Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Myth, Metaphor & Morality

by Field, Mark

  Having said all this, I need to add that I think the whole discussion of Pete and Angel is secondary to what I see as important about the episode. As usual, I think what’s important is what an episode tells us about Buffy. For her the contrast is not with Pete, it’s with Debbie. Marti says in The Monster Book that "Young women have a tendency to be drawn to the darker side of man. To romanticize the bad boy. What is that about? And when does it become dangerous? When do you lose control?'" Debbie and Pete exemplify this. Note in particular that Pete tells Debbie that she’s the one who brings out his evil side:

  “Pete: When I drink it, nothing, Debbie. Nothing! (Debbie flinches) I don't need this anymore, okay? I am way, *way* past that now.

  He slams the bottle back onto the shelf.

  Pete: You see?

  He takes another bottle down and throws it to the floor, breaking it.

  Pete: You see?! (breaks another) No more. (breaks a third) You could pour out everything I made, and it wouldn't help. And you wanna know why?

  He grabs her by the arms. She whimpers in fright.

  Pete: You wanna know why?! Because all it takes now is you, Debbie.”

  That, of course, also describes the situation with Angel and Buffy. Remember from Innocence? “So it was me. I did it.” And “The important thing is you made me the man I am today!”

  Buffy lost herself in Angel once; does she now understand the risk that entails? Read her dialogue with Debbie and apply both their words to Buffy in light of Angel’s return, his ambiguous status at that moment, and her concealment of his return from her friends:

  “Buffy: You have to talk to us. (Debbie shakes her head) We can't help you until you do.

  Debbie: I didn't ask for your help!

  Willow: Well, when are you going to? I mean, if Pete kills you, it'll pretty much be too late.

  Buffy: Debbie, we're running out of time….

  Buffy: Where can we find him?

  Debbie: I-I don't know.

  Buffy: You're lying.

  Debbie: What if I am? What are you gonna do about it?...

  Buffy takes her by the arm again and pushes her up against the sink in front of the mirror.

  Buffy: Look at yourself. Why are you protecting him? Anybody who really loved you couldn't do this to you.

  She takes a few steps away. Debbie turns around to face them.

  Debbie: Would they take him someplace?

  Buffy: Probably.

  Debbie: (shakes her head, sobbing) I could never do that to him. (Willow sighs) I'm his everything.

  Buffy: (disgusted) Great. So what, you two live out your Grimm fairy tale? Two people are dead.

  Debbie just shakes her head and says nothing.

  Buffy: Who's gonna be next?”

  Buffy’s playing a dangerous game here; the distance between her and her friends caused by her relationship with Angel is very wide and the wounds from Dead Man’s Party aren’t healed. There’s a real temptation for her, as we learned in her conversation with Platt:

  “Buffy: He was my first... I loved him, and then he...

  Mr. Platt: ...changed.

  She looks up at him, surprised again.

  Buffy: Yeah.

  Mr. Platt: He got mean.

  Buffy: Yes.

  Mr. Platt: And you didn't stop loving him.”

  That’s the story of Debbie in nutshell. She didn’t stop loving Pete even though he “got mean”. She “stayed lost” in Pete, to use Platt’s phrase. The question for Buffy – the one she implicitly asked herself in the conversation with Platt – is whether she will stay lost in Angel. The ending voiceover from The Call of the Wild nicely captures the ambiguity here: does the passage apply to “love’s dog”? To the animal instinct inside Angel? Could it even apply to Buffy herself, feeling the call of the wild in the form of Angel?

  Finally, there’s yet another application of this episode to Buffy which I won’t discuss because of spoilers, but I will say that the theme of this episode fits right in with the most important seasonal theme. And there’s a very good reason why this episode appears at this particular point in the season.

  I need to add that “Rules change” is a great moment.

