongst her troops to her puzzling decision to have the Slayer Army forgo their powers. If you wanted a nuanced look at the pros and cons of Buffy's leadership style, this article's the place to begin.

Faith Parke, meanwhile, takes a look at her namesake in “I Hope Evil Takes MasterCard”: Faith the Vampire Slayer and the Image of the Bad Girl in Society". She regards the character as an example of second wave feminism from which the show's female protagonists distance themselves.

Jared Rose takes on similar issues, as he looks at how the series represents the masquerade of femininity by Buffy, Darla and others through the prism of the feminist debates about the legitimacy of sex-workers in his “You Know, I'm Extremely Youthful. And Peppy!”: Buffy, Playing Girl, and Popular Culture Representation of Sex-Worker Feminism". Here, he finds Buffy's status as an open, complex symbol requiring thoughtful investigation more important than whether Buffy is a good girl or a bad girl.

The Mr. Pointy Award Winners!

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:49:00 +0000

We are extremely pleased to announce the winners of the 2010 Whedon Studies Association awards for excellence in scholarship:

Short Mr. Pointy Winner

Buckman, Alyson R. "'Go Ahead, Run Away! Say it was Horrible!': Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along-Blog as Resistant Text." Slayage: The Journal of the Whedon Studies Association 8.1 (2010): n. pag. Web.

Long Mr. Pointy Winner

Attinello, Paul, Janet K. Halfyard, and Vanessa Knights, eds. Music, Sound, and Silence in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate, 2010. Print.

Congratulations to the winners--and all of the nominees! The quality of scholarship the jury had to select from demonstrates the clear and continued growth of Whedon Studies.

The other finalists this year were:

Short Mr. Pointy finalists:

Buckman, Alyson R. “Triangulated Desire in Angel and Buffy.” Sexual Rhetoric in the Works of Joss Whedon: New Essays. Ed. Erin B. Waggoner. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. 48-92. Print.

Frohard-Dourlent, Hélène. "'Lez-faux' Representations: How Buffy Season Eight Navigates the Politics of Female Heteroflexibility." Sexual Rhetoric in the Works of Joss Whedon: New Essays. Ed. Erin B. Waggoner. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. 31-47. Print.

Kociemba, David. “To Spoil or Not to Spoil: Teaching Television’s Narrative Complexity.” Buffy in the Classroom: Essays on Teaching with the Vampire Slayer. Eds. Jodie A. Kreider and Meghan K. Winchell. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. 7-21. Print.

Masson, Cynthea. “Who Painted the Lion?—A Gloss on Dollhouse’s ‘Belle Chose.’” Slayage: The Journal of the Whedon Studies Association 8.2-3 (2010): n. pag. Special Issue: Fantasy Is Not Their Purpose: Joss Whedon's Dollhouse. Eds. Cynthea Masson and Rhonda V. Wilcox. Web.

Long Mr. Pointy finalists

Comeford, Amijo and Tamy Burnett, eds. The Literary Angel: Essays on Influences and Traditions Reflected in the Joss Whedon Series. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. Print.

Kreider, Jodie A., and Meghan K. Winchell, eds. Buffy in the Classroom: Essays on Teaching with the Vampire Slayer . Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. Print.

Waggoner, Erin B, ed. Sexual Rhetoric in the Works of Joss Whedon: New Essays. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010. Print.

How do I slay thee? Let me count the ways!

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 22:30:00 +0000

Found this Call for Submissions in my inbox today. Thought I'd share. It's for anyone, not just the previously published or those in academia. So get those in!

"CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

I am seeking submissions for Buffy Verse, an anthology of quality poetry inspired by Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I am looking for lively verse that engages with the Buffy mythos. For example, you may choose to revisit a certain episode, examine the intersection of some aspect of Buffy and real life, or simply write a poem with a relevant Buffy epigraph.

Submissions should be sent either as a Word document or pasted in the body of an email to me at erinlyndalmartin [at sign] gmail. No cover letter or bio is necessary at this time. Please put "submission" somewhere in your subject line.

I will be reading submissions until August 1, 2011.

I have already sent a proposal for this book to several agents and presses, but if any of you are involved in publishing and would like to discuss this project, please feel free to contact me.

I'm looking forward to reading your work!

---Erin Martin"

"Nobody Messes with My Boyfriend!"

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:58:00 +0000

Pop Matters seems to have its comments turned off on its Whedon articles. I wonder why? So, this is my commentary on the article, Women Who Hate Women: Female Competition in 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' by Faye Murray & Holly Golding.

First, interesting article on this issue. Right now, they've got Willow-Buffy and Tara-everybody as positive models of female solidarity, contrasted with Buffy-Faith, Cordelia-everybody and Anya-everybody. For additional models of female friendships unmarked by male competition, we also have Echo-Sierra (Dollhouse) and Kaylee-Inara (Firefly). While their article is on the Buffyverse, the site's series is on Whedon, so I think a mention of that might have been appropriate. I think I agree with their last paragraph more than an earlier declaration that "Buffy presents us with a world where female friendship can only exist where women aren’t competing for men."

Second, the Sharon Ross article looks like a good article to pick up. Good find!

Third, while the prevalence of such commentary is ultimately subjective, I can at least indicate a few additional quotes dealing with this issue: "Buffy’s taunts to male villains revolve around their impending defeat, inadequacies as villains and relative lack of strength ... rather than personal observations about their attractiveness."

Buffy remarks on the Master's "fruit punch mouth" in her final battle with him in "Prophecy Girl." In the pilot, during her first combat with vampires, she remarks "Okay, first of all, what's with the outfit? Live in the now, okay? You look like DeBarge!" In "Something Blue," Buffy mocks Spike by calling him "flaccid." She also does a lot of work with her facial expressions with Adam and the Trio.

As for being bitchy about appearances, Spike takes the cake. (Although Anya and Cordelia have incisive comments on attire as well.) There's an excellent article on camp and Spike in Slayage: Cynthea Masson and Marni Stanley, “Queer Eye of that Vampire Guy: Spike and the Aesthetics of Camp."

Not only is Spike moved to attempt suicide after being given clown pants to wear, he also has this narration in the third episode of Angel: (falsetto)"How can I thank you, you mysterious, black-clad hunk of a night thing? (low voice) No need, little lady, your tears of gratitude are enough for me. You see, I was once a badass vampire, but love and a pesky curse defanged me. Now I'm just a big, fluffy puppy with bad teeth. (Rachel steps closer to Angel, and Angel steps back warding her off with his hands) No, not the hair! Never the hair! (high voice) But there must be someway I can show my appreciation. (low voice) No, helping those in need's my job, - and working up a load of sexual tension, and prancing away like a magnificent poof is truly thanks enough! (high voice) I understand. I have a nephew who is gay, so... (low voice) Say no more. Evil's still afoot! And I'm almost out of that Nancy-boy hair-gel that I like so much. Quickly, to the Angel-mobile, away!"

