![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Let me preface the following ramblings by saying that I don't read the BtVS Season 8 comics. The shift in media fractured my attachment to the show so that I no longer consider it canon despite Joss Whedon's close involvement. The comics are divorced in a very real way, in my mind, from the show and although they are a continuation it's as negligible to me as reading AU fic. Although, if I read the comics (probably at some future date I will) I'll undoubtedly incorporate some of the elements into whatever fic or as part of my ruminations on the franchise as a whole. The comics being declared canon by the show's creator tells me that effective and affective changes are happening in the comics that would not otherwise occur in a tie-in novel where nothing essential to the universe changes.
This is not a formal argument or anything, just my ramblings and questions. I have no answers. I'm welcoming all thinky thoughts on the subject.
Spoilers for BtVS S8: Wolves at the Gate ahead.
So ...
I was at the bookstore yesterday hunting down a copy of Coraline (which ended in failure, by the way, and resulted in me using my $5.00 off coupon on a copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard instead) and made a pit stop to peruse the comics and omnibus' available in the Marvel Universe. I was prompted by a steadily growing re-interest in the X-Men comics. As I scanned the titles I happened to look up from where I crouched on the floor and saw, two shelves above, the Buffy comics. I pulled out Wolves at the Gate very randomly and equally as random flipped through the pages and landed on Buffy in bed with a girl. I kinda sort of scanned the pages but mostly left it with a question mark in my head to check it out on the interwebz due to my growling belly, increasing need for the ladies room and the hot pursuit of Coraline that I was then engaged in. Getting home I hopped on Wikipedia as an easy method for finding what I wanted quick, fast, and in a hurry. The Buffy/Satsu relationship came as a bit of a surprise as did the later claim that Whedon had decided that this was "the logical step for the character in light of the series" (I am quoting Wikipedia and not Whedon directly, although Wikipedia may be quoting him). I can't say that I exactly follow the logic of the pairing, but again, I don't read the comics. From what I gathered this was a surprise for everyone all the way around, Buffy included.
Spring boarding from his alleged statement, my question for Mr. Weldon is this: Are we assuming that the dominance of homosocial relationships naturally and necessarily evolve into homosexual relationships? Or do we assume that female power ultimately necessitates an estrangement or rejection of the masculine by the feminine so that, again, the natural and necessary recourse is homosexual relationships? If we assume that none of the above is true and it's merely a case of a kind of natural selection, not unlike Buffy's attraction to men who are difficult to kill (or nearly equal in power to her, i.e. Spike and Angel) then her next location for selecting a companion or mate would be among the other slayers. However, that still rings false as a logical step because, despite Buffy's example, slayers are notoriously short lived and an increase in the quantity of slayers does not necessarily dictate an increase in their longevity.
Our previous models for relationships are all over the map. Willow, a very powerful witch, is now canonically lesbian (Tara, Kennedy and the Naga(?), and not bisexual where I think we could have considered her post S4/S5. Of course there's still Fred, Amy, Cordelia, Anya, and Lilah to consider who are all canonically straigh (Although we could probably make a thin case for Cordelia/Harmony). However, none of them are placed in positions of power that equal Buffy or Willow for any serious length of time (again Cordelia being possibly the only monkey wrench). I'm not including Faith in the list because she is sub-textually if not canonically bisexual. Obviously, we've all re-read her obsession with Buffy to include desire in terms of possession and consumption of sexuality and identity.
At the end of Wolves at the Gate Satsu decides to remain in Japan. Buffy insists that a relationship between them will not work. Her excuse is that the people who love her are destined for tragic futures. It's made clear that Satsu loves Buffy, but it is never made clear if Buffy reciprocates. Can we/are we intended to read the relationship as one-sided? Buffy's physical longing for closeness versus Satsu's emotional attachment? Are we talking a Katy Perry-esque exploration of the "other side of the fence" provoked purely by curiosity and access? What exactly are we to make of Buffy and Satsu? Or more importantly, at least for me (considering my complete non-history with Satsu), what are we to make of Buffy? With Willow we at least got that foreshadowing from Doppelgangland. I can't recall any substantive hints about Buffy having a more fluid understanding of her sexuality. Not that she can't develop one, but it all seems very out of left field and, really, in the end, for naught.
What do you guys think? Help me figure it out.
This is not a formal argument or anything, just my ramblings and questions. I have no answers. I'm welcoming all thinky thoughts on the subject.
Spoilers for BtVS S8: Wolves at the Gate ahead.
So ...
