Discussion of 6.08 "Tabula Rasa" - Aired 11/13/01 (UPN-US)

[Bite-me]

. I have to admit, I identify far more with Spike's "otherness" and his fluidity than I do with Buffy's centrality (beyond the fact we're both white, female and straight, we have little in common). I suppose it's to do with the problem of literal demons on one hand and metaphorical demonization/marginalization on the other. As literal demons, it's difficult (though not impossible) to criticise Buffy but move beyond this and you're confronted with all sorts of relativism that's not easy to reconcile at the level of story.

That is interesting! I don't think anyone takes "Chased by demons" as literal, I meant what you pointed out, that no Buffy fan, at least that I am aware of, has ever felt a kinship/identification to vampires on the basis of "marginalization" the "Misunderstand" and "Demonized" are fertile ground for identification but BTVS attracts the underdogs who relate to Buffy and not the vampires, (save for Spike's romanticism and Angel's depression, central characters who are humanized in every sense of the word)

"Buffy's: "And the thing is, I like my evil like I like my men-- evil. You know, "straight up, black hat, "Tied to the train tracks, soon my electro-ray will destroy metropolis" bad. Not all mixed up with guilt and the destruction of an indigenous culture". Spike's" You won. All right? You came in and you killed them and you took their land. That's what conquering nations do. It's what Caesar did, and he's not going around saying, "I came, I conquered, I felt really bad about it." The history of the world isn't people making friends. You had better weapons, and you massacred them. End of story... You exterminated his race. What could you possibly say that would make him feel better? It's kill or be killed here. Take your bloody pick". And I've just noticed this one: Spike : You know what happens to vampires who don't get to feed? Buffy : I always wondered that. Giles, plates. Spike : Living skeletons, mate. Like famine pictures from those dusty countries, only not half as funny"

Again, interesting! sounds reasonable and practical enough but reading it, I don't feel that we are suppose to take Spike's side here, I mean its Spike as Buffy would say, it is not "Might Is Right" black and white as Spike makes it sound and that makes Buffy very uncomfortable considering her world and world view, its a callback or foreshadow to her questions upon discovering she has demon DNA and her self recriminating self hate/doubt in S6

But memories alone aren't what makes a vampire violent. The degree of viciousness does seem to be dependent on the experiences and personalities of their original human selves, but the bloodlust and impulse to kill comes from the animating demon. So an amnesiac Spike should have been feeling a resurgence of that. Compare it with 'Spin the Bottle' where Angel doesn't at first know he's a vampire but still feels 'cold inside' and is drawn to Cordy's neck. And presumably Angel has had a more regular intake of pig's blood than Spike did since the latter was always trying to make some cash to feed himself. The circumstances differ in that Angel still has his soul so has no initial desire to hurt anyone, untl they turn on him and his resentments as 17 year old Liam cause him to give in to some of the benefits of his vampirism, before getting fed up of it eventually. But still, even with a soul his vampiric instincts do emerge. I reckon @gnarl may have a point about the chip conditoning by now subconsciously impacting Spike's behaviour. It seems a more plausible explanation

Not if you consider my proposition as the answer "If we had more time to discover that "trapped between worlds" is the perfect description of vampires in general, its consistent in the shows mythology that vampires take their personality after their human self, only without social constraints and morality, a explanation to Spike, Harmony, Sam, Penn and Drusilla's surplus of humanity is that vampires, beyond their "embodied metaphorical role of "pure evil'"frozen in time impediments to adulthood, are actually, in the style of Anne Rice, more tragic figures than their boastful, demonic bragging "I have no conscience and have never felt better" lets on" And also "Eternity", is Angel not Angelous or only suppressing him, the question that made Buffy uncomfortable in "Enemies"

@EarthLogic

Yes this seems to be what the show is moving towards - and I think it's the prevailing view in fandom/academia of the shifts in morality of the later seasons. It's still problematic for me though, because while it might work simply on a metaphorical/thematic level within the context of the season itself, I don't think it's consistent with the show's overall mythology from S1. The only way I could comfortably go with it is if I think on S5-7 as essentially a reboot of the show's vampire lore. However I really I don't like to do that because it creates a huge gulf between the earlier and later seasons.

Is that so? I am curious, what is your understanding of S1 Mythology because I do not see it as diverging, as evolving, which I suppose is another way of saying "rebooting" but I am ok with that because none of us would be discussing "Buffy" now if it were a show we showed when we were young, as opposed to a show that we watched while growing up because it grew up with us.