Fourth, "Once again, this ability to maintain friendships with the other women on the show can be attributed to her sexuality; as a lesbian she poses no sexual threat to the heterosexual female characters and therefore presents no competition when it comes to dating and attracting male attention." Can you tell me why this has nothing to do with Tara's personality? Otherwise, I think you run the risk of assuming what you need to prove, here.

Ultimately, letting a text be open to interpretation rather explicitly contesting every problematic element activates viewers to perform active readings of media products. Such texts teach the tools of media criticism essential to feminism and thus promote progressive politics by encouraging viewers to read against the grain. That's to be preferred, to my mind, to works whose explicitness teach readers to follow along with the text. What a text does should not be forgotten in the face of what it depicts. The balancing act referenced in the last paragraph is the best choice on artistic and social grounds, I'd argue.

Spotlight on Joss Whedon

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:31:00 +0000

Pop Matters is doing a special on Joss Whedon this week, with pieces on the movie, his "unproduced" Alien: Resurrection script, the biblical studies perspective, and a general defense of the body of work. Take a look! The link is in the blog post title.

Rewatching Buffy

noreply@blogger.com (Kristen Romanelli) — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:36:00 +0000

As most people who read this blog know, there's a great Buffy Rewatch happening in the Whedon fan (and "aca-fan") community. Nikki Stafford is heading up a Buffy Rewatch segment on her blog which features (and will be featuring) some awesome guest bloggers, many of whom come from the Slayage conference 'verse (including David, who's first post went up yesterday, and myself). We're working our way through Season 2 right now and I've been having some wicked flashbacks to watching the show while it was in broadcast.

When Buffy began airing in March of 1997, I was a sophomore in high school who had transferred in part-way through the previous semester. Pair that with the fact that I had watched the 1992 movie an embarrassing number of times since its VHS release and you can see how I quickly identified with the our heroine and became a fan of the show. So while I'm watching Buffy again, from the very first episode to the very last, I'm not only flashing back on fashion and pop culture, but on being 16 itself. It's incredibly weird to look at this as a 30 year old and remember just how much I empathized with Buffy when I was that age — the same age being portrayed in the series throughout its run.

For example, 30 year old me is somewhat creeped out by the Buffy & Angel thing. 16 year old me was all "ZOMG ROMANCE!" (if "ZOMG" was something the kids would say in 1997... which it wasn't). I guess now that I'm watching it all over again, I'm getting back in touch with my angsty, hormonal, super-emotional teenage self. This show really is a melodrama! No wonder we all loved it in the late-90s (and early aughts). It's totally formative years stuff. Also, it helps that all these flashbacks are underscored by my high school playlist (wait... we didn't have "playlists" back then — we had mix tapes, on actual tape cassettes). This experience is very weird.

Buffy Tries a Little Tenderness

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:19:00 +0000

14. It is important to be loving [affectionate, tender]

Summary:

There’s a rough consensus in the numbers above, but the lack of comments indicate an even greater consensus. It’s either that, or people started realizing at this point how long this survey is! The one area where there was some disagreement was on the qualifying terms of tenderness and affection, where some asked if friendship qualified and others talked about the varying expressions of love from rough to tender.

Your Comments:

Although, a little tough love is important to snap people out of their funks that may be holding the entire group back and leading them into possible danger.

What better example is there of this, than the love between the main characters, which stays through, though tested hard at several turns during the series.

it all comes down to love. the choices they make, the places they go, the things they do.

This isn't a huge subject on the show, but I think that the best relationship on the show is Willow and Tara, because they truly love each other, and can be very affectionate.

Absolutely. Buffy's last night in Sunnydale was about feeling the physical presence of Spike's love. Countless times, a hug has been shown as a true sign of warm affection, its importance never in doubt. Buffy and Giles hug when he returns to defeat Dark Willow. Giles hugs Willow when he learns she's still alive in "Doppelgangland." Ultimately, affectionate, tender love is what Xander used to save the world at the end of season six.

Especially, Buffy, Dawn, Willow, Tara, to some degree, Giles.

Whether it's spoken or it's shown non-verbally, there is never any doubt as to the scoobies feelings for one another. Their devotion to each other and the cause show how to make connections and good relationships last.

Again, I think this is often hard for some characters, but it is the glue that holds them together.

tended to be tender within the group, less so to others

Love is what keeps Buffy alive, mostly, and even motivates her self sacrifice.

In this series, there's no glory in death. There's only how you spend your time alive. Everyone in this series only appears happy when they feel loved.

Yes. Loving and showing it are seen as crucial in the Buffy world.

This value is also seen consistently throughout the series. Perhaps the best example would be during the course of season 5 where Buffy feels like she is losing her humanity, her ability to love - and without that she feels like she'll be nothing, an empty shell of a human being. At the end of the season she is then able to make the ultimate sacrifice due to her great love for her sister, her friends, and the world.

is friendship enough of love?

yes, despite the dangers of love——but the risk is central to the value

See above; the characters struggled to find a balance between logic and emotion.

Yep

I don't believe this was a huge theme. There was a mix of tender and rough.

Thats how Xander saved the world.

Many different types of love were portrayed.

Buffy vs. Spock

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:55:00 +0000

13. It is important to be logical [consistent, rational]

Summary:

Essentially, the commentariat believe that reason is necessary, but not sufficient in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Comments constantly included emotion and instinct as equal or superior values, both in terms of prominence and importance. While some horror and fantasy series embrace the irrational as a chief virtue necessary for survival, as in the works of HP Lovecraft, none of the commenters noted the series representing the virtues of embracing irrationality or acknowledging that there are things “man was not meant to know.”

Your Comments:

Sometimes shown by the lack of rationality.

To an extent, but hesitation can get you killed. Sometimes it is best to go with your gut, not always but sometimes...

I would say emotions and emotional truths are given more validity than strict logic in most cases. Or at least are explored more fully.

Being logical leads to rewards, irrational behaviour usually leads to some sort of agony.

Again yes it is important, but is heavily balanced by placing emphasis on how important emotions are to decision making too. So the process of decision making is logical but emotions form a part of logic, it is not 'cold' rationalism.

There is wide variety of people and personalities on BTVS. Giles is very logical and rational. This can be a good thing, but it can also get you into trouble. Buffy, on the other hand, is rather impulsive. I think her and Giles balance each other out.

