"Tabula Rasa"--Why Willow?

Willow Rosenburg. What happened? How did the sweet, clueless, well-mannered girl become so self-involved? I was very intrigued by our discussion in class today regarding Isabella Thorpe and Willow. Although I understand the point that was made regarding the less than ideal situation in which 19^th century women were placed, I have to say that nothing can excuse Isabella’s behavior. She already had bagged a nice man with means. But when she found out that her desires and expectations exceeded his means and that she would have to wait three years to get married, she continued to climb the rungs of the social ladder. What makes Isabella so terrible is that she adopts the pretense of being kind and well mannered. She acts as if Catherine is her little “pet” and that she, Isabella, is so ubiquitous and perfect that she needs to impart her knowledge onto our “blank slate” heroine. As readers, we can see right through her pretty guise. We just want to shake Catherine and implore her not to befriend Isabella. Miss Thorpe is possibly one of the most annoying characters Austen has ever written. Everyone knows an Isabella. The girl who pretends to be nice, holier than thou, but then does everything to benefit herself. I never thought Willow was that kind of girl. Sweet Willow. Willow, the only person who was brave enough, selfless enough, to opened the door for Tara when the Gentlemen were chasing her. “Tabula Rasa” razed the schema that I had previously constructed for Willow. Willow was not an Isabella, but a member of the Scooby Gang who stuck with her best friend through thick and thin. By becoming dependent on magic, Willow’s relationships with everyone but her “drug of choice” get put on the backburner and subsequently begin to suffer. Willow begins to act selfishly. Even though she says that she is doing her spell to help Buffy and Tara, she ultimately is performing it to help herself. Willow is like Isabella in this sense. Both women act purely out of self-interest, though they adopt the guise of pretending to be well meaning. However, in the end, their veils are lifted. We see who both women truly are, or in Willow’s case, have become. In the end of Northanger Abbey and “Tabula Rasa,” respectively, both Isabella and Willow’s avarice leads to their ultimate abandonment.

Miss Communication

So for all her witty repartee and valley-girl banter, Buffy is terrible a communicating her true feelings. By giving Sunnydale the literal silent-treatment, Joss Whedon offers her and the rest of the Scooby Gang an alternative to conversation. This gimmick acts in two very distinct ways. It’s an excellent device because it makes the viewer stop to think if their own speech is essential to communication, which as “Hush” shows, are two very different things.

Firstly, the Buffy and Riley relationship. Unless they are building a relationship between OPEC nations, their actual discourse is useless. Each is so preoccupied with keeping their secrets, that nothing ever gets said. But when nothing can be said at all, their emotions take center stage. This is obvious when the two bump into each other on patrol and share their first kiss. The scene is not cluttered by deceiving dialogue, and its amazing what can happen without all the Buffy babble.

The second is what makes the Gentlemen so terrifying. As humans, we fear what we don’t know. The Gentlemen are aesthetically eerie, but for the majority of the episode the Scooby Gang is in the dark to the terrible truth. What’s worse, is because they can’t discuss the problem, it only perpetuates the darkness.

As an aside. We have had several class discussions about technology, and how much easier things would be for Buffy and her friends if they had cell phones. But when they are reduced to “texting” in its most literal sense (writing messages on white boards/projectors), they struggle. Thoughts?

Suspension of Disbelief

In the episode Tabula Rasa, in which the main characters of Buffy lose their memories temporarily, but still retain some of their basic personality traits, the show’s creator, Joss Whedon, seems to be making a point about the concept of the suspension of disbelief that is an essential part of Gothic media. Just as Buffy retains her “slayer” abilities and instincts while she has lost her memory, so too do the rest of the characters readily accept that they are living in a world where monsters exist despite having any prior knowledge of this fact. Whedon seems to be saying that regardless of situation, this is an undeniable part of the Gothic, that both the audience and characters within the story must accept that they are inhabiting a world separate from reality, in which monsters and the paranormal are facts of life. This theme relates directly to Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey, in which the protagonist, Catherine Morland, bored with the uneventful life of occupying a large castle, decides to apply the rules of the world within her precious Gothic novels to the real word, creating her own adventures.

Returning to Buffy, Whedon, in another display of self-awareness, also appears to be making a statement about characters in the Gothic, literature in general, and perhaps even reality, that people or characters are who they are, regardless on memory or situation. Buffy and the “Scooby gang” are heroic and individual personalities despite their disabilities in this episode.

Believing is Seeing

Sorry for my super-late Buffy vs. Dracula post, guys. Here goes:

One of the things that stuck out most to me in watching Buffy vs. Dracula was the reactions of the men to the attraction Buffy, Anya, and Willow have towards Dracula – even before any of them were under his so-called “thrall.” Riley and Xander (and even Giles, somewhat) grow protective and jealous of their attraction to a famous historical and sexual figure. This parallels the protective instincts of Van Helsing, Jonathan, Dr. Seward and Quincey over Mina. Somehow, all parties come to the conclusion that this attraction is not due to the conscious desires of the women, but rather to the supernatural power that Dracula has over them. Why is this?