  Trivia notes: (1) Buffy read in voiceover from Jack London’s The Call of the Wild. If you haven’t read it, the story involves a dog raised in civilization but taken to a brutal environment in Alaska. The dog is able to survive only by reverting to its animal instincts. Apparently dogs have shadow selves too. (2) Willow carried her detective tools in a Scooby-Do lunch box. (3) Someone’s a Sound of Music fan. This is the second episode to use the phrase “the hills are alive”. The first was The Dark Age. Buffy seemed to remember that it was Jenny’s phrase because she trailed off when she used it to Giles. (4) Willow got the donuts from “Mister Donut”, which is now Dunkin’ Donuts. (5) I’ve Got A Secret was a TV game show which originally ran from 1952-67. (6) In comments, State of Siege correctly pointed out that I’m being very eclectic – that’s a euphemism – in my use of Freud and Jung. Guilty. In mitigation, I plead that I’m trying to get a reading which takes account of popular understanding, both of the viewers and of the writers. That will inherently lead to a less-than-scholarly treatment of the issues.

  Homecoming

  “Welcome to Slayerfest!” is one of those lines that makes me laugh every single time. The Mayor, whom we meet for the first time and who is one of my favorite characters in the whole series. Lyle Gorch, whom we see for the first time since Bad Eggs. Homecoming has all these things, but it’s not a particular favorite of mine. This is basically my own issue: I dislike scenes in which people are humiliated even if it is really good for Buffy’s color. For example, I hated what the frat boys did to Xander in Reptile Boy. Buffy’s painful attempt to become Homecoming Queen makes me very uncomfortable and those portions of the episode therefore hard to watch. This doesn’t make it a bad episode; I think that my sense of discomfort was intended by the writers in order to remind us of something about Buffy.

  Buffy tells Cordelia that what she wants is to be recognized: “I just thought... Homecoming Queen. I could pick up a yearbook someday and say, I was there. I went to high school, I had friends, and... for one moment, I got to live in the world. And there'd be proof. Proof that I was chosen for something other than this.” Buffy had all those things at Hemery: “At Hemery, I was Prom Princess, I was Fiesta Queen, I was on the cheerleading squad. And the yearbook was, like, a story of me.” But of course, as we saw in Becoming, Buffy was vapid and childish at Hemery (lollypop and all). Here at Sunnydale she’s on the path to adulthood.

  That doesn’t make it wrong for her to want recognition. We all want recognition, of course. The problem is that Buffy not only wants recognition for something relatively shallow, she goes about it entirely the wrong way: she orders her friends around instead of asking; she guilt-trips Willow; she actually includes Xander’s name on her list of Cordy’s weaknesses; she manipulates some voters and bribes others; she engages in dirty tricks. That’s not the way to get people to work with you or to recognize you, and it’s not Buffy. It is, in fact, very like Cordelia, and that’s the point – to remind us that Buffy has a side to her which Cordelia represents in metaphor.

  Cordy has functioned as Buffy’s shadow self from the beginning. The competition for Homecoming Queen, and the conflict this generates between them, re-emphasizes that role: “This whole trying to be like me really isn't funny anymore.” Buffy denies this, but we can all see that it’s true. The level of bitchiness between them reaches new and disturbing levels. Buffy gives in to her shadow, adopting the behaviors and attitudes she ordinarily controls, though she never goes as far as Pete did last episode. Not until her friends force the two together and Cordy gets to experience Buffy’s life does Buffy regain control. Her metaphorical “grownup” side rescues her from the shallowness and distraction from her destiny which becoming Homecoming Queen represents. Willow was right when she said that Cordy needed that more than Buf
fy.

  Their reconciliation – facilitated by the cooperation which is essential if they’re to evade their hunters – I see as another case of Jungian individuation. Individuation is the reconciliation of the conscious mind and the shadow as part of creating an adult self. I discussed this in Out of Mind, Out of Sight, an episode Buffy not so coincidentally references here when she asks Oz if she’s invisible. As was true in OoM,OoS, the individuation we see here sets up a subsequent episode. Individuation is an iterative process, meaning that it’s necessary to do it repeatedly over one’s life. However, this is the last instance we’ll see in which Cordy plays the role of shadow self; her metaphorical role is done. Hence the “homecoming”, the first of 3 important “homecomings” we see in the episode.