While sometimes irrationality saved the day (Buffy's roommate Kathy comes to mind), for the most part, yes, logic was portrayed as a strength on the show. Buffy was different from other Slayers because, while she saw the value in the books and other teachings, she ultimately was the one in the field, and needed to trust her gut, her own sense of highly refined logic and rationale. "That guy has a hopelessly out-of-date fashion sense? Maybe he is of another time. Let's follow him." Often this kind of thinking saved the day and was admired.

Yes: Riley, Oz, Giles, Xander, to some degree, Buffy and Willow… Not so much: Faith, Spike, Anya, Andrew

Almost every major moment is fueled by emotion but thought out rationally. If they hadn't be strategic, many things could have gone wrong (i.e. saving Dawn in "The Gift")
Giles.

I think being too logical could be bad, though it helps to have someone who is always logical there another person has to understand the emotion behind a situation.

Buffy is rational when it suits her, but very irrational when that suits her better…. "We all die and I'll kill anyone who goes after Dawn."

Destroying the Box of Gavrock would have saved dozens of lives on Graduation Day, but giving it to the bad guys saved Willow's life. Logic does not lead to a moral view. You've got to get to the moral value first.

On Buffy, rational motivations vs. instinctual ones is actually a subject, and occasionally a conflict. Usually, though, it's presented that at least *someone* needs to be logical and rational in any given situation.

There are times where I think you could argue that this is true on the show - however, more often than not I think emotion overrides logic during the course of the show. For instance in 'Choices' where Willow has been taken hostage by the Mayor and Faith and is being used by the Mayor as a bargaining chip in order to get his Box of Gavrok back. Wesley presents the logical argument: if they refuse to negotiate with the Mayor, yes Willow may die, but they will keep the Box of Gavrok meaning that the Mayor will not ascend and so possibly hundreds and thousands will be saved thanks to Willow's sacrifice. However, his argument is shot down my the emotions of the rest of the Scooby Gang - notably Oz - who cannot imagine giving up Willow even though 'rationally' Wesley is correct.

Buffy was not always rational. Her decision in The Gift to protect Dawn above all else put her in conflict with Giles, but ultimately her decision was the right one and she saved the world again.

Buffy was as much a force of chaos as any demon. It kept her alive. In the comics she creates a perfect world where all she had to do was be there and everything would be okay. She decided to go back to the world she knew and fight alongside her friends. How many people would do that?

see caveat above… (yes, but only if intellect and logic (below) do not over-ride intuition and non-logical (or, better said), non-linear logic: buffy is never one-dimensional, as there has to be a mix——this is why the buffy/giles partnership was so important, as they brought a mix of spontaneity, creativity, and rigorous intellect)

Much of BtVS was the conflict between logic and emotion, particularly regarding Angel in seasons 2 and 3.

Sometimes the heart comes first though (e.g. Buffy saying she WON'T kill Dawn to save the world; Buffy leaving the Watchers Council because they won't help save Angel; Buffy loving Angel even though he's her natural enemy).

Giles tried. LOL.

Start that way but whatever shows up instead deal with that without complaining

Wasn't always necessary...

It depends on an opinion of rational. If you believe things like risking the life of the entire world for your sibling, She is very Rational.

Not always. I liked that many of the characters followed their hears. Logic played only a portional part in the decision making process.

Buffy vs. Intellectuals

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:00:00 +0000

It is important to be intellectual [intelligent, reflective]

Comments Summary:

The commenters seem to agree that this value is prominently represented, they drew clear distinctions between intellectualism, being self-reflective, and various forms of intelligence. One commenter noted a number of intellectuals were represented as jerks. The positive representations are Dr. Gregory in 1997 and Jenny Calendar and Willow in 1998, with Doyle never being shown in a classroom.

[screencap credit: buffyworld.com]

Since this moment, it’s hard to find a school teacher who is not evil, a propagandist or sexually inappropriate in any of Whedon’s works. That’s a rather odd trend, considering that Joss Whedon’s mother was a teacher, he had an extremely good college experience and remains close to his college mentor, and he has received an extraordinary amount of support from academia during that time. Why do you think that is?

Your Comments:

Willow, Tara

Yes, but not always in traditional ways. Less intellectual characters are not devalued.

There are different types of intellects. Though the characters may hide it in down to earth lingo they are true intellectuals, daring to see the world, more and more as the series progresses, in different ways.

Just to be clear, I don't think the show says it is important to be intellectual in a way that frowns upon less academic forms of intelligence, just that it is something to aspire to. Also, intelligence being important isn't the same as intelligence contributing to the worth of a person, it is represented more as an asset that some naturally have, but whether it is a good thing to have is ultimately decided by what you do with it.

BTVS isn't just an action movie; it's the overnight sessions in the library researching the monsters that win the day in the end.

Willow's intelligence was a huge asset to the Scooby's, Buffy however was never very academically intelligent but this was never a hindrance on her work

Buffy is not the smartest. She got by in high school. But her character shows that you don't have to be the smartest, but if you protect your friends and the ones you love, you can be powerful.

As with being creative, the show didn't have too much to say about intelligence, actually. Giles and Willow were very smart and intellectual. Buffy and Xander were less so. However, they all proved helpful and valuable, without question.

Yes: Xander, Willow, Giles, Angel, Tara, Giles… Not so much: Buffy, Faith, Spike, Anya

Through each of the main sccobies, we see the vast number of ways that you can be intelligent and how important it can be. Not all of them take the conventional route of college and formal education, but they all learn in different ways (i.e. Xander with vocational training and Anya with capitalism and the ways of being human.) They each show how important it is not to be ignorant.

Giles.

Please note this isn't the same as being educated. I think the show was about how you could be "street smart" and it was actually superior to being academic. I think being self-reflective was difficult but important, I think that often when a character isn't reflective enough upon themselves and a villain knows more about them then they do (such as the case of early Spike or The First) is when the villain would win.

at the same time volatile emotionally and a person of action (everything turned up to 11)

Intellect certainly has many merits, but it's okay not to be academical if that is not your forte. As long as you're a good friend.

It isn't important for a hero to be intellectual, but it IS important for a hero to have an intellectual adviser/sidekick. E.g., Spock, Daniel Jackson, Giles, Willow, Wesley, Merlin, Obi-wan, Claudia, Henry Deacon, etc.

Being informed is important on the program (Giles, Research crams), but that information must be applied. Otherwise, you're "telling the 'Everybody Thinks We're Insane-os Home Journal."