I was at the bookstore yesterday hunting down a copy of Coraline (which ended in failure, by the way, and resulted in me using my $5.00 off coupon on a copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard instead) and made a pit stop to peruse the comics and omnibus' available in the Marvel Universe. I was prompted by a steadily growing re-interest in the X-Men comics. As I scanned the titles I happened to look up from where I crouched on the floor and saw, two shelves above, the Buffy comics. I pulled out Wolves at the Gate very randomly and equally as random flipped through the pages and landed on Buffy in bed with a girl. I kinda sort of scanned the pages but mostly left it with a question mark in my head to check it out on the interwebz due to my growling belly, increasing need for the ladies room and the hot pursuit of Coraline that I was then engaged in. Getting home I hopped on Wikipedia as an easy method for finding what I wanted quick, fast, and in a hurry. The Buffy/Satsu relationship came as a bit of a surprise as did the later claim that Whedon had decided that this was "the logical step for the character in light of the series" (I am quoting Wikipedia and not Whedon directly, although Wikipedia may be quoting him). I can't say that I exactly follow the logic of the pairing, but again, I don't read the comics. From what I gathered this was a surprise for everyone all the way around, Buffy included.
Spring boarding from his alleged statement, my question for Mr. Weldon is this: Are we assuming that the dominance of homosocial relationships naturally and necessarily evolve into homosexual relationships? Or do we assume that female power ultimately necessitates an estrangement or rejection of the masculine by the feminine so that, again, the natural and necessary recourse is homosexual relationships? If we assume that none of the above is true and it's merely a case of a kind of natural selection, not unlike Buffy's attraction to men who are difficult to kill (or nearly equal in power to her, i.e. Spike and Angel) then her next location for selecting a companion or mate would be among the other slayers. However, that still rings false as a logical step because, despite Buffy's example, slayers are notoriously short lived and an increase in the quantity of slayers does not necessarily dictate an increase in their longevity.
Our previous models for relationships are all over the map. Willow, a very powerful witch, is now canonically lesbian (Tara, Kennedy and the Naga(?), and not bisexual where I think we could have considered her post S4/S5. Of course there's still Fred, Amy, Cordelia, Anya, and Lilah to consider who are all canonically straigh (Although we could probably make a thin case for Cordelia/Harmony). However, none of them are placed in positions of power that equal Buffy or Willow for any serious length of time (again Cordelia being possibly the only monkey wrench). I'm not including Faith in the list because she is sub-textually if not canonically bisexual. Obviously, we've all re-read her obsession with Buffy to include desire in terms of possession and consumption of sexuality and identity.
At the end of Wolves at the Gate Satsu decides to remain in Japan. Buffy insists that a relationship between them will not work. Her excuse is that the people who love her are destined for tragic futures. It's made clear that Satsu loves Buffy, but it is never made clear if Buffy reciprocates. Can we/are we intended to read the relationship as one-sided? Buffy's physical longing for closeness versus Satsu's emotional attachment? Are we talking a Katy Perry-esque exploration of the "other side of the fence" provoked purely by curiosity and access? What exactly are we to make of Buffy and Satsu? Or more importantly, at least for me (considering my complete non-history with Satsu), what are we to make of Buffy? With Willow we at least got that foreshadowing from Doppelgangland. I can't recall any substantive hints about Buffy having a more fluid understanding of her sexuality. Not that she can't develop one, but it all seems very out of left field and, really, in the end, for naught.
What do you guys think? Help me figure it out.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 01:47 am (UTC)From:It's made clear in issue 3, that Buffy has been without a partner for some time and it definitely lonely (also horny). She finds out several issues later that Satsu is in love with her. I think that is significant because in all her relationships except Angel, once a person declares an interest in Buffy, she always allows it to go to the next level.
Buffy talks to Satsu and tells her a relationship with her is a bad idea because the other party always gets hurt.
Next issue they're in bed together. As far as Buffy, I think there are several forces at work here - as I mentioned, once someone expresses an interest in her, Buffy tends to reciprocate. Two, she's in an environment where there are literally no men (except for Xander). Three, curiosity, horniness and loneliness.
Willow immediately calls her out on the affair because Buffy is, in effect, Satsu's boss and the other girls will resent the whole thing. Plus it's made clear that Buffy does not love Satsu. At the same time, Satsu knows this, so there is an element of both of them using the other one, knowing in the end this can't work out.
Satsu decides to put an end to the affair, realizing that she's only going to get hurt emotionally and she stays behind in Japan.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-29 05:07 am (UTC)From:However, with the exception of Spike, interest has been mutual, if undeclared.