  Though the main plot involves the Homecoming Dance and the election for Homecoming Queen, it’s also clear that Buffy has welcomed Angel back home. It’s not so clear that this is any more successful than her attempt to be Queen. If nothing else, her time spent with Angel seems to part of what cost her what little relationship she had with Scott Hope (but a big cheer to Faith for taking Buffy’s side!).

  Angel’s return also continues to isolate her from her friends. She can’t trust them to understand: “I haven't... told Giles and the others that... you're back. … And I'm not going to. They wouldn't understand that you're... better.” Xander’s Lie and the events of Dead Man’s Party are still poisoning the well. We can see the distance between them in their choice to help Cordelia rather than Buffy, which of course only serves to reinforce the separation. Buffy’s decision to hide Angel’s return seems logical from her perspective, but it’s worth thinking about how her friends might feel about it, particularly since they have no way to know that he’s Angel again.

  Speaking of friends, there’s a third level of “homecoming” on display in Homecoming. I can’t say that Xander’s sudden (?) attraction to Willow came as a complete surprise to me. After all, I never thought he loved Cordelia; that’s the way I interpreted the results of Amy’s spell in BB&B. He’s always looking around at others, including Faith this season, never content with what he has. Having Cordy tell Buffy that she truly does love Xander just raises the stakes that much higher. Willow has always loved Xander, so her giving in to temptation comes as no great shock either.

  Willow and Xander, like Buffy, are now hiding a secret that their friends won’t really understand or accept. It’s not a completely symmetrical situation because Buffy isn’t the victim of their fluking, whereas Xander and Willow are directly affected by Buffy’s concealment of Angel. That said, there’s a metaphorical connection to Buffy: when one’s heart and one’s spirit turn inward towards each other, that suggests a dangerous level of self-involvement and disregard of others.

  I haven’t said anything about the Mayor until now. He was mentioned four times previously (in IOHEFY, Becoming 2, DMP, and FH&T), but this is the first time we actually see him. He’s obviously a bad guy, given his association with Mr. Trick, but that’s all we know so far. While you’re thinking about what metaphorical role the Mayor might play – because by now you know I think he has one – I’ll leave you with a suggestion. The Mayor has only 2 scenes, both fairly short. In my view, one very obvious theme appears from his statements.

  Trivia note: (1) The Slayerfest plot is based on the short story The Most Dangerous Game.

  Band Candy

  After 3 episodes which prefigure one of the two important themes of S3, we now get two which prefigure the other major theme and some of the plot lines. I’m not going to spoil the plot, but I do want to talk about one of the themes: maturity. Since Buffy’s a senior this year, it’s shouldn’t surprise us that maturity is a theme. Mature is what all seniors are supposed to be when they graduate.

  Joyce tells Buffy that she’s being immature: “You're acting really immature, Buffy.” She is, though not for the reasons Joyce and Giles think. It’s the fact that she’s concealing Angel’s return which causes her to lie to them and to Willow. Buffy then does what teenagers love to do and demands to be treated like an adult in order to prove she is one. What follows is a metaphorical enactment of that demand.

  Jane Espenson describes the episode as “be careful what you wish for”. As she says, “Buffy wishes she had something, she gets it and then learns that it’s not what she hoped it would be. So in Bandy Candy she was getting a lot of parental supervision from….."I wish I didn’t have these adults running my life" and then they’re not adults anymore and she realizes that she needs them, needs them as grownups.” It’s not just that the behavior of the adults provides a “sobering mirror” (Oz’s phrase), but Buffy also learns something from the absence of adult supervision: that she can function as an adult even if she’s not one.

  So who’s being irresponsible here? The adults, certainly, once the candy takes effect anyway. Willow and Xander too, and Xander didn’t even need the candy. It’s an interesting question whether Buffy is. She’s lying to Joyce and to Giles about her studies/training, but she at least sees that as done for a good cause, namely taking care of Angel. On the really big other hand, though, she’s still hiding his return. That’s not exactly responsible behavior, particularly given the look on her face while he’s doing his Tai Chi. Nor does her reckless driving (without a license) show particularly good judgment. Failing to study for the SAT? I’d give that a pass. Last minute cramming isn’t likely to do her much good anyway; might as well relax.

