?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

You know, I haven't heard anyone -- either characters on the show or fans obsessing afterward -- refer to the fact that not all little girls are nice and heroic and ethical and all that jazz. So ... bringing all potential Slayers into full Slayerhood ... not necessarily an entirely good idea. Because some of those girls are going to go out robbing liquor stores and killing folks and whatnot.

Just look at Faith. If she hadn't had a Watcher, she would have been even more out-of-control. As it is, she was already running around killing people willy-nilly and working for evil folks as "muscle".

And now there are all these sudden Slayers (and, again, I wonder if it stops at a certain age or continues on to include all these disillusioned women who really want to pummel their ex-husbands and suchlike) who have no idea why they are so strong and fast and whatnot, and have nobody guiding them in how to channel this new power. Can you say "potential girl gang"?

Hmm. How come no one but me worries about this sort of stuff? I think it would be really funny if next season on "Angel" he and his crew spent a large percentage of their time fighting new Slayers and cursing Willow for Slayerifying them all. Heh.

I'm just sayin'.

Tags:

Comments

( 19 comments — Leave a comment )
sigrun
Jul. 16th, 2003 12:56 am (UTC)
It's a worrisome situation definitely. I think some of the girls would probably be committed, like Buffy was.

Something you mentioned though ... Willow shouldn't get the blame for this. She didn't even want to do it. Buffy is the one who came up with the idea & pressed her into doing it. A lot of things may set directly on Willow's shoulders - but this isn't one of them.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 01:03 am (UTC)
I actually don't think it's anyone's fault. As it was set up in those final few episodes, they didn't have any other plan for defeating The First, and so this was sort of their only choice. I just wish it hadn't been presented as a purely wonderful, positive thing to hand out power like it was candy. Perhaps we'll see some of the negative aftermath on "Angel".

My one major hope is that ME doesn't just pretend that the Jossiverse isn't now riddled with Naive!Slayers who don't know what the heck they're doing. If there was more separation between the two shows, I wouldn't care, but having Angel show up just before that big final battle creates a sort of common universe which I hope will be respected.
sigrun
Jul. 16th, 2003 01:09 am (UTC)
Meep. Sorry if I jumped the gun a bit about blame then. There's just been a rash of Willow!Hate lately so I'm a bit touchy. My apologies for assuming.

With everything that happened in seasons 7 & 4 respectively, I too am worried about the crossover aspects. Because there were some key things that were left out - could Buffy & co. not have known about the LA blackout? And no mention of the call from Angelus at all. With everything that is supposed to be coming up on AtS next season, I do wonder if they'll have time to actually tie up the loose ends from both shows or if they'll just gloss over what happened as much as they could. I guess it's a wait & see scenario at best.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 02:03 am (UTC)
Re:
You might have misinterpreted my comment about the Angel folks cursing Willow's name ... which was entirely meant to be funny. Very understandable, though.

could Buffy & co. not have known about the LA blackout?

Yeah, that bothered me, too. But I was willing to let it go because they really are two separate shows. I think ME do themselves a disservice, actually, by making any attempt at setting them in the same universe, because it only makes the inconsistencies more obvious. Ah well.

I expect that most stuff from "Buffy" will fall by the wayside. "Angel" has its own loads to carry, after all. I'd like to see some amount of continuity there, but I don't really expect it.
selenak
Jul. 16th, 2003 02:43 am (UTC)
Actually...
The risk for superpowered girls is the same as it was for every Slayer. But of course there's dark potential here. My take doesn't involve girl gangs as much as...

http://www.livejournal.com/users/selenak/11002.html#cutid1
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 10:33 am (UTC)
Re: Actually...
Yeah, it sounds like you were writing more about how Slayers would interact with a world that didn't understand them. My question was more about how Buffy, Willow & Co. seemed to consider this a wonderful thing, giving all the Slayers their power right now. And ME presented it as such, too, with the shiny happy people montage: cute little baseball girl smiling, ugly girl finally standing up to bullies, etc. My point is that none of them seemed to acknowledge that some of these girls aren't going to be good people (because not all people are good people), and they won't have the Watchers' Council to control them if, in fact, they are killing people for fun or whatever.
selenak
Jul. 16th, 2003 12:13 pm (UTC)
No, some certainly will misuse their powers...
...which is yet another parallel to the mutant scenario. Because yes, of course some will use their powers for evil. Some will be persuaded to do so, some will do so out of their own volition, some as a reaction. This is inevitable. But I maintain this is still better than the previous One Doomed Slayer status quo.

Mind you, I think Buffy & Co. will probably try to track all the new Slayers down to give them at least some basic explanation. Even should they succeed, it doesn't change there will be the inevitable rogues/downright villains. Just as there will be heroes, and in-betweens.