So are we looking at a Parker moment all over again? With the added bonus of office politics. I've never thought of Buffy as opportunistic, but the way that you phrase it is sparking thoughts about her relationship with relationships and, more explicitly, her relationship with Spike. Do we tie it back to the absence of her father or the historically isolated life of a slayer? The thing about Buffy is that there are connections: Willow, Xander, Giles, Dawn. To a lesser extent Faith, Spike, Angel (the latter two being obviously compromised due to their sudden relocation to Hell). But I suppose on a "romantic" front, I get it. But I still don't get the *point* of it. Relationships in the Buffyverse are so fraught and difficult and they always mean something. Not to downplay loneliness, but what does Buffy/Satsu give us?
I'm also still unsure how this is a logical next step. If anything, it sounds like a repetition of S5 in which Buffy was, I think, at her most isolated. Access and opportunity with the only real difference being gender. There's no acknowledgment for the why of it. What does it mean that this is a logical next step when it doesn't really sound like a step at all? She's in the same holding pattern she's been in since Riley left.
Of course this a slowly unfolding storyline. It took a season and a half for B/A to really get off the angsty ground.
Obviously I really need to read the actual text. I've read the synopsis of the both arcs, Long Way Home and Wolves at the Gate, but reading a synopsis can out a lot of the more subtle elements.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-30 02:28 am (UTC)From:at the same time, part of the storyline, imo, is Buffy is growing more and more insular - she only interacts with other slayers and is starting to lose sight of the fact that just because she's a force for good, doesn't mean she's always right. This can be seen as one more symptom of that.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-30 04:52 am (UTC)From:The same is true with Spike. It was strictly physical, a product of her own self-loathing, self-destructive, post-dead depression. It evolved, I think, but in the beginning it was about her making a physical connection because she couldn't make emotional ones. Buffy was completely detached and remained that way through As You Were.
From what you're describing about the Wolves at the Gate arc, her relationship with Satsu, possibly mirroring (probably very superficially at least) her relationship with Spike, or at least the impetus for the relationship, is a hallmark of Buffy in crises. Increased isolation and what sounds like increased detachment, if not emotional detachment then detachment from certain aspects of reality. Season 7 read that way. We went from a very broad sort of re-introduction to the series that narrowed quickly into the story of the Slayers, the First Evil and the end of Sunnydale. I'm definitely interested in reading the Season 8 comics now in light of that. We've got this global Slayer effort and as liberating as the idea of it is, as universal, it's also forced (at least) Buffy into a very narrow and reclusive existence. Explicitly, I'm thinking of the Buffy impersonators here.
I'm also curious about your last statement that I tied to what I'm assuming is Buffy's growing sense of detachment. I'm thinking of the way that future!Willow is depicted in closing of the WatG arc and there's something about that image of Willow and what you say about Buffy that rings a bell for me.
You really are going to make me go read those comics, aren't you? ;)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-30 07:32 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-01-31 12:26 am (UTC)From:I think there are some huge differences between Buffy/Spike and Buffy/Satsu though. The Buffy/Spike relationship is season 6 was abusive on both sides. For Buffy it was a way to numb her emotional pain.
That's not the case with Satsu. They are having a fun romp, as it were. Buffy isn't looking for more, but that's not necessarily a crime.
A lot of people dislike the comics, but then again I've seen a lot of complaints that Buffy isn't crying her eyes out over Spike. Because that would really be in character. (**rolls eyes**)
And also, most complaints about ooc things don't seem ooc at all when I consider their history. (I won't say more since I don't want to spoil you on plot points.)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-31 06:30 am (UTC)From:I've seen a lot of complaints that Buffy isn't crying her eyes out over Spike. Because that would really be in character. (**rolls eyes**)
lol!! THAT would be the ooc behavior if Buffy cried her eyes out over anyone besides Angel. So often it comes down to fans not liking the direction things are going and then they get all bent out of shape. I didn't like the idea of Buffy/Satsu because it did seem OOC, but it sounds like an opportunistic development more than anything else and although it still seems somewhat out of character I can begin to understand how it came about. I can't say that I agree with it but I can see it. Then again I was UBER upset when TPTB split up Willow and Oz and brought Tara into the picture. Of course I totally fell in love with Tara over time. Kennedy, however, I NEVER understood Kennedy. For me it became an issue of who you fall in love with independent of sex. I guess with Buffy's very hetero history and the purely physical nature of the relationship with Satsu, I have reservations all around.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-04 05:38 pm (UTC)From:If I wrote a fic where I made Angel the lonely, horny headmaster of an isolated school of hot boys and because of this situation he embarked on a sexual relationship with one of them, I would be laughed off of LJ if I insisted over and over that this was a character-driven choice that was a natural progression of Angel's story.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-04 05:51 pm (UTC)From:...my question for Mr. Weldon is this: Are we assuming that the dominance of homosocial relationships naturally and necessarily evolve into homosexual relationships?