Memory isn't stored in one place. The Scoobies seem to remember some things, though they are fuzzy on the particulars. For example, Will and Tara are instantly drawn to each other. Spike hasn't fed on humans in almost two years and the punishment of the chip has become ingrained in his spine.

I think Spike always has had a tendency to see himself as a hero. I think even when he was with Dru, he felt he was better and less depraved than the rest.

Yes, the idea that the "Chip" gad conditioned Spike to "behave" good, does not by its self contradict it self with the idea that Spike had within him self the spark of humanity, in fact, it is consistent with the existential philosophical tradition influencial on Joss Whedon that one is what they do, that essence precedes existence in other words.

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

in fact, it is consistent with the existential philosophical tradition influencial on Joss Whedon that one is what they do, that essence precedes existence in other words.

Sure you haven't got that backwards 😵 The clue is in the name 😛 I would argue that old fashioned humanism is more common on BtVS, while AtS portray an existentialist perspective.

 

[Bite-me]

Yeah, if Spike is truly this magnificent unique unprecedented character who chose his own destiny then everything says that Angel should totally love him, ironically they have bad blood between them, perhaps Angel does respect and admire Spike underneath only we did not get enough screentime to explore that. A alternative perspective I put forth is that Spike is not unprecedented but vampires are misunderstood tragic figures, serving a metaphorical role in somebody elses story, not of their own.

 

[EarthLogic]

its consistent in the shows mythology that vampires take their personality after their human self, more free to be themselves without social constraints and morality, if family was most important to their humans selves they will seek them out first thing, if not they will be a second thought, so another explanation given credibility by Spike's, Harmony's Sam's and Drusila's, Penn's surplus of humanity is that vampires beyond their embodied metaphorical role of 'pure evil' frozen in time impediments on the way to adulthood, are like in the style of Anne Rice more tragic figures than their boastful demonic braggadocio "I've never felt better" lets on.

Yes, I do think the vampire state is shown to be more 'freeing' since they can give in to baser impulses without question, and of course the form and nature of the violence is informed by their human personalities. Their immortality basically keeps them in a state of arrested development: their physical inability to change is I think representative for their mental/emotional inability to change (at least for the better anyway, we do see Spike deliberately change his outward persona).

But we have to ask ourselves what consitutes a person - is it your personality and baser desires or is it the choices you make when the whole spectrum of morality and conscience is available to you? The idea that soulless vampires are their 'essential selves' is problematic because then it undermines the show's original premise and also whole premise of AtS. If Angelus is somehow Angel's 'true self' than the entire series is basically just him in denial and the soul is just a muzzle. And if so, what are we to make of his ability to love truly and selflessly with his soul - as with Buffy or Connor? Is that also something he is forced to feel and therefore not genuine? It also depends on who/what you consider to be the 'I' of the souled Angel: is it simply Angelus with a conscience speaking? Or is it a part of his human self that is returned to his body along with his conscience (which is what seems to be happening in Becoming Part 2 - he's Angel again even before he even rememebrs what he's done).

For that reason the show's original idea that the vampire 'is not you' is still valid, because we see that it both is and isn't you. The demon seems to take on personality and memory and amplify negative traits which abolsutely come from the human being - so in a way it is you. But it also is not because your ability to resist is gone. Lots of people have resentments and negative issues which we do not act upon because even if we might sometimes want to out of anger and frustration, we also have the ability to choose whether to give in or not. It's why I don't see a problem with Angel holding himself responsible for his soulless actions. He knows he didn't really have a choice as to whether to kill and drink blood or not since he had no morality to hold him back, but he also knows his own human issues informed his capacity for evil. And I think in AtS they did a good job of bringing those two sides closer together.

The Anne Rice-esque portrayal of vampires we get later on - mainly through Spike - is what I actually didn't like so much. It's interesting from the POV of the character and his symbolic function within Buffy's story, but I really liked that Whedon's original idea was to discard the revisionist sympathetic-vampire tropes and take us back to genuine horror and monstrosity. I suppose one could argue that maintaining these original binaries would have been too simplistic but I believe they could have found a middle-ground where Spike could have remained basically evil and yet also functioned as a means for Buffy to recognise and confront her own darkness (I haven't thought out the whens and hows of this in detail though). This might just be a matter of personal taste.