X "Smart girls are so hot."… W "You couldn't have figured that out in sixth grade?"

Intelligence is crucial, but major intellectual capacity tends to be confined to a few characters, and contemplation/meditation to even fewer.

While Willow and Giles are both very intelligent and play an important role there isn't a massive emphasis on academic or intellectual achievement. Xander never goes to college and Buffy drops out.

I'd argue that although the series promotes intelligence as a good quality and something that should be developed (see Willow and Giles), the series places far more weight on the value of always trying your best, always trying to help others, and making the most of what talents or gifts you do have.

Academic ability may not be crucial, but wit, quick reflexes and insight are all important.

Buffy, though obviously intelligent (see her SAT scores), was more of a doer than a thinker. Angel's relentless brooding did him no favors. Willow's tendency to over-think caused her some problems.

This is more the Giles/watcher aspect - as well as the Willow aspect….The scooby gang is always going and doing research, as well as different knowledge of language

Buffy could sometimes be a ditz, but she was also a great general. Willow is as brainy as they come. Giles had more book smarts than most libraries. And Xander, well Xander tried really hard.

Buffy's not that smart. She gets a lot smarter as the show goes on, but she's definitely not intellectual, and school is usually overshadowed by the importance of slaying. On the other hand, Willow and Giles are extremely intelligent, which is probably the reason why they are the only ones that are a genuine help to Buffy on a regular basis.

yes, but only if intellect and logic (below) do not over-ride intuition and non-logical (or, better said), non-linear logic: buffy is never one-dimensional, as there has to be a mix——this is why the buffy/giles partnership was so important, as they brought a mix of spontaneity, creativity, and rigorous intellect

The show doesn't convey to me it's IMPORTANT but it's certainly helpful!

It's kind of a balance of brains and brawn, particularly with in the first few seasons with Willow/Giles as the brains and Buffy/Faith/Kendra as the brawns…. However, as the show progresses, Buffy realizes the importance of self-realization, which I suppose is reflective and intellectual.

...at *something,* not necessarily book-smarts.

The intellectual characters - Giles, Willow - are valued for their contributions, but Buffy and Xander are valued without those.

Not so much

Almost all of the recognizably "intellectual" people are total jerks - Travers and the Watcher's Council, Buffy's first-day-of-college professors. Or they have an evil agenda, like Maggie Walsh. Or they get teased for being stuffy, like Giles and Wesley.

Giles. Willow. Enough said.

Very much so. Not necessarily book smart but Buffy was always very witty and was brilliant with her ideas for winning battles.

Independence vs. Interdependence

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:03:00 +0000

11. It is important to be independent [self-reliant, self-sufficient]

Summary:

It’s interesting that there’s a lot less agreement on this question than there is on the how frequently the value of friendship is depicted with question 35. Respondents seem to believe that the series holds the values of independence and friendship (individualism and interdependence, more broadly) in tension, with group values being more prominently displayed. That’s not to say that self-reliance is not prominently represented in the series, with several commenters quoting this moment:

[screencap credit: buffyworld.com]

The majority of the comments use examples relating to Buffy to answer this question, while there was a much greater balance in previous comments. The question of the hero’s ties to the community seems to define how people looked at this question, instead of the ties the community has to the hero or to each other.

Your Comments:

I see the series being the opposite of this, where eventually every character at some point tries to be independent, but eventually needs the rest of the group to get them out of trouble.

Sometimes, but Buffy also needs her friends

To an extent. Buffy is the slayer and must go it alone. She has the Scoobies and a fabulous support system, however, in life it is not always possible to have that at your finger tips at every moment and in every crisis. In certain situations they may not be there and you must be able to go it alone. This is not to say that one should isolate themselves from an amazing support system, that is key and allows for personal growth and the confidence to take charge, however, it can also lead to complete reliance which is never a good thing, you must be able to function on your own in society. It sucks but its true. I feel that Joss did a wonderful job addressing these themes in the last two seasons and the difficulties of leadership, hard as they were for me to watch. Buffy had to take charge whether people wanted her to or not. And sometimes leaders make mistakes, but who doesn't?

I think Buffy really stresses an interdependence model for independence. If that makes sense. Probably not.

Never was this driven home more than when Giles knew he was holding Buffy back from being a true adult (“You're not ready for the world outside ... I'm just standing in the way”).

The show focused more on working with others. Buffy had family and friends helping and often the moral was that she couldn't do it without them.

Yes, but often it explores the tension between that independence and the necessity for communal action and support, which are also highly valued.

The characters rely on each other. From each other they gain true self-sufficience.

Not really, I mean, they need each other in the scoubi gang. That's how they survive.

the series is more about teamwork and being able to rely on others and to ask for help - rather than thinking you have to do everything by yourself

Of course, each person had to show that he or she could stand on his/her own. However, their greatest strength was when they worked together. They weren't nicknamed "the Scoobys" for nothing.

I would say that this trait is important but it's also clearly balanced with a view that it is equally important to be co-dependent and have relationships. Independence and dependence are never portrayed as mutually exclusive, they are complementary.

but asking for help from your friends and family is needed too.

In most situations, it's teamwork and family that are the most important things in BTVS.

This is one point that changed my world.

When Joyce died Buffy realized how dependant she had been on her

I think the message is that it's NOT always important to be self-reliant. Buffy often relies on herself, and goes into her own little world. But when she talks to her friends about whatever it is that's bothering her, she feels much better.

Actually, I think the show said just the opposite. Buffy needed her group of friends. They made her stronger. In fact, we saw several times what might have happened to her had she been more independent. "The Wish" showed a darker, uncaring Buffy, one who ultimately was killed by who we knew to be a relatively week villain. Faith showed us who Buffy might've been without her friends, and it was only when Faith was truly accepted by the group that she began to turn things around.

Buffy shows in s2 how important it is to be self reliant and then spends the rest of the series emphasizing the importance of friends and relationships

Buffy--hello, weight of the world. Xander is also very responsible and resourceful in later seasons.

I think Buffy actually does the opposite. It shows how being strong is about asking for help and relying on your friends. Whenever Buffy or the others try and do things alone it turns out when than if they worked together.

Teamwork is better than self reliance, but it shows up.

There are times to be independent, but you also have to know when to rely on others.

Other than Buffy in S7, it's teamwork that is represented.

tension in the series between going solo and turning to the group

Buffy is both self-reliant and strongest when she is with friends.

The whole point of the series is that Buffy survives as a Slayer BECAUSE she has friends, i.e., she is not self-sufficient. Self-sufficient Slayers get killed quickly.

