More thoughts on LMPTM
Mar. 26th, 2003 03:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
estepheiaI read a few LJ comments on the episode and also rewatched it twice and thought some more, so here are some more thoughts on LMPTM
What are we supposed to take away from this episode?
I read somewhere that initially the title was supposed to be ‘Sons and Mothers.’ The actual title is better because it makes it obvious that this epi is not just about Wood and William and their moms but also about Buffy and father-figure Giles.
Lies, lies, lies…- the use of metaphor in LMPTM
LPMTM intertwines three stories. Wood’s story reflects on Buffy’s, Spike’s story reflects on Wood’s. Let me elaborate:
Buffy/Giles
This is the second time Giles has actively betrayed Buffy. The first time was in Helpless where he drugged her, following Council Orders. During S5 Giles was of the opinion that Dawn had to be sacrificed, but he voiced that opinion and did not actively set up Dawn to be killed. He did kill Ben, but he did it himself, not by looking away and letting someone else do it. Giles *knew* Wood was primarily after revenge but went along with it - for the greater good.
There had been spoilers that Giles would tell Buffy about how he killed Ben in this epi. I think it would have been interesting to see that, but I suppose ME decided not to because it would have muddied the moral waters even more. Taking Ben’s life when Buffy had spared him was a kind of betrayal, but due to Buffy’s death it was never addressed as such. We will never find out if Ben’s death was really necessary, or if Ben would have lived peacefully - away from the slayer.
Giles held two main roles in Buffy’s life: first teacher, then, during Helpless he sheds that role to become her father figure. In LMPTM the father role becomes tattered and he turns into a kind of shady advisor who presumes to make the unpleasant decisions for the leader he’s supposed to follow. Giles’s betrayal in LMPTM is a ‘daddy knows best’-kind of act. However, all that talk about leadership and war and generals also establishes a strategic context, which makes his betrayal an act of treason.
Just because we all love Spike doesn’t mean that Giles is wrong and Buffy is right. The fact that Buffy is wearing the mantle of leadership and has no intention of sharing that leadership, does not mean that ME wants us to be critical of that development.
(Side note: I think it was![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
eliade who reminded me in one of her posts that Buffy was in that parade of past Big Bads FE was posturing as in Lessons, saying that it’s all about power. Are we to understand that Buffy is on a path that would lead her to become evil? She refused to give up her humanity for more demonic power in Get it Done but she allows her mission to de-humanize her, and she’s aware of it. I can’t wait to find out if this is the build-up to a treatment of the power theme or not.)
In any case, at the end of LMPTM Giles has lost all the privileges he might have had and is now demoted to rank and file.
William/William’s Mother
The lie in this case is of course vamp!Mum’s rejection of William, the statement that his mother never loved him, hated and despised him from birth. All those cutting remarks the vamped mother utters are designed to sully the one thing that William holds dear above all else. They are lies. It doesn’t matter so much that his mother is changed more than William himself changed when he turned into a vampire, what matters is that the demon before him lied about the things that happened before the turning, that it re-invented history.
The result is of course, that William re-invented himself and became Spike.
Spike too betrayed his mother. He didn’t give her a choice, just turned her – with catastrophic results. But it was an act of love, however misguided.
Spike/William’s strange uniqueness aside, the episode once again establishes him as a Fool for Love in whatever shape and size, whether with or without fangs. Bad ass Spike is at least partly a lie.
Wood/Nikki
What is Nikki’s lie to her son? Is it the line ‘You know I love you?’ As Spike said, he knows about Slayers. In FFL he tells us Nikki died because she wanted to die, because – unlike Buffy - she had no ties. Are we to understand that Nikki didn’t love her child? That she didn’t love Robin enough to quit and not enough to even fight hard enough to win?
For Nikki the mission came first. But let’s not forget. Nikki failed. She died shortly afterwards:
And did Wood heed his mother’s advice? No, because he puts vengeance before the mission (or human compassion). Bringing out the monster again by using the trigger is a worthwhile experiment, it could have been done under controlled conditions. Spike would have been prepared to let himself chained up again. We already know that Spike is concerned with his lack of choice and control. So, Robin is lying when he claims that killing Spike is the only way to neutralize the threat Spike (genuinely) represents. And he admits to Giles that he is motivated by revenge: ‘Does it matter?’
When Robin tries to kill Spike instead of helping with the de-triggering, he violates his mother’s mission statement. He becomes part of the problem instead of part of the solution, and that puts him outside the circle of people Buffy will go out of her way to protect.