  No, Buffy shows her maturity when she has to operate as the Slayer instead of a teenager. She takes over completely at that point in order to stop the sacrifice. And to stop Giles and Joyce: “At least I got to the two of you before you actually *did* something.” Heh.

  Band Candy may not have the subtlest of messages, but it’s certainly one of the funniest. Any episode with Ethan Rayne is worth watching repeatedly. It also contains a major clue to the season finale, both in the plotline and metaphorically.

  Trivia notes: (1) Answer C on the SAT preparation test Buffy was taking in the teaser was “all systems tend towards chaos”. We know from Halloween that Ethan Rayne worships chaos, and that is what his candy leads to. (2) Mr. Trick’s “I know a beast who knows a guy” plays on the expression “I know a man (or guy) who knows a guy”. (3) When Buffy told Snyder that she “loved the idea of going all Willy Loman” to sell the candy, she was referring to the lead character in the play Death of a Salesman. As we’ll see in S4, one of the writers really likes that play. (5) The song Giles really likes is Cream’s “Tales of Brave Ulysses”. You’ll hear it again. (6) Buffy’s description of the juvenile adults at the Bronze – “Let’s do the time warp again” – is from the Rocky Horror Picture Show. (7) Snyder wanted to be like Barbarino, who was the character played by John Travolta on the 70s TV show Welcome Back Kotter. (8) Ratboy – Buffy’s description of Snyder – was a 1986 movie starring Sondra Locke. (9) Anthony Head played Giles’ juvenile self very much like the character Alex from the movie A Clockwork Orange, the hat he took from the store being a real giveaway. Someone added the hat during the shooting, because the hat is not mentioned in the shooting script even though Joyce’s coat is. I’m giving this detail because the novel A Clockwork Orange will provide a major theme for S4 and later seasons.

  Revelations

  Revelations brings us front and center to a critical issue: the extent to which Angel is responsible for the crimes of Angelus (consistent with my posts to date, I’m using the name Angel to refer to him with the soul, Angelus without). Xander and Buffy take different sides of this debate; complicating the picture is the bias each has because of Buffy’s relationship with Angel. He’s jealous, she’s in love.

  I want to put aside the bias problems for purposes of thinking about this issue. Frankly, it’s a distraction from the merits. However, I also want to hold off on the merits too until we get to Amends. What I’m going to do here is analyze the actions of Buffy on the one hand, and Xander and Faith on the other. In each case I’ll simpl
y assume for the sake of argument that they’re right in their contradictory views of Angel.

  Buffy seems to view the presence or absence of the soul is a matter of essence. By that I mean that she sees the presence of the soul as marking the real, true essence of a person. It’s a fixed property which defines the very meaning of what a “person” is. She uses this as a dividing line – souled beings are generally for the human world to deal with (except when they access the supernatural in some way), while the unsouled are the province of the Slayer. Her viewpoint on this will remain consistent throughout the series.

  This is a very interesting position for her to hold, and I’m going to discuss it more when I get to Amends. For now I’ll just note her position and move on to evaluating her actions on that basis.

  When Buffy sees Angel with his soul restored, that makes him immediately similar to other real human beings in her eyes, and therefore not a creature to be slain unless he, with the soul, commits some act to deserve that (as Mrs. Post does here). Unlike other vampires, she wouldn’t slay him on sight. He’s rather in a class similar to Oz in that he’s capable of evil but also able to control himself.

  If you see the “soul canon” (as it’s called in fandom) this way, Buffy’s decision not to hold Angel responsible for the crimes of Angelus makes good sense. If the soul is an essential component of personhood, then Angel can’t be held morally responsible for what Angelus did in its absence. Given Buffy’s understanding of the world, keeping Angel alive after his return was the morally correct action.

  Of course, that’s only one part of the criticism of her actions. The other part is her concealment of Angel’s return. She’s on much shakier ground there. From the perspective solely of the Slayer, it’s plausible to argue that she had no duty to tell Willow or Xander about his return. The Slayer is the one who ultimately has to make the call to slay or not, so they don’t have any right to demand that she do so.