In 'Buffy,' the most good was achieved with the help of others. Alone often led to suffering and badness.

That is important, but you still need to be able to lean on others sometimes. Sometimes you have to let someone else take the lead.

The whole show is about how Buffy wouldn't survive if she didn't have her friends there for her.

With the proviso that teamwork is important, and interdependence is the organic nature of people's connections...

Mixed on that. Yes, self reliance was important. But so was being part of a community that depended on each other.

While Buffy does occasionally strike out on her own and has shown she is able to be self-reliant I think the key to the show is her friends, her family and her support network. It is part of the reason Kendra and Faith are not as good slayers as Buffy.

To a certain extent I think this value is illustrated on the show - during 'Anne' for example where Buffy has to fend for herself in LA, or in Becoming Part 2 as Angelus is about to kill Buffy, and Buffy fends him off with the following riposte:

"Angelus: Now that's everything, huh? No weapons... No friends... No hope.

Buffy closes her eyes and steels herself for whatever's coming.

Angelus: Take all that away... and what's left?

He draws the sword back and thrusts it directly at her face. With lightning-fast reflexes she swings up with both arms and catches the blade between the palms of her hands. She opens her eyes and meets his gaze

Buffy: Me.

She shoves the blade away from her, and the hilt of the sword hits Angelus in the face."

In 'Anne', Giles also says the following about Buffy: "Buffy is the most capable child I've ever known. I mean, she may be confused, unhappy, but I honestly believe she's in no danger." However, although I think the show does value the ability to be independent the show also makes a strong statement in favour of being able to depend upon your friends and family in times of need.

Buffy's major arc was that Buffy lasted longer and excelled because of her reliance on friend and family

Yes, but also to build a "family" of friends on whom one can rely.

Being your own person was always very important, but part of what made Buffy so strong was her family & friends. Joss (we're on a first name basis, natch) specifically wanted to dispel the notion that heroes had to be completely independent loners. It is important to be able to fend for yourself but it's equally important to have support.

I think that was more true early in the season - versus in the seventh season it was more regarding group slayer identity…. I think it is more that it show the inverse of this - that we are not islands.

Slayers are solitary beings. The irony of that statement not withstanding, at the end of the day, Buffy had Buffy. And that was enough. But she was the greatest slayer in all of history because of her friends. I doubt she would have made it out of the first season alive if not for her friends.

I would describe it as being important to be able to be independent, but that teamwork is more important.

Most of the instances I can think of that deal with this topic disagree with that. Buffy can't survive on her own. She needs the support of her friends. They all do.

but only with the caveat that extreme self-reliance can be destructive

This is represented but I believe it shows nore that it is also okay to rely on others as well sometimes and you need people around you that you are able to rely on. Asking for help when you need it is always important.

The character Buffy definitely is independent and self-sufficient, but I think the main message the show puts out, to me at least, is the idea of a family, whether that's blood relations or a family of friends. You never have to or should have to stand alone in life, and Buffy has found that many times on the show.

Frankly, I think it's the opposite/ Buffy says to have friends to rely on--that's what makes Buffy a unique slayer, and the show a good one to watch.

Though all the characters are, in their own way, irretrievably alone, they survive through familial friendships.

While I don't think that it's not not represented in the series, I think that the show conveys that it is far more important to depend on other people than to be self-sufficient.

Yes and no. Too self-reliant can be a bad thing, and one of the messages that Buffy is that we need other people to be effective.

To a certain extent, but Buffy was always stronger with her friends. In contrast, in "The Wish" dystopia, Buffy was alone and independent was not the Buffy we liked.

Buffy is not about being dependant, but about acknowledging the power of teamwork instead of flying solo.

This is sometimes valued, but the importance of teamwork comes up a lot more often - especially as an attribute that makes Buffy stronger.

Ya gotta have friends or at least interesting enemies

I feel like independence is most encouraged of folks within a community. Like you must be independently good at working with a team. Isolated independence is looked down upon - think season 3 Faith.

The show both tells us thins while it negates it. Buffy as the only one - but her greatest victories are team victories. She is lonely but the series ends with many slayers, not one. Frequently, it is self-reliance which makes the biggest mistakes. I think the show says no matter how capable you are on your own, you are better off with help.

I think the show was more about teamwork and trust. Mostly it was when a character tried to fly solo, when thingsnwould take a turn for the worst.

The series frequently highlights the tension between independence and inter-dependence.

Well, many of the questions are different if your talking Buffy, or the whole group.

I think the show did a great job of balancing Buffy's independence with her reliance on her friends. She was successful both ways and needed to be.

It was highlighted many times how much deader Buffy would be without her friends and family. On the other hand, and the reason for a 2 instead of a 1, I refer you to Buffy and Angelus' sword fight....to paraphrase...Angelus: take away everything you have and what's left...Buffy: Me.

Giles: Can you forgive me?
Buffy: For what?
Giles: I should never have left.
Buffy: Oh, Giles... You were right to leave.
Buffy works best when she has her friends around her.

Again Half the time it is stated that that’s what Buffy is and needs to be, but also several times when to over -come things she NEEDS her friends to do it.

The Scoobies showed teamwork was essential. Same with the chosen group of gals. Teamwork seemed more important than doing it all alone, in fact it was rare for any character to succeed on their own.

The group depended on one another. But as mentioned, when you have lost everything, you always have yourself left.

Buffy vs. Art

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 20:25:00 +0000

10. It is important to be imaginative [daring, creative]

Summary:

There’s fairly strong agreement that this was a frequently represented value in the series. Comments observed that imagination tended to be geared towards tactical and strategic surprise and daring, rather than creativity. You never see Willow agonizing over how she wants the visual displays of her spells to look, for example. This was THE favorite example of imagination:

One commenter observes that the quips and puns indicate the verbal creativity of Buffy. I would add that Willow does work on the smell of her potions in season three, while Xander’s outraged at his loss of the Class Clown award to an aesthetic beneath him: balloon art. And Angel’s always had nice taste in decorating his various abodes.

Your Comments:

Buffy was resourceful and didn't rely on what she had been taught in order to succeed - came up with her own ideas.

Without ingenuity, you are predictable and predictability gets you killed.

Perhaps best represented through Willow's witchcraft and different styles of fighting employed by the characters. Blowing up the school was bloody genius.

It's their creativity and imagination that saves the day in the end, whether it's a rocket launcher or a plan to blow up the library.

This is not a huge topic addressed on the show, however, all the characters are very daring.

Honestly, I don't think the show had much to say about being creative. Characters certainly were creative, but it got them ahead and in hot water in about equal measure. I think about killing Kralik with the Holy water in his glass as being creative when at a distinct disadvantage and having it be celebrated. However, the Troika were very creative, but that was ultimately shown as a bad thing.