To use a more down-to-earth example: if you teach people, women or men, how to fight, some among them will probably use these techniques for bad purposes. Does this mean there should be no self defense classes.
seidl
Jul. 16th, 2003 12:57 pm (UTC)
Re: No, some certainly will misuse their powers...
In a modern age, I suspect Willow to spam most of the magicy web sites with a post along the liens of 'Just got super strong? Vampires trying to eat you? Welcome to the wonderful world of slayerness. ..." Would cover at least the connected world fairly well. For the very third world countries, just wait for the news articles of women gangs to surface? Either toppling dictators or setting them up.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 01:28 pm (UTC)
Re: No, some certainly will misuse their powers...
First of all, I think you and I are miscommunicating with each other here. I'm not trying to make any sort of judgment about whether the characters should have made a different choice. I'm saying that I'm surprised that none of them were shown to have any concerns about bestowing this sort of power on a bunch of people they'd never met.


To use a more down-to-earth example: if you teach people, women or men, how to fight, some among them will probably use these techniques for bad purposes. Does this mean there should be no self defense classes.

Given the extent of Slayer power, I would say it's more like giving people machine guns. And handing out machine guns to a bunch of people -- kids, no less -- whom I'd never met would make me stop and think first about the ethical ramifications.
rusty_halo
Jul. 16th, 2003 08:04 am (UTC)
Kimberly, you've missed the entire point of Buffy the Vampire Slayer:

Women = good
Men = bad

Once you understand that, the whole "giving immense amounts of power to women who are in no way prepared to handle it" thing makes so much more sense.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 10:43 am (UTC)
Ohhhhh! Of course! Season 6 makes more sense now, too! How could I have been so blind?

In fact ... whoa! It isn't just Spike and Buffy in S6 that makes more sense under that rubric. Between Willow and Tara, Tara was the more femme ... and so at the end of S6, pure and wonderful (femme) Tara got killed tragically, while (butch) Willow went evil and violent! Of course! Tara would never have gone evil ... because she wasn't masculine!

Thank you for illuminating the whole issue for me. What would I do without you?
seidl
Jul. 16th, 2003 09:56 am (UTC)
In some of his recent interviews, Joss has said they will deal with the 'lots of slayers' thing on Angel.

What I wonder is really, how many are there going to be? How good was the council and the scooby gang in locating them all. If they were good, we're talking maybe 20 or 30 world wide. If they sucked, maybe every town gets one or two. It will also be interesting to see if potential slayers lost their 'slayerness' at some age. 18? 21? Get drunk before you're a slayer and poof, you can't be one anymore. :)

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. And what effect it has on any other spinoffs that come down the road. Faith the Vampire Slayer Nanny with a half dozen upper powered tots slaying vampires from their strollers.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 10:47 am (UTC)
It will also be interesting to see if potential slayers lost their 'slayerness' at some age.

I've wondered about this, myself. How "potential" is "potential"? I mean, some of these potentials/Slayers (for example, Kendra) were raised from infancy by Watchers. So they must be "potentials" from birth. So are there a bunch of BabySlayers running around out there now, accidentally killing the family cat with their superstrong affections? What about the superstrong grandmas?

My best guess is that ME will ignore that, and all new Slayers will be teenagers, in order to best appeal to their viewers.
seidl
Jul. 16th, 2003 01:05 pm (UTC)
Who says its 'ignoring' it?

We don't have a good idea of the youngest or oldest slayer ever called, but maybe willow only empowered those in the right bracket to be called? Youngest sounds like down to maybe 13 or so. Oldest should be less than 18 or the council wouldn't have its funky age 18 right of passage thing.

You might know you could be a slayer at a younger age, or that you had the chance if you're older, but you weren't called. What willow's done is basically call everyone who's eligible now, and left call waiting messages for those who're too young.

While its a really big change in the universe, I'm not sure how much effect it would really have. I mean, its always bothered me that the one and only slayer spent all her time in a little CA town, ignoring the big demons that might rise all over the rest of the world.

As for the happy/shininess of it, well ... most deals with the devil look all happy and shiny at first. its only down the road that the bad stuff starts to surface. I'm sure Joss & Co will find a way to make it painful. They have with almost everything else.
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 01:30 pm (UTC)
You make much sense! Thank you for sharing your wisdom, sensei!
seidl
Jul. 16th, 2003 03:32 pm (UTC)
Me thinks Kimberly has had too many sarcasm pills today. :) Its my view. Probably wrong, but who knows. Its at least one spin on things that avoids 80 year olds sharpening the ends of their walkers to stake vampires with, and babies not killing their mom's with super sucking action. :)
kimberly_a
Jul. 16th, 2003 05:24 pm (UTC)
Re:
In all seriousness, what you wrote made a lot of sense. :)
seidl
Jul. 17th, 2003 06:43 am (UTC)
Then I'll shut up now and slink away with my complement in hand. Anyway, I have a season of angel tapes to get caught up with. :)
kimberly_a
Jul. 17th, 2003 10:15 am (UTC)
Re:
And I'll just silently envy you your Angel tapes. :)
( 19 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com