Is that so? I am curious, what is your understanding of S1 Mythology because I do not see it as diverging, as evolving, which I suppose is another way of saying "rebooting" but I am ok with that because none of us would be discussing "Buffy" now if it were a show we showed when we were young, as opposed to a show that we watched while growing up because it grew up with us.

I think it sort of evolves to the point of divergence, if that makes sense. Angel being revealed having a human soul already starts to complicate the shows initial humans=good, vampires=bad binary. But crucially, because Angel physically has something extra which allows him to be good, Buffy can still slay other vampires. It's the exception that proves the rule. You do get a more complex morality in the depiction of other demon species- such as the one with the Books of Ascension whose not interested in evil or violence, and that's something which continues on AtS as well. But the issue with Spike is that they later introduce ideas of morality and conscience with the same creature as before, but in an entirely different way. Had the show not made the soul/soulless divide explicit at first then there would be no problem, but they did and so it appears contradictory. Basically we get two different versions of the man/monster trope but within the same fantasy creature, which puts them at odds with each other. If you take S5-7 in isolation from the rest, or maybe just read vampires on a shifting symbolic level - as simply a metaphor for stepping into the adult world of blurrier morality from Buffy's story POV, then it sort of works, but it doesn't cohere on a mythological/worldbuilding level. Call me greedy but I want to be able to do both 😛.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

When the Judge appears, he comments on the level of purity of evil and the level of humanity in the vampires who put him back together, going so far as to annihilate Dalton for being too human. If we see a vampire as having human memories of doing good being rewarded and doing bad being punished (and the vampire will have retained all these memories) then we have a vampire equivalent of PTSD where a vampire cannot be a "pure" evil character because everything he remembers from humanity becomes a disabling influence. This is like a soldier who massacred innocents and cannot cope with his memories anymore.

 

[Priceless]

But memories alone aren't what makes a vampire violent.

But isn't that one of the questions Tabula Rasa asks? It you awoke as a vampire, and no one told you what you were, would you be evil? You seem separate the demon and the man far more that I do. I think the man/demon is a singular thing, not two consciences inside one shell battling it out, more just one conscience trying to find it's own reality in a world in which they have been changed. Spin The Bottle is Angel's reality, it's what he believes about himself, but Spike's reality, in Tabula Rasa is very different. Just as two people can be different, I think so can two vampires.

I would agree that the chip really did kick start the change in Spike, but I also think it was there anyway, just latent, as seen in the truce with Buffy at the end of Season 2.

 

[EarthLogic]

But isn't that one of the questions Tabula Rasa asks? It you awoke as a vampire, and no one told you what you were, would you be evil?

Yes but I just think the balance is a little bit off because those basic vampiric instincts don't seem to emerge at all until he feels the adrenaline of the fight. I've always thought the vampire was a complex combination of nature/nurture. Tabula Rasa seems to lean heavily towards the nurture.

You seem separate the demon and the man far more that I do. I think the man/demon is a singular thing, not two consciences inside one shell battling it out, more just one conscience trying to find it's own reality in a world in which they have been changed.

Not really. I've never thought of it as two separate consciences battling it out and I don't think I've ever said that. If I've implied it, it's probably a mistake because I was struggling to articulate an idea in precise terms. Memory and the core aspects of personality are always there, it's just dependent on whether the demonic essence or the soul (neither of which I think are separate consciousnesses in themselves, more like blank slates) is drawing on and shaping it. I think there's always a degree of continuity there.

 

[gnarl]

Interesting discussion @Meliza @TriBel.
I haven't given enough thought to Otherness in Buffy to really have a consistent idea about it, but my experience of the show is that Buffy and her friends represent a version of the 'other' which we are invited to identify with. Demons and Vampires, on the other hand, hold a position of power within the verse because they are physically stronger than humans and they far outnumber our merry band of worriers. However, this seems to become less and less true as the series progresses.

@Meliza am I right understanding what you say as that we aren't supposed to identify with Vampires as a group? I think you're right. While we have moments of connection with both Spike and Angel, both vampires exist outside of 'normal' vampire existence; Angel because he has a soul and Spike, because he is unable to act as a vampire (and then he has a soul) thus, the experiences that make them relatable come from their 'otherness' from the vampire norm, not from their vampirism.

This is such an interesting topic, ever time I try to write down an idea about this I become aware of an opposing through that seems to complicate the issue further. For instance, I identify with both Spike and Buffy at different times based on their otherness and their centrality.
Maybe Otherness in Buffy needs a thread of it's own 🙂

 

[EarthLogic]

such as the one with the Books of Ascension whose not interested,

Correction: That should say 'not interested in evil or violence'.
 