(I sympathize with the character and can understand his motives, especially since the scene in his office indicates that he has no real clue as to who or what Spike has become.)
What I find interesting is the way Spike explains why he spared him. ‘On account of his mother’ – not because of Buffy, not because of the mission, not even because by some serendipitous chance Wood freed Spike of the post-hypnotic trigger. Spike’s first truly completely free moral choice is sparing another man, on account of the fact that he killed the man’s mother. He spares a man who set him up, who took away his free will by triggering the monster (which is the only time Spike looks frightened throughout) and who tried to kill him.
I believe that is the most important development of this episode, not Buffy’s declarations of Spike’s worth as a warrior or her concern for his well-being: Spike faced one of his inner demons and emerged victorious.
What are we supposed to take away from this episode?
I read somewhere that initially the title was supposed to be ‘Sons and Mothers.’ The actual title is better because it makes it obvious that this epi is not just about Wood and William and their moms but also about Buffy and father-figure Giles.
Lies, lies, lies…- the use of metaphor in LMPTM
LPMTM intertwines three stories. Wood’s story reflects on Buffy’s, Spike’s story reflects on Wood’s. Let me elaborate:
Buffy/Giles
This is the second time Giles has actively betrayed Buffy. The first time was in Helpless where he drugged her, following Council Orders. During S5 Giles was of the opinion that Dawn had to be sacrificed, but he voiced that opinion and did not actively set up Dawn to be killed. He did kill Ben, but he did it himself, not by looking away and letting someone else do it. Giles *knew* Wood was primarily after revenge but went along with it - for the greater good.
There had been spoilers that Giles would tell Buffy about how he killed Ben in this epi. I think it would have been interesting to see that, but I suppose ME decided not to because it would have muddied the moral waters even more. Taking Ben’s life when Buffy had spared him was a kind of betrayal, but due to Buffy’s death it was never addressed as such. We will never find out if Ben’s death was really necessary, or if Ben would have lived peacefully - away from the slayer.
Giles held two main roles in Buffy’s life: first teacher, then, during Helpless he sheds that role to become her father figure. In LMPTM the father role becomes tattered and he turns into a kind of shady advisor who presumes to make the unpleasant decisions for the leader he’s supposed to follow. Giles’s betrayal in LMPTM is a ‘daddy knows best’-kind of act. However, all that talk about leadership and war and generals also establishes a strategic context, which makes his betrayal an act of treason.
Just because we all love Spike doesn’t mean that Giles is wrong and Buffy is right. The fact that Buffy is wearing the mantle of leadership and has no intention of sharing that leadership, does not mean that ME wants us to be critical of that development.
(Side note: I think it was
eliade who reminded me in one of her posts that Buffy was in that parade of past Big Bads FE was posturing as in Lessons, saying that it’s all about power. Are we to understand that Buffy is on a path that would lead her to become evil? She refused to give up her humanity for more demonic power in Get it Done but she allows her mission to de-humanize her, and she’s aware of it. I can’t wait to find out if this is the build-up to a treatment of the power theme or not.)In any case, at the end of LMPTM Giles has lost all the privileges he might have had and is now demoted to rank and file.
William/William’s Mother
The lie in this case is of course vamp!Mum’s rejection of William, the statement that his mother never loved him, hated and despised him from birth. All those cutting remarks the vamped mother utters are designed to sully the one thing that William holds dear above all else. They are lies. It doesn’t matter so much that his mother is changed more than William himself changed when he turned into a vampire, what matters is that the demon before him lied about the things that happened before the turning, that it re-invented history.
The result is of course, that William re-invented himself and became Spike.
Spike too betrayed his mother. He didn’t give her a choice, just turned her – with catastrophic results. But it was an act of love, however misguided.
Spike/William’s strange uniqueness aside, the episode once again establishes him as a Fool for Love in whatever shape and size, whether with or without fangs. Bad ass Spike is at least partly a lie.
Wood/Nikki
What is Nikki’s lie to her son? Is it the line ‘You know I love you?’ As Spike said, he knows about Slayers. In FFL he tells us Nikki died because she wanted to die, because – unlike Buffy - she had no ties. Are we to understand that Nikki didn’t love her child? That she didn’t love Robin enough to quit and not enough to even fight hard enough to win?