Some characters do this well. Faith is a great example, and Buffy in Season 7, particularly.

Buffy is able to be such a good Slayer in huge part due to her creativity when it comes to finding ways to defeat evil.

Rocket launcher.

Thinking out of the box gets the job done.

I can't really think when this was represented- other than Buffy's strategies. A lot of 'imagination and creativity' was based on research.

Demon can't be killed with a sword? Let's try a rocket launcher.

Rocket Launcher, arm the graduating class, activate all every slayer, demand the WC provide information about Glory... At nearly EVERY opportunity, this show demonstrates the importance of not letting the other side make up the rules. If you need to win, do it however necessary.

Thinking outside the box is usually represented as a crucial survival tool.

I think this value is frequently represented on the series, especially when trying to beat various foes and enemies. One good example I think comes from 'The Gift' where Anya manages to think of a whole host of ways to help prevent Glory from getting to Dawn in time to begin the ritual. Anya comes up with the Troll hammer, the Orb, and the BuffyBot all as distraction methods.

Buffy's ability to "think outside of the box" (I hate that phrase!) was one of the keys to her unprecedented success as a slayer. Still, Faith represented what happens with unchecked daring.

the approaches taken are daring

It stated that Buffy's effectiveness as a slayer is a direct result of her willingness to improvise.

Buffy's fighting daring saved her on more than on occasion. Thinking outside the box was important.

Spot on

I believe this was towards the end. Buffy thought outside of the box and broke all of the rules!

Buffy survives where other slayers fail because she doesn't do everything by the book (dead Kendra)….e.g. …Quipy much? Also, I refer you to the Kendra vs Buffy sparring match in Giles' office.

Buffy vs. Lying Liars

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:11:00 +0000

9. It is important to be honest [sincere, truthful]

Summary:

Lots of discussion of lies here: Xander’s to Buffy, Giles’ to Buffy, Buffy’s to Giles, Buffy’s about Angel to everybody, Riley’s to Buffy, the Scoobies drifting apart, Willow’s to Tara… Of course, there’s the litany of truths that characters struggle to accept, like Xander’s doubts about his impending marriage or Willow’s insecurities. What people seemed to argue here is that while there are many examples of a lack of full disclosure, the series makes honesty a central value through the consequences a lack of it can have.

And, of course, facing the truths brings people closer together and teach us values through the emotional “Awws” we get from such revelations, such as here with Buffy and Willow admitting why they were growing apart in season four.

Two other points interested me. First, respondents noted that Giles and Joyce “get away with” two lies of omission, as Giles never reveals on a TV screen what happened to Ben and Joyce never tells Buffy about her confab with Angel. I hadn’t thought of those. Second, nobody mentioned Buffy hiding her sexual relationship with Spike.

Your Comments:

See: Xander and Buffy in "Becoming Pt.2" where he lies to her about what Willow said so that Buffy won't try to put off killing Angel to allow the spell to take place.

Important! However, after 7 beautiful seasons it seems to be a continual theme that all of the scoobies continue to fail to grasp:)

It was important but untruths or at least misdirection had to be employed at times. Such as when Angel came back from the Hell dimension and Buffy didn't tell Giles or friends for a long time. Of course they felt betrayed and she was between a rock and a hard place.

Difficult one, there are lies, and lies have consequences. Lies usually lead to some agony. But sometimes they are needed, like in "Lie to Me".

Giving this one a 3 because while I thought the characters considered honesty a value or a virtue, they were often not honest themselves.

The first time Buffy lies to Giles, she almost gets eaten by a demon. In season 6 when she lies to her friends about sleeping with Spike, she spirals downwards into an abusive relationship that is not healthy towards her, or Spike. When her friends find out, she feels a huge burden taken off her back, and realizes that it is always to be honest with her friends.

For the most part, the show preached honesty, or at least consequences for dishonesty. However, sometimes a teenager would get away with lying to his or her parents about his or her whereabouts. While Xander eventually came clean about his lie about Angel -- "Kick his ass" -- he never really faced direct repercussions. Giles got away with killing Ben, though, to my knowledge, he never told anyone about that. These are the exceptions that prove the rule, though, as honesty was, time and again, definitely shown to set one free.

Buffy is almost always honest but giles is not like when he kills ben. I think this one occasion makes honesty seem like a luxury for the strong and that special people like buffy need other people to do their dishonesty for them

Again, Xander is the best example of this value. There is a lot of deception on this show under the pretense of protecting the others or "for their own good."

buffy taught me that while we have been taught that everything thing in life is meant to be black and white, right and wrong….nothing really is...we operate on a morally gray scale...all we have our are choices and those choices have ramifications (both good and bad) far beyond any one of our control and even perception

I think the best example of this is in season four when the scoobies let their friendships fall through the cracks by hiding things from one another. Doing this allowed Spike to weasel his way in and cause them all to fight with each other. Honesty truly is the best policy.

Sort of hard to be truthful when fighting monsters.

Again, I feel like not telling people the truth caused many problems. Relationships suffer because people lied to either protect people's feelings or out of shame. I think this is the same with the forgiveness things. Sometimes you just can't forgive and sometimes you just can't be honest with yourself, let alone others. It's about the process of it.

Dishonest characters always get punished, e.g. Xander and Willow S3, Xander S6

Most lies or omissions lead to later suffering (the Crucimentum, Riley going to pay-for-bleed nests), but some are intended with noble (or at least mixed) intentions ("Kick his ass," Giles going years before admitting he murdered Ben). Lying is seldom simply "wrong," but it must never be done lightly.

If you lie to the people you care about, it WILL come back to bite you on the ass.

Being dishonest almost always has sever consequences.

Things usually get messed up when characters are dishonest.

There are several occasions on the show where a character's lie comes back to bite them in the ass, so it would appear that the series is suggesting that honesty is always the best policy. For instance, Buffy lies to the Scooby Gang and Faith about the return of Angel in season 3. This leads to a large confrontation involving all the characters in the episode 'Revelations', some of the ramifications of which are seen later on. For instance with Faith, this is where we can see the beginnings of her 'trust issues' really developing.

Some facts are smudged over a bit, but sincerity matters.

Telling the truth was never fun but lying always led to serious repercussions.

I think the show does illustrate the gray areas….I think of the 18th birthday test - where the truth is not there and it is an unraveling….I think it is more degrees….And how about when Buffy hides Angel at the first 3 months of the 3rd season - not truthful.