Spin The Bottle is Angel's reality, it's what he believes about himself, but Spike's reality, in Tabula Rasa is very different.

I'm not sure you can equate the two episodes in terms of characters constructing their reality since in TR they lose their memories and so have to figure out who they are kind of from scratch whereas in 'Spin the Bottle' they revert to their 17-year old mental state/memories - Cordelia even thinks she still lives Sunnydale. It's a commentary on some of the aspects/teen issues that inform their adult selves, but in a different way to 'Tabula Rasa'.

 

[Bite-me]

"Their immortality basically keeps them in a state of arrested development" Yes! the perfect cautionary tale to Buffy of what happens when failing to grow up. Slaying vampires is the perfect metaphor for the impediments on the road to adulthood and self actualization.

The vampires are challenges that prepare one for the "Big Bad" of each season, the milestone her stage of life, the message being, in the form of Buffy's vulnerability and bravery, that every defining challenge we will face in life, we will face, well before we are ready to do so, so be brave and live.

"The vampire state is shown to be more freeing since they can give in to baser impulses without question"

Yes, it is called Negative liberty, that is, immortality "Freedom from external restraint" as opposed to growing up, which is Positive liberty "The power and resources to fulfill one's own potential"

"Soulless vampires as their 'essential selves' is problematic because then it undermines the show's original premise"

Not if we take it as the shows thesis as Buffy growing up. Vampires at first are only symbolic impediments to the path to adulthood than their metaphorical role grows more complicated as the adult world is want to do and as prefigured by Angel. It is nothing as clear cut as Angel is simply Angelus in a muzzle. Just like that Buffy could once in S1-2 , safely assume Giles was her protector and had all the answers in the S3 years she discovers parents are only human and do not have all the answers, the world only ever becomes more complicated and begets more questions, in Buffy's life at least, Spike is a maturation of Angel, maybe even a referendum.

The episode "Enemies" unsettles Buffy because it rears the ugly question ( A major anxiety of Angels) is Angel "Pretending" to be Angelus or is he only unleashing him? as demonstrated by our debates, there is no clear answer to this question and it is the answer onto which Angels own show seeks.

"I suppose one could argue that maintaining these original binaries would have been too simplistic but I believe they could have found a middle-ground where Spike could have remained basically evil and yet also functioned as a means for Buffy to recognise and confront her own darkness."

I too like the idea of Spike remaining a evil figure because I think Buffy truly "sleeping with the enemy" has a lot of panache to serve the point of season six. Spike given a "Chip" muddles the dramatic waters, so that I understand fans who feel his presence in Season Seven is perfunctory, I only like the message of his character arc because I came to understand it some thirteen years after the fact, while a lot of fans still to this day do not and that is a justifiable drawback, people can "just get" what Buffy and Angel are all about.

Your very last paragraph is the gospel of the contingency that love Bangel and won't hear of Spike/Buffy, they understand Angel complicating Buffy's worldview, they do not however. aside from Spike having a chip understand Spuffy and therefor the divsion. My working theory (much like the comic/show divide perhaps) is to regard two different propsitions s at the same time, being that vampires play the role in metaphor on Buffy as the impedients on the road to adulthood, while at the same time having their own subjective story/reality as tragic figures with breathing ( or imitating breath. 😉 ) living figure of tragedy besides their metaphorical role as pure evil in somebody elses story.

"The issue with Spike is that they later introduce ideas of morality and conscience with the same creature but in an entirely different way/we get two different versions of the man/monster trope within the same fantasy creature, which puts them at odds with each other."

I agree in the show they are different characters absolutely but if we think of it as following Buffy's journey, the way we view people evolves. Spike at odds with himself is how he sees himself, at the very least the show acknowledges this contradiction.

 

[EarthLogic]

Your very last paragraph is the gospel of the contingency that love Bangel and won't hear of Spike/Buffy, they understand Angel complicating Buffy's worldview, they do not however. aside from Spike having a chip understand Spuffy and therefor the divsion.

I have to take issue with this idea that I (and the 'contingency that love Bangel') 'won't hear of Spike/Buffy' or 'cannot understand Spuffy'. I absolutely understand the dynamics of the relationship and the way the narrative metaphors shift in the later seasons, and I understand why so many people are big fans of it. I just cannot reconcile the inconsistencies (or at least what I percieve as such) in the metaphysical fabric of the show's universe. There are a wide range of views amongst fans - both Bangel shippers and non-shippers, and yes some of them might be vehemently opposed to Spuffy or unable to understand it at all, but I think it's wrong to make generalisations of this kind.