For Nikki the mission came first. But let’s not forget. Nikki failed. She died shortly afterwards:
And did Wood heed his mother’s advice? No, because he puts vengeance before the mission (or human compassion). Bringing out the monster again by using the trigger is a worthwhile experiment, it could have been done under controlled conditions. Spike would have been prepared to let himself chained up again. We already know that Spike is concerned with his lack of choice and control. So, Robin is lying when he claims that killing Spike is the only way to neutralize the threat Spike (genuinely) represents. And he admits to Giles that he is motivated by revenge: ‘Does it matter?’
When Robin tries to kill Spike instead of helping with the de-triggering, he violates his mother’s mission statement. He becomes part of the problem instead of part of the solution, and that puts him outside the circle of people Buffy will go out of her way to protect.
(I sympathize with the character and can understand his motives, especially since the scene in his office indicates that he has no real clue as to who or what Spike has become.)
What I find interesting is the way Spike explains why he spared him. ‘On account of his mother’ – not because of Buffy, not because of the mission, not even because by some serendipitous chance Wood freed Spike of the post-hypnotic trigger. Spike’s first truly completely free moral choice is sparing another man, on account of the fact that he killed the man’s mother. He spares a man who set him up, who took away his free will by triggering the monster (which is the only time Spike looks frightened throughout) and who tried to kill him.
I believe that is the most important development of this episode, not Buffy’s declarations of Spike’s worth as a warrior or her concern for his well-being: Spike faced one of his inner demons and emerged victorious.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 08:45 am (UTC)I'm having trouble understanding why Giles was so opposed to the possibility of Spike's redemption. Unlike Wood, he wasn't motivated by personal vengeance. So by what then? Was it just his desire to protect Buffy and keep her focused on the mission? Was it a father's sentimental overprotectiveness, not wanting to see his girl get hurt again (a la Angel)? Was it his failure to see Buffy as the leader she already is?
no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 09:00 am (UTC)ME wanted to drive a wedge between them and Spike was chosen to act as that wedge.
There are a few relationships and friendships which are constant cornerstones of the show, like the friendship between Willow and Xander, or (for a long time) Xander's hostilty towards Spike, but the other relationships of the peripheral characters among each other are so vague that they can be twisted to serve the metaphors and themes of single episodes. ME does not want to explore the Giles-Spike relationship in its own right because this show is predominantly about Buffy. It largely explores *her* relationships and often (not always) neglects some of the other connections. We never saw Tara or Riley connect much with the other characters, either.
By becoming a guest star rather than a regular Giles has been demoted to 'peripheral' character, meaning he has to serve a purpose instead of commanding a storyline in his own right.
no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 09:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 09:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 09:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-26 07:38 pm (UTC)I think this is a key development in both Giles and Buffy's character. In this case, Buffy has truly learned everything he has to teach. Life is hard and cruel, sometimes so are your friends. I'm sure it wasn't the lesson that Giles had intended. I like your reference to Giles' betrayal being an act of treason. If we keep with the war metaphor, he committed an unforgivable crime. He did not trust the leadership so he acted independantly and against orders.
Not that I think that Buffy is necessarily a good leader or even using her best judgment in this case - but Giles' betrayal at this time, in this way, may forever damage their bond of mutual respect.
Lots of interesting parallells to Wes' betrayal of Angel as well. It was 'ends justifies the means', 'done for your own good' kind of act - and equally misguided and foolish. As you mentioned, Giles should have shown the patience to go through every measure to avoid this. Because on Angel it was an on-going storyline, we were also allowed to be much more invested in Wes' struggle. I was not, in any way, sympathetic to Giles in this ep.
Shame on you, Giles. Shame on you.
no subject
Date: 2003-03-31 11:58 am (UTC)Hi. I wondered in from
It seems to me that one of the reasons the characters keep getting into this mess is because Buffy was never meant to be their general. The slayers were meant to be warriors, with the CoW acting as the general. 2 things happened with Buffy to change the natural dynamic: She quit the council and Giles left her in S6. I'm still working this out, but I think if Giles had remained in Sunnydale, we would see more Giles acting as general and Buffy following his orders (i don't know how much this would change her behavior towards Spike because I think she would still refuse to kill him, but she might be more open to not allowing him to be a part of the fight). Instead, he left her to make her own decisions and now she's the one left in charge and she is not well-prepared for it.
This doesn't excuse what Giles did (and personally I can't decide whether it is just shoddy writing on ME's part or actual character development that has left us with this shell of Giles), but I think it does explain partially why he did it. He knows Buffy doesn't have the skills to she needs to do the job and so he decides to step in and "solve" the problem, albeit in this completly patronizing and daddy-knows-best way. Bad move on his part.