Buffy's life is kind of one big lie, but then again, if she wasn't honest with her friends she wouldn't have their support and be able to be such an amazing slayer.

The Scoobies' project is shrouded in secrecy for the entirety of the show, largely due to the team's concerted efforts to hide the truth of the Hellmouth. …Also, it is suggested that "noble lies" are sometimes necessary, i.e. when Giles kills the human Ben to destroy Glory, which Buffy was unwilling or incapable of doing, but which was necessary.

Willow lying to Tara about magic use, and Xander and Anya hiding their feelings. For the four of them, OMWF is all about hiding the truth, and look how it turns out for them.

Depends on the circumstances. Joyce never told Buffy that she asked Angel to leave (that we know of). Buffy having to keep her Slayerness a secret from *most* people is more important than being upfront about it with them.

Not really. Buffy had a real problem with honestly when it came to her personal life and choices.

Honest, sincere truthful is not the same as correct, thoughtful or merciful. The white lie or tougher love from Xander to Buffy or Dawn can be more human.

While I think all the characters would say it's important to be honest, everyone has their fair share of secrets and lies, which sort of undermines the "honesty is best" line.

You rarely - if anytime - get away with anything on the show.

I think this was a value but the characters struggled with it in certain situations. There were quite a few instances of dishonesty.

It is important to be honest to your team/friends. But there is a little bit of "it's not lying if they make you lie"

....except the other half of the time when it's important to be dis-honest (in the context of the show) :P

Buffy and the Welfare of Others

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:45:00 +0000

8. It is important to be helpful [working for the welfare of others]

Summary:

There’s virtually no disagreement in the comments on this one. Key examples seem to be Cordelia and Anya’s conversion narratives...

Anya: The rapid reproductive rate of our rabbits has given me an idea. I can give the excess out to the townspeople, exchanging them not for goods or services, but for goodwill and the sense of accomplishment that stems from selflessly giving of yourself to others.
Olaf: Ha, ha, ha. Sweet Aud! Your logic is insane and happenstance, like that of a troll.

and Buffy’s unrecognized labor...

… until this moment, at least.
[screencap credit: buffyworld.com]

Myself, I’d include Joyce, whose labor to make a functional home for Buffy goes unrecognized until after her death.

Your Comments:

Although occasionally begrudgingly. Why should one person shoulder all of the burden and responsibility? A major theme/idea that Buffy is constantly struggling with. Why me? Why can't I just have a normal life? That is the beauty of friends and family, you don't have to go it alone! Although, at times it still might suck, at least you are not going it alone!

This was key to the show. And not even just helpful. Selfless (which of course, was very tiring for Buffy, in particular).

Yes, but not to the exclusion of your own individual well-being. In other words, not complete selflessness.

Compassion, love, understanding, respect and willingness to intervene when a person is ruining a life is a central theme in Buffy.

Although it's not always the easiest to help others, the scoobies learn that it is for the better in the long run, and they will be rewarded if they do a good deed for another.

The biggest and most relevant theme of the entire series was the importance of helping others. Buffy, a girl who just wanted to be a normal girl, sacrificed that desire specifically so that she might help others. More than that, she helped others who would have no idea they were ever being helped, despite being ridiculed because of it (or, rather, because of the fallout of it, but the likes of Cordelia). The fact that Willow and Xander (and later many others) chose to help in the fight, even though they were never made to, just underscores how important helping others truly was to the show.

Everyone does their bit

Scoobies were helpful to one another most of the time. Of course, saving the world was Buffy's mission.

"You've only lasted this long because you have ties to the world." …Buffy risks her life every day for the welfare of others and pays very dearly when she has selfish moments.

The show dealt more with the balance between helping others and living one's own life, between taking care of others and taking care of one's self.

This is the nature of Buffy's calling, and I'd argue that she adheres to it throughout almost the complete series. However, by seasons 6 & 7 her interest in working for the welfare of others has significantly waned.

The self-centred might as well be vampires or demons - they either learn or suffer - or both. (Cordy, for example. Anya too, in some ways.) Vampires are the ultimate antithesis to this, and are routinely dusted.

Buffy's full-time job was helping people & she never got paid for it! Angel sought redemption through helping people. Spike's actions were never seen as heroic until he earned his soul & could finally do the right things for the right reasons.

the prom episode - where Buffy is elected the class protectorate…I think it is more an underlying aspect rather than in Angel where it is very front forward.

They always work for the welfare of others, that's what the scooby-gang is all about.

Buffy was committed; she just wasn't happy about it. Mixed message.

Yep

I think this theme is more fully explored in Season 8, but even within the first 7 seasons the series often forces characters to distinguish between what is personally desirable and what is good for the world (Giles killing Ben; Buffy refusing to kill Dawn; Buffy accepting her role as a slayer; even the humor of Anya's suggestion that Buffy charge for her services).

Buffy's friends were often vital to her success!

The good guys were all very helpful, so....

Buffy vs. Forgiveness

noreply@blogger.com (David Kociemba) — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:19:00 +0000

7. It is important to be forgiving [willing to pardon others]

Summary:

With 82 percent putting this value as being frequently represented by the series, there was a lot of agreement with this question in the comments. Yet, there were some notable objections: Giles and Angelus, Xander and Angelus, and sometimes Spike. (Isn’t it always “sometimes Spike”?) Two specific moments were cited multiple times, Giles' “I Only Have Eyes for You” speech and…

What not going all Dumbledore looks like.
[screencap credit: buffyworld.com]

Your Comments:

Willow nearly destroyed the world but was still forgiven by those who cared for her.

Sometimes shown from the reverse perspective--the consequences of unforgiveness and revenge

Everyone on the show goes through a rough patch, Buffy, Giles, Dawn, Willow, Anya, yet they all make it through. Love and forgiveness are are powerful forces. Though it may be hard and take an entire season to happen it is vital to the shows core. Although, as the world is not perfect neither are the characters. I believe the Andrew would be a great example of redemption throughout the later series. Also the rehabilitation of Dark Willow after her escapades in season six are able to be eventually forgiven. Although Spike ultimately redeems himself in my eyes this is not so with many of the other characters on the show. He was trying and isn't that what really matters most. The acknowledgement of past wrongs and working on self improvement?…Sorry, I ramble...

Oz forgiving Willow for cheating with Xander, Giles forgiving Angel for torturing him as Angelus, everyone mostly forgiving Angel for being Angelus, everyone mostly forgiving Spike for everything, Buffy eventually forgiving them for bringing her back from the dead, Anya kind of being okay with Xander after a while...there is tons of this

Hard to say. What counts as forgiveness? Willow's revenge on Warren certainly did not value forgivness. Buffy's forgiveness of Angel and murder of Angelus at the end of season two was a mixed version of forgiveness. This is not a clear value in Buffy.