As someone who went to an all-boys school for a while, perhaps he observed this in his environment? Public-schoolboys-spend-all-day-playing-soggy-biscuit stereotypes aside, I don't think the context of the comics implies that exactly. But you've set me thinking - there is definitely something in the idea that the Jossverse has a fluid portrayal of sexuality in people who participate in the fringes of society - vampires, slayers, Others of all kinds (including nerds and witches). Though I think Buffy being around a lot of women means her *opportunities* to sleep with women might direct her undirected sexual desire that way - even if she wouldn't have slept with a woman if she'd been surrounded by willing men?
Perhaps Buffy feels (though this is speculation on my part...fanwank, to be honest) that sleeping with Satsu means she's not going back on her "cookie dough" speech - by sleeping with someone PURELY for the sex, for the excitement, for the physical pleasure and the joy of new experiences; by sleeping with someone she's in no danger of falling in love with... she's keeping things noncommital and dough-y?
That's just off the top of my head though, and I may change my mind if five minutes :)
Or do we assume that female power ultimately necessitates an estrangement or rejection of the masculine by the feminine so that, again, the natural and necessary recourse is homosexual relationships?
I'd say that the centrality of Xander to the Scoobyslayer organisation shows that males/the masculine can have a very important part to play in empowering young women. In terms of sexual relationships, we've seen Buffy both strong and weak in m/f relationships - though obviously, this being the Jossverse, there's always a lot of pain involved, because teh love = teh painz. Whether you're straight or gay or male or female. Then again, not being in love and just doing your job involves a lot of pain too. Pain's just a constant.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-04 06:21 pm (UTC)From:I don't know the answers, but interesting questions.
I still have a problem though that Whedon's "girl power" icon has been presented as darn near incapable of forming solid emotional attachments since the age of seventeen. Something in that just doesn't scream "feminism" to me.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-04 09:35 pm (UTC)From:Doubt it.
1- Parker lied to get a girl into the sack, Buffy was being honest from the beginning.
2- Parker ignores the girls after he sleeps with them, Buffy talked about their sex with Satsu and never ignored her.
3- Parker didn't respect the girls he slept with, Buffy respects Satsu.
Buffy/Satsu and Buffy/Spike have the similarity of Buffy not being in love with them when she slept with them. Buffy sought Satsu for connection because she was lonely and under a lot of pressure, kinda the same as why she slept with Spike.
The differences are:
1- Buffy respected Satsu, but she didn't respect Spike (I'm talking about S6 here)
2- Buffy cared about Satsu's feelings, she didn't care about Spike's.
Here via Petzi's pimp
Date: 2009-02-05 11:18 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-05 12:23 pm (UTC)From:The difference from Spike in S6 is that Buffy doesn't hate herself in S8. She's lonely, and feeling isolated and cut off and in need of connection, so there's definitely a similarity there, but there's no abusive element in the relationship. In several of the preceding issues of the comic it's clear that Buffy and Satsu have become good friends, spending time with each other discussing hair styles as well as fighting side by side.
Thematically, I've become convinced that we're meant to see Buffy's relationship with Satsu as a sign that she'd becoming too focussed on her Slayer army at the expense of the rest of humanity that they are, in theory, supposed to be fighting to protect. (That's a major element of the season arc.) The only person that Buffy is able to feel emotionally close to now is a fellow-Slayer. It's because this fits so neatly into the overall theme of Season 8 that I reject the arguments that Joss was only "doing it as a ratings stunt" or "pandering to fanboys" (why not pandering to fangirls who like f/f, by the way? It's not as if such people don't already make up a huge percentage, relatively speaking, of 'Buffy' fandom...).
As for saying that Buffy has never shown the slightest sexual interest in her own gender before... there are lots of Faith/Buffy fans out there who might quibble with that argument. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-05 12:30 pm (UTC)From:I'm not sure she's deliberately trying to "not go back on her word", as though she swore a solemn vow to Angel to be chaste for him. (ew ew eww). I do think her connction with Satsu is a sign that she was telling the truth - she's not ready to settle down into a permanent long-term relationship with anybody yet; she wants to live her life and explore and have fun and, yes, experiment with her sexuality in a classic Lesbian Until Apocalypse (LUA?) fashion.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-05 01:32 pm (UTC)From:I also think Joss mainly did this ship for clumsy political pandering to gay groups because of the whole Tara debacle, and to enthrall the newsarama masturbating fanboy crowd. I don't think it worked really well since the sales slumped big time after issue #12.