 

[Grace]

But isn't that one of the questions Tabula Rasa asks? It you awoke as a vampire, and no one told you what you were, would you be evil?

I feel like we see vampires rise from the grave, have no one around to tell them what they are, and they immediately go into snarling attack mode. In some cases, that might be simple self-preservation, if Buffy is there. But it always seemed to me that vampires were driven by bloodlust, no matter what complicated combination of human traits and emotions they continued to have. And you don't need anyone to tell you you're hungry to be hungry, y'know?

I definitely see how you couldn't get Angelus, for example, without nurture. He goes way beyond basic vampirism.

I do like the idea of the chip affecting Spike's behavior, at least temporarily. Or, since the spell is specifically targeted at wiping out bad thoughts ("Purge their minds of memories grim, of pains from recent slights and sins."), it's also possible that it affects whatever natural evil impulses Spike might have as well. Or, depending on how you define "recent," it might actually block Spike's human brain from feeling the demon, the "sin" of vampirism committed against him. So he might experience his hunger as regular human hunger, it's only the involuntary physical response during the fight that clues him in. I'm just making stuff up now, but it's fun!

Anyway, I thought a big point of the episode was to show us how the characters feel about themselves. So I just go with it because I do think Spike sees himself as a hero at this point.

Your very last paragraph is the gospel of the contingency that love Bangel and won't hear of Spike/Buffy, they understand Angel complicating Buffy's worldview, they do not however. aside from Spike having a chip understand Spuffy and therefor the divsion.

I don't see how this is helpful.

 

[Bite-me]

"There are a wide range of views among fans" "ok fair point, "Narrative metaphor changes" totally true and you can reconcile this by holding two different perspectives in mind at the same time.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

I think that already this thread has put more collective intellect to work on the questions about the nature of the soul and conscience than Rebecca Rand Kirshner ever did when she wrote it.

 

[Buffy Summers]

Let's be sure to keep this friendly, and remember to be careful when making generalizations about groups of people.

 

[EarthLogic]

I think that already this thread has put more collective intellect to work on the questions about the nature of the soul and conscience than Rebecca Rand Kirshner ever did when she wrote it.

One of the reasons I'd have loved to have been in that writers' room when they broke episodes like this. I really want to know how much these ideas were thought through.

 

[Priceless]

I feel like we see vampires rise from the grave, have no one around to tell them what they are, and they immediately go into snarling attack mode. In some cases, that might be simple self-preservation, if Buffy is there. But it always seemed to me that vampires were driven by bloodlust, no matter what complicated combination of human traits and emotions they continued to have. And you don't need anyone to tell you you're hungry to be hungry, y'know?

Good point, but we also see vamps who rise and run away. I am sure their feelings and instincts are heightened, but vampires are as different as human. Holden was prepared to give Buffy a fee analysis before eating her, maybe if she's tried to talk him out of it, he wouldn't be dust now. Maybe it depends on the intellect or emotional intelligence of the human part of them that makes the difference. We see the vampires Riley goes to find a different way of living, so it is possible.

 

[spikenbuffy]

Great funny episode

- I love Spike like often he is sssssoooooooo funny, I laugh everytime to his lines or attitude.
- Funny as hell, Spike (randy) & Giles think they are father and son, they makes me laugh in a lot scenes 😀, Giles & Anya ironic banter 😀).
- Giles & randy shares a hug goodbye before Giles go to England 🙂.
- Spuffy amazing kiss 😛
- Great music ending by Michelle Branch
- Willow promised Tara not to use magic again but she do it again and try to violate minds of Tara & Buffy 😡
- Sad ending for everyone but Spike, Xander and Anya 🙁.

 

[Trepkos]

I loved it so much, I named my house after it.

 

[Mr Trick]

Overrated but still very enjoyable is how I'd sum this one up. The concept works really well and there's some great comedy and themes. I oddly do ship Giles and Anya every time I watch it 😛

Again its painful watching the decline of Willow and Tara's relationship at this point in the season. Feel so bad for Tara. Its painful watching Dawn's reaction to Tara leaving too. The Michelle Branch musical number and montage again is beautiful and a great way to end the episode. I always enjoy a bit of Spuffy🙂