Buffy’s ability to pretend to be under Dracula’s thrall – as well as Mina’s guilt and feelings of disloyalty to Jonathan – both put little holes into the theory that Dracula’s appeal is solely supernatural. And Giles himself (at least, I’m pretty sure it was him) said that it’s not enough for Dracula to merely take his victims; they have to “want to be taken.” All three of these things suggest that the women have more of a hand in their “thrall” than the men acknowledge.

These things suggested to me that the men’s perception of “thrall” could be thrown completely out of proportion by their own desire to see innocence in the women in their lives. By completely tossing aside free will, they would make it more comfortable for themselves in choosing to believe that the women have no choice. This, in turn, would make the women both able and deserving of redemption, and allows the storylines to reach positive conclusions.

What do you think: is Dracula’s thrall 100% compulsory? Or is there some element of free will?

<3 Lisa

the uncanny

In the article “Silence as Symptom: A Psychoanalytic Reading of ‘Hush’”, scholar Kelly Kromer mentions the importance of Freudian psychology when critiquing the text – specifically, she references the idea of the uncanny, which is perfect, since it’s a super convenient way for me to bridge this class with my other Schwartz class.

When discussing the Gentlemen and their mental-patient cronies, Kromer explains that “the fears that these silent monsters access bring us back to Freud again: the ‘uncanny is what one calls everything that was meant to remain secret and hidden and has come into the open.’” This is partly accurate, but there’s more. Freud, being that he was Viennese, originally used the word “heimlich” in his treatise, which roughly translates to the English “homey.” Heimlich and unheimlich: homey and unhomey. But “homey” has two meanings: the first, having to do with one’s home, the known and familiar; and the second, having to do with the concealed, the hidden. Therefore, something that strikes us as “uncanny” is something that is both familiar and unfamiliar simultaneously. The best way I can explain it is this: you know that famous logic-bomb used on movie androids? “This statement is false”? The one that explodes the robot’s head because it can’t reconcile the two possible solutions to the question? (“If this statement is false, then it’s lying and the statement is really true; but if the statement is telling the truth, then it’s actually false, just like it said… but it’s also telling the truth, so it can’t be false, but that means it’s inherently false, so it must be true…” KABOOM!) Well, I think that what we tend to label as “uncanny” is the fundamental gut reaction to that ontological logic-bomb: “The Other is You!” …when some part of your (un)consciousness realizes (in not so many words, of course, for as Kromer explains, the uncanny is often more primitive than language can accurately describe): “holy crap, this thing that seems so different from me, so Other, hits wayyy closer to home than I would like.”

Kromer accurately describes the arrival of the Gentlemen in Sunnydale as an uncanny event; she explains that the inability to articulate the uncanny is symbolized in the loss of everyone’s voices. But, to me, the more interesting interpretation is the “return of the repressed” – that is, the return of infantile fears (considered “outgrown”) to the forefront of the adult mind. The Gentlemen are “fairy tale monsters,” the stuff of children’s folklore. Their impending arrival is sung by a little girl as a pseudo-nursery rhyme. They are, quite literally, boogeymen that get you while you’re in bed. (Indeed, it’s important that these Other-creatures “catch” you – and they are at their most violent – when they enter your home… yet another clash of the homey and the unhomey.)

Kromer goes on to explain that “when the town wakes up unable to speak, they regress to an infant-like position, and as such are more susceptible to the nightmare of ‘Hush.’” I think that this is really interesting: without their voices, the residents of Sunnydale become like helpless children against the tyranny of the Gentlemen – the authoritarians, the parents, the veritable dictators of the family unit. When we were small children, we were powerless against our parents’ demands; and something about that lack of control felt horrible. That same feeling, eventually buried as one grows up and achieves self-empowerment, is again unearthed from the unconscious of the characters (and of the viewers) when the Gentlemen arrive; the difficulty in reconciling our adult mind with our childhood fears effectively results in the uncanny.


Kromer, Kelly. "Silence as a Symptom: A Psychoanalytic Reading of "Hush". Nineteen: The Online International Journal of Buffy Studies. Web. 06 Oct. 2011.

Of Mice, Men, and Vampires

“A man’s voice called from up the river, and another man answered.

‘Go on,’ said Lennie.

George raised the gun and his hand shook, and he dropped his hand to the

ground again.

‘Go on,’ said Lennie. ‘How’s it gonna be. We gonna get a little place.’

‘We’ll have a cow,’ said George. ‘An’ we’ll have maybe a pig an’ chickens .

. . . an’ down the flat we’ll have a . . . . little piece alfalfa—’

‘For the rabbits,’ Lennie shouted.

‘For the rabbits,’ George repeated.

‘And I get to tend the rabbits.’

‘An’ you get to tend the rabbits.’

Lennie giggled with happiness. ‘An’ live on the fatta the lan’.’

‘Yes.’

Lennie turned his head,” (Steinbeck)

and saw that in a flash of light a great stone castle had appeared.

Lennie hesitated. “George, is that castle part of the fatta the lan?”

George turned his head too and noticed the strange citadel. “Why, yes Lennie I do believe it is.”

And as the man’s voice up the river grew louder, the two friends hastened towards the fortress and into the impending darkness.

But seriously, it just doesn’t work anywhere else.

One of the aspects I like about the Gothic is how all things brooding and ominous can just appear from seemingly nowhere and make perfect sense. What’s more, they seem absolutely essential to the plot. For example, in Dracula we see this with the strange flashes of blue light on Harker’s carriage ride, and in Stoker’s descriptions of the doom and gloom of Translyvania. In “Buffy vs. Dracula” we see it in the opening scene with the flash storm at the beach, as well as the appearance of the castle in Sunnydale. In this instance, Riley is taken aback when he sees the it for the first time. However, he and Giles then begin a series of sarcastic dialogue that makes the edifice seem absolutely obvious.

It is in situations like these that the Gothic offers the distinct opportunity for the writer/director to mess with the minds of its followers. To set up a situation for something mundane, look out the window, and see a man scaling the wall like a reptile. To me, the Gothic is a twisted commentary on society. These distortions are all part of the idea of inversion we keep returning to in class. As a commentary on a commentary, “Buffy vs. Dracula” is Joss Whedon’s way of inverting the Gothic onto itself. On the first level, if the viewer has any knowledge of the Gothic, then they are in on the joke. But the second level operates on traditional Gothic themes, surprising the viewer with its contortions. Without these twists and turns, books like Dracula and episodes like “Buffy vs. Dracula” would simply die. Or rather, un-die.

Steinbeck, John. Of Mice and Men. New York: Penguin, 2002. Print.

Buffy Game

So I am still laughing from this and had to share.

Be safe. Don't drive. Proper ID required.

http://www.members.tripod.com/~Nedster69/buffy.html

Imitation as the greatest form of flattery?/ Pleather and Cravats

So I spend way too much time on Wikipedia, but I found a quote about Buffy vs. Dracula’s conception.

“The vampire who was going to show Buffy a darker side of herself was originally envisioned as "just another vampire who rode a horse and was all cool", says writer Marti Noxon. "I kept saying, 'Like Dracula'" - until Joss Whedon said, "Why not Dracula? He's public domain."[1]”

While I understand Dracula as a character serves to show Buffy a darker side of herself and understand her role as a bad-ass slayer/valley girl, I feel like the presence of Dracula allows the show to see a darker side of itself and force itself to admit it’s gothic heritage.

Dracula represents, quite obviously, the traditional gothic, sets the standard for what Buffy is doing. You cannot create a “twist” or parody of a genre without acknowledging the validity of the genre. Dracula appears in the show as a beautiful vampire (contrasting the modern vampires we see with the scrunched-up foreheads and yellow eyes) wearing a black cape. He seems to fulfill all the stereotypes that Joss Whedon has been attempting to break with his series, until of course, one realizes that Dracula set the precedent for these stereotypes. (And yes, occasionally in my head I refer to Dracula as the OG—Original Gangsta) Our 20^th century characters, however, much like us, have been jaded by the last 100 years of vampire obsession, find poor Vlad amusing rather than terrifying (Xander so hilariously compares him to the Dracula-parody, Sesame Street's Count puppet). To me, this mockery of Dracula represents the nature of the parody—Buffy mocks Dracula, Buffy the Vampire Slayer mocks what Dracula represents—the Gothic tradition.

As the show progresses and Buffy pulls more and more pleather pants out of her closet, the characters realize the danger of Dracula as a vampire and the power he can weild over all of them. Both Buffy and Xander fall under his thrall, and willingly go to him, and Buffy even goes so far as to sleep drink his blood. The acknowledgement of Dracula’s power over the characters reflects the power of gothic tradition over the show. As much as Joss would like to create a new realm of vampire fiction, the show still functions as part of the greater universe of gothic tradition. The beauty of the show lies, I believe, in its ability to both mock and admire the gothic. In the end of the show, Buffy can defeat Dracula, but it is a temporary death and he returns to life, reflecting the place of the show as indelibly linked to the Dracula legacy.

Tangent:

And yes, maybe it’s because I hate Tom Cruise, but I would love the episode for the crack at Lestat alone. Maybe because Anne Rice lacks the same self-awareness that Joss Whedon posses, or maybe its just my abhorrence for lace cravats.

Tangent over.

Time to go get me some pleather pants.

How Silence Changes the Slayer

After reading Kelly Kromer's article on "Hush," I became intrigued by things I hadn't paid much attention to in the (many) previous watchings of the episode. For example, Kromer talks about how Buffy has two things in her arsenal, her physical confrontation and her vocal confrontation. For any hero, sometimes kicking and punching isn't enough. This isn't always made clear in Buffy, as more often than not, this sort of physical combat suffices. Hush serves as a reminder that sometimes "...physical assault just isn't enough" (Kromer). Though it seems silly, this made me think of Buffy's little puns and quips and insults that she insists on saying as she slays. When these are lost, we lose a part of Buffy, and her slaying becomes more like hunting and killing, and we lose the comic relief that reminds us constantly that this girl with the weaponry is our hero. Kromer explains how, "As long as Buffy can refer to 'The Big Bad' as "Fruit Punch Mouth' the audience knows that she is still able to fight," (Kromer). It is a signal to the viewer that she is strong and is above the evil. In Hush, we lose this, and we get a look into Buffy's weaknesses and fears.

Though communication and speaking isn't what ultimately defeats the Gentlemen, Joss is still making a commentary on the importance of talking. However, the fact that Buffy is the screaming princess is very important. I think that this entire episode plays on fear. Losing your ability to talk is scary, and we witness things like Willow being scared she is deaf and Giles reaching out to both Willow and Buffy physically to quell their anxiety. Allowing Buffy to scream, even in a heroic way, demonstrates that even the slayer can be frightened, and that within this warrior is still a little princess. It brings me back to Inca Mummy Girl, where we talked about how both Ampata and Buffy were selected to serve and to save their people. Just because Buffy accepts her fate doesn't mean she doesn't get shaken up every now and then.

Kromer also makes a point about why the Gentlemen are called the Gentlemen, describing them as "old, white, Victorian, ultra-white, well-dressed, clean and precise." She describes how this taps into childhood fear of growing up and conforming to expectations of society. I think that this works well with the thematic lack of communication amongst excess talking. Buffy and Riley babble, Willow says that her wicca group is "all talk," and Xander has a problem with Anya saying things that should be kept private. This is childish, and all sorts of babble correspond to the idea that kids say the darndest thing. This is juxtaposed with the silent gestures of the Gentlemen, a symbol for the scary adult world where communication comes from minimal talking.


Kromer, Kelly. "Silence as a Symptom: A Psychoanalytic Reading of "Hush" Nineteen: The Online International Journal of Buffy Studies. 07 Mar. 2007. Web. 04 Oct. 2011.

Naive or Lazy?

What struck me in the episode “Hush” was the extent to which citizens of Sunnydale will go to in order to come up with excuses and explanations about the supernatural occurrences that impact their daily lives. You would assume that after watching a student or an innocent bystander die in every episode that people would be curious about the high death rate and the mysterious circumstances surrounding these demises. However, the people of Sunnydale, whether on purpose or simply because of naivety, turn a blind eye towards the supernatural monsters that haunt their town. In this episode in particular, the local media goes to great lengths to cover up the supernatural nature of the loss of voices of the entire town. In the news report, they blame sickness as the reason no one can speak and use words such as “epidemic” and “quarantine” to bring home the message of disease. Ironically, going along with the disease metaphor that relates to lack of communication, The Gentlemen eerily resemble doctors gone mad.

People suffer from confusion and chaos when they realize they do not have the ability to speak, however no one really questions why or how this happened besides the Scooby gang. People subconsciously realize something unnatural is happening yet they don’t seem to make any connections to the unluckiness and normal dangers that their town usually suffers from. However, in the prom episode, there is reason to believe that some citizens of Sunnydale are more aware of the supernatural and what is truly going on than you may think. Although no one comes out and simply says that their school is on a Hellmouth and that they are plagued by the supernatural, vampires, and untimely deaths, the students do recognize that odd things happen in their town and that, thankfully, Buffy is always there to save the day, which she obviously does once again in “Hush” while the town looks on unknowingly.

Left Unsaid

One of the things that stood out to me the most in "Hush" was the relationships. We talked about relationships a little during class discussion, but I think there was quite a bit that went unsaid.

My main idea is that the only way Joss Whedon could get all of the fledgling relationships in this episode off the ground was to take away the barrier of language. It was not a coincidence that "Hush" is the episode in which Buffy and Riley kiss for the first time, or Tara and Willow finally get a chance to be together one on one. The point of this episode seemed to be geared around creating an environment in which relationships could bloom without the constraint of proper "small talk."

Starting with the easiest: Giles and Olivia. One good reason