(no subject)
Aug. 26th, 2009 10:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shapinglightHello again. Have been mostly absent since Sunday, except for posting horrid porn on my other LJ. Hands still bad, so still trying to keep posting/commenting smallscale. Have been reading but not commenting much. Sorry. Also, work is being a pain in the a**e.
Have been having an interesting conversation with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
shadowcat67, though, about this and that...
...during which the subject of Joss's speech/Q&A when he picked up his award from the American Humanist Society (?) came up. I've just listened to the whole thing (90 minutes, so no casual undertaking), and have come away quite impressed and liking Joss rather a lot. I'm looking forward to watching Dollhouse (if I ever get around to it) rather more than I was before.
I would urge everyone to listen to the whole thing themselves if they haven't already, but for me, the stand-out parts were as follows:
A clip of Angel's speech to Kate in Epiphany was shown - the one where Angel says, "If what we do doesn't matter, all that matters is what we do," or words to that effect. Joss says that pretty much encapsulates his philosophical standpoint, and that Kate's riposte that Angel just entered her apartment uninvited and saved her life in a miraculous way was put in just to show an opposing POV.
Interesting. Mind you, Joss does also say - and I loved this, particularly in view of the fact that I have seen the view expressed that if you criticise Buffy's actions in the Buffy comic, you are a running dog of the patriarchy - that if you use your drama just to make a philosophical/political point, it's didacticism, not drama, and people will walk away.
Yep. Nice to know that Joss agrees with me on this, or rather I agree with him, I suppose.
He was less satisfying on other issues that were of major concern to fans, such as that when he decided that Fred's soul was destroyed in AtS season 5, he never once thought of any 'deeper' issues connected with that (even though having a soul or not having one was so important in his own 'verse). It was just a shorthand way of saying they weren't buying the moment back. Illyria had replaced Fred and that was it. He did say he was sorry about not realising how much it would upset people.
He also didn't really unmuddy the waters where the possible dual nature of Angel/Angelus was concerned. He said the mythos of the show was that when a vampire kills you it sets up shop in your body and uses your memories/personality etc as its own, but that Angel/Angelus was also a metaphor for alcoholism - for how one person can be like two totally different people, one a monster and the other a normal human being, and yet be one and the same person. In other words, Angel/Angelus is both two different people and one and the same.
Confusing, and I wish the person who asked the question had asked him if the same thing applied to Spike.
About whom, btw, he said Spike was a more mature version of Angel, who came at his humanity in a more difficult way than Angel did. He was comparing Spike with Faith when he said this (the question was about Faith), and saying that her path to heroism was more mature and difficult than Buffy's. I think. Anyway, you should listen for yourselves. The question's at around 42 minutes in.
Did say that B/A is like Romeo & Juliet, a 'kiddie romance'. "'Twilight', if you will." Did also say, rather flippantly, in answer to a question that no one actually asked, but that he must get asked a lot, "She loves Spike, or maybe Satsu, I'm not sure sometimes."
Take that how you like.
Apologised for the fact that he can't really write 'ordinary joes', no matter how he tries. They always end up like the X-Men, that the First Evil was just a convenience and yes, incompetent, he realises, and that he's ashamed that some episodes of Dollhouse don't actually mean anything.
You've probably all talked about this already, haven't you, ages ago, and I didn't notice?
Anyway, how are all of you?
Have been having an interesting conversation with
shadowcat67, though, about this and that......during which the subject of Joss's speech/Q&A when he picked up his award from the American Humanist Society (?) came up. I've just listened to the whole thing (90 minutes, so no casual undertaking), and have come away quite impressed and liking Joss rather a lot. I'm looking forward to watching Dollhouse (if I ever get around to it) rather more than I was before.
I would urge everyone to listen to the whole thing themselves if they haven't already, but for me, the stand-out parts were as follows:
A clip of Angel's speech to Kate in Epiphany was shown - the one where Angel says, "If what we do doesn't matter, all that matters is what we do," or words to that effect. Joss says that pretty much encapsulates his philosophical standpoint, and that Kate's riposte that Angel just entered her apartment uninvited and saved her life in a miraculous way was put in just to show an opposing POV.
Interesting. Mind you, Joss does also say - and I loved this, particularly in view of the fact that I have seen the view expressed that if you criticise Buffy's actions in the Buffy comic, you are a running dog of the patriarchy - that if you use your drama just to make a philosophical/political point, it's didacticism, not drama, and people will walk away.
Yep. Nice to know that Joss agrees with me on this, or rather I agree with him, I suppose.
He was less satisfying on other issues that were of major concern to fans, such as that when he decided that Fred's soul was destroyed in AtS season 5, he never once thought of any 'deeper' issues connected with that (even though having a soul or not having one was so important in his own 'verse). It was just a shorthand way of saying they weren't buying the moment back. Illyria had replaced Fred and that was it. He did say he was sorry about not realising how much it would upset people.
He also didn't really unmuddy the waters where the possible dual nature of Angel/Angelus was concerned. He said the mythos of the show was that when a vampire kills you it sets up shop in your body and uses your memories/personality etc as its own, but that Angel/Angelus was also a metaphor for alcoholism - for how one person can be like two totally different people, one a monster and the other a normal human being, and yet be one and the same person. In other words, Angel/Angelus is both two different people and one and the same.
Confusing, and I wish the person who asked the question had asked him if the same thing applied to Spike.
About whom, btw, he said Spike was a more mature version of Angel, who came at his humanity in a more difficult way than Angel did. He was comparing Spike with Faith when he said this (the question was about Faith), and saying that her path to heroism was more mature and difficult than Buffy's. I think. Anyway, you should listen for yourselves. The question's at around 42 minutes in.
Did say that B/A is like Romeo & Juliet, a 'kiddie romance'. "'Twilight', if you will." Did also say, rather flippantly, in answer to a question that no one actually asked, but that he must get asked a lot, "She loves Spike, or maybe Satsu, I'm not sure sometimes."
Take that how you like.
Apologised for the fact that he can't really write 'ordinary joes', no matter how he tries. They always end up like the X-Men, that the First Evil was just a convenience and yes, incompetent, he realises, and that he's ashamed that some episodes of Dollhouse don't actually mean anything.
You've probably all talked about this already, haven't you, ages ago, and I didn't notice?
Anyway, how are all of you?