I'm going to give a 3 on this one because there were times when forgiveness was warranted, times when it wasn't and times when it was given and it should not have been.

Forgiveness over vengeance is a big theme throughout the series. In the words of Giles, "To forgive is an act of compassion, Buffy. It's not done because people deserve it; it's done because they need it."

Angel, Andrew, Spike, Willow, etc.

Anya, Andrew, Spike, Willow, Faith and Angel are all characters that through forgiveness have become better people

In the first episode of season 7, Willow is very nervous about returning to Sunnydale; she killed a human and is not sure if her friends will forgive her. They do, of course, but it takes time. It's kind of ironic, because the reason she thinks she won't be forgiven is because she couldn't forgive someone and killed him.

This is an interesting one. Yes, I would say that, for the most part, the show preached forgiveness. However, the show also acknowledged that, sometimes, forgiving those that you know would take advantage of that forgiveness would be a bad thing. Giles accepted this truth when he killed Ben. However, these examples are rare. For the most part, everybody was allowed to be forgiven, including Giles himself on several occasions. Faith, Andrew, Angel, Willow, even Buffy were all able to find forgiveness.

Giles killing Glory/Ben comes to mind.

Or you become Evil Willow.

Giles clearly recognizes the danger of forgiveness, and his killing of Ben is one of the greatest moments of the show, demonstrating that Buffy's forgiveness is a weakness not shared by the pragmatic Giles. …But at other times, forgiveness proves to be useful, as with Angel, Spike, and other instances.

The point of holding on to anger was shown as valid. But, really if people could forgive in Buffy world pretty much all tragedy could be avoided, but then there would also be no show. I think a lot of it is about the process of letting go of anger and how difficult it can be. I also think forgiving is not the same as fighting back when someone attacks you.

After some time- e.g. Giles and Angel, Buffy and Willow after 'Smashed'
very interesting issue in Buffy. I loved Giles' speech about forgiveness early on. The main characters generally forgive (or more correctly chose to forget) major transgressions on the part of those they love (e.g., Xander and Anya, Spike and Buffy, Buffy and Angel). My daughter insists Buffy never forgave Spike for the attempted rape.

"Giles went all Dumbledore on me."

The giving of unconditional love as portrayed in the show makes Buffy one of the most Christian shows ever made. Xander, a carpenter, saved the world with unconditional love at the end of season six.

The show also struggled with the difficulty of forgiveness. It's important, it's needed, but it's not easy.

GILES: To forgive is an act of compassion, Buffy. It's, it's not done because people deserve it. It's done because they need it. - "I Only Have Eyes for You"

Lots of the characters get a second chance - Willow, Spike, Angel, Anya, Faith etc... all have properly evil moments but even when they don't deserve a chance they're given one.

Forgiveness is an important theme in the Buffyverse with good reason - at one point or another every member of the core Scooby Gang has committed a heinous act of one form or another. I'd argue that Giles is the most forgiving member of the core Scooby Gang, perhaps followed by Willow. Xander and Buffy tend to hold onto grudges a little longer than the others (e.g. Xander never truly forgave Angel for his actions as Angelus in season 2, and Buffy brings up Xander's 'lie' in 'Selfless'). At the end of the episode 'I Only Have Eyes for You' Giles also says the following: "To forgive is an act of compassion, Buffy. It's, it's not done because people deserve it. It's done because they need it."

Scoobies get more breaks than others, but forgiveness is important.

Buffy was generally pretty forgiving, with the exception of Selfless. She refused to take a human life, prompting Giles to snuff out Ben. Oz forgave Willow & it seemed like Willow could have forgiven Oz had he not left abruptly. Certainly, Xander's, Giles' & Joyce's inability to forgive Buffy at the end of Season 2 was quite harmful. Buffy's inability to forgive Riley about the vampire biting led to their breakup. Still, Cordelia never explicitly forgave Xander & that seemed like the correct choice.

Not always the most important.

I think that the episode with the crosses in the garage where Giles and the former principal try to assassinate Spike -…and in the end Buffy will let what happens happens….I think it also has to with having a soul - and since numerous characters don't - hard concept.

Absolutely forgiveness is a huge theme in Buffy. All the characters make mistakes that hurt others at some point in the series. Forgiveness and redemption are big themes.

It's definitely a moral theme, but the characters disregard it quite often.

Tara finds happiness after she forgives Willow (until she dies). Buffy forgives Spike….On the other hand, Xander and Giles refuse to forgive Angel. Buffy refuses to forgive Faith until she is virtually forced to in Season 7….And Buffy blames herself for taking Angel's soul in Season 2 and cannot forgive herself until "I Only Have Eyes For You"….Forgiveness is a major theme in Buffy, but I'm not sure if the moral of the story is to forgive or not to forgive.

Otherwise you turn evil (Willow).

only if they were human.

Forgive maybe but not forget and definitely move on.

A central theme of Buffy is the question of what actions - if any - are unforgivable. Giles poisoning Buffy? Buffy running away? Buffy killing Angel? Willow resurrecting Buffy? Anya sleeping with Spike? Spike trying to rape Buffy? Jonathan messing with everyone's reality? Buffy stabbing Faith?…I don't know whether the series advocates forgiveness is all cases, but it certainly asks the question, over and over again.

Seeing Faith being forgiven by the core gang would be awesome especially here the words from Buffy

HUGE theme I believe. Everyone does not so spectacular things...everyone can be redeemed. The show did a great job at this. No matter what mistakes they made, they were always there for each other.

There were times when characters forgave each other, yes. To be forgiving was not reinforced as something a person SHOULD be though, nor was unforgiveness show in a negative light. Forgiveness was simply portrayed as something that usually happens over time, where the people involved really actually care about each other.

Buffy: He wants forgiveness.

Giles: Yes. I imagine he does. But when James possesses people, they act out exactly what happened that night. So he's experiencing a form of purgatory instead. I mean, he's, he's doomed to, to kill his Ms. Newman over and over and over again, and... forgiveness is impossible.

Buffy: Good. He doesn't deserve it.

Giles: To forgive is an act of compassion, Buffy. It's, it's not done because people deserve it. It's done because they need it.

You could questions if some people really ever did forgive others. Willow killed one man, that sure wasn't forgiveness, but because she failed to forgive, Buffy almost had to end her. And did Giles ever REALLY forgive Angel? Did Buffy ever REALLY forgive Jenny?