VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:36:19 10/18/05 Tue
Author: Sunshine
Subject: Re: explicitly stated mythology of the soul
In reply to: manwitch 's message, "explicitly stated mythology of the soul" on 09:55:22 10/18/05 Tue

The link took me where is was advertised to take me and that was a really interesting piece (and I sincerely mean interesting – not the “I am too polite to criticize so I will just say interesting” kind of interesting). I actually had previously read this in the archives but worth rereading. I have read somewhere (and unfortunately I cannot recall where) that Angel wanted to BE something while Spike wanted to DO something. I found this characterization to be astute and I believe consistent with your treatment.
I certainly agree that there is not a single consistent mythology of the soul. I had previously posted a link to a slayage article discussing this very question The Ontology of the Soul). I personally do not see this lack of consistency as a flaw but rather a reflection of the ever present ambiguity in life. I think Joss has said that when it comes between the emotion of a scene and consistency, he will always go for the emotion. I completely agree with him. I just sometimes get exasperated with Buffy and her continual statements that without a soul, one cannot love (and I think love in the Buffyverse is so important that a characters inability to love => character is evil) despite being told otherwise by Spike, Drusilla (okay – neither are exemplary character witnesses), Tara, Dawn etc. I feel like yelling out to Buffy “Are you even watching the show?”. I am no Spuffy shipper and I could care less whether Buffy ends up with Angel, Spike, the Immortal, Xander, Andrew, Willow or even (shudder) Giles or even becomes a nun (the foods not bad and I hear you don’t even have to be super religious). I just wanted her to acknowledge that this soul thingy was perhaps a bit overrated. Enough rambling for the time being.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

  • "I am an anarkyste, I am an antichrist." -- Celebaelin, 15:05:40 10/18/05 Tue
    Forum timezone: GMT-8
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.