To me, Buffy isn't a particularly likable character anymore. She is emotionally stunted and I feel she will never be called out on her crap. She's obviously going through an Angel-like "beige" arc with her bank robbing and submarine stealing but I don't think the writers will do a good
job of building her up again when it's time to have her umpteenth epiphany.
"Hello, gay now."
Date: 2009-02-05 11:11 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 05:32 am (UTC)From:Thanks for chiming in.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 05:38 am (UTC)From:Faith/Buffy have always been problematic for me and, in some ways, very one-sided. Whereas Buffy wants to be like Faith, Faith wants to be Buffy. She craves Buffy *more*, I think. The translation into a sexual obsession appears greater coming from Faith than it ever did from Buffy. It may be a result of Buffy's relationship with Angel at the time and that Faith was unanchored, perpetually seeking a place.
Re: "Hello, gay now."
Date: 2009-02-06 05:39 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 05:41 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 05:50 am (UTC)From:Oh, I am intrigued by this. I am having deep thoughts, they're not really articulate just yet, but they are there. How are we understanding morals in relation to that Fringe? That then translates into real life moralizing as depicted/represented in the show and based on expectations and/or stereotypes. How interesting!! And I definitely don't think that Buffy would have slept with a woman if she had equal access to willing men. Buffy just doesn't read that way to me, never has. Definitely not in the same way that we get the foreshadowing with Willow from Doppelgangland and The Wish. There's enough canonical history that to suddenly change up the game is more disconcerting and troubling than Willow switching teams back in S4.
The cookie dough speech is, I think, irrelevant because Buffy's already embarked on two other relationships (not including Parker) between the end of S3 and S8. It's clear that Buffy and Angel are living separate lives complete with romantic interests (see Cordelia in S3). They CAN'T be together and that's a fact that they both grow up around even though they may always be true loves, etc. etc.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 05:57 am (UTC)From:As an aside, I never really felt that Buffy was all that much of a feminist icon. Her circumstances dictate that status. It's not a choice of being. Cordelia, however, fits the description better. She makes a conscious choice and acts accordingly. Buffy has the imperative sort of hard wired into her, but it's also a matter of force and of life and death. She can either live as the Slayer or die, killed by vampires, or very possibly, the Council.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 06:00 am (UTC)From:job of building her up again when it's time to have her umpteenth epiphany.
That sounds awesome and I can only HOPE that the writers do justice by the character and the type of arc. If they don't, that's a total cop out because it could be really stupendous to watch in a way that Angel couldn't. BtVS having become more global and her existence being more widely known.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 02:26 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 04:25 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 04:55 pm (UTC)From:When I read your comment it dawned on me how much of their relationship for me is a fanon construct. They've got history and status, but it's almost purely fan based. You're quite, quite right and I love the way that you phrase it, that it's enshrined.
So, thinking about how Buffy does and does not form relationships and attachments (the differences between platonic and romantic), it seems even less likely that Buffy/Satsu really means anything. It becomes another way to show that Buffy doesn't engage. I can't say that I see the point. We've had three "relationhips" fail already and Buffy has always read as very heterosexual. Making her next relationship lesbian doesn't seem to add anything. And not that it has to just because it's a lesbian relationship. but there's never been any kind of history and despite the back story in S8, there doesn't seem to be any real connection that would indicate that this is what happens next.
Wow, Joss, what the heck?
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 10:48 am (UTC)From:How are the deep thoughts going?
Re morals and the fringe - I think that the fringe, the Other, in Buffy doesn't necessarily carry a moral implication. The Other can be a threat or it can be a hero, since the edge is the centre in Buffy - the nerds (Willow and Xander), the slayers, they're the main characters.
But evil is also on the fringes. And Buffy likes to sex the evil - sex and evil are linked often in Buffy, even though the message isn't that sex is evil. Buffy just happens to sleep with a lot of evil people :D (well, two, unless you count Parker as evil).
I agree that Buffy probably wouldn't have slept with a woman unless it was, like, handed to her on a plate, and if there'd been a lot of men around. I don't think for a second that Buffy's bi - I just think she's showing a human level of ambiguity. Everyone knows Buffy's vampsexual anyway ;)
Re the cookie dough speech - that came after Parker though? Do you mean that the cookie dough speech is just for Angel's benefit? I disagree, I think she meant it. Even though it's a lame speech. Many of Buffy's speeches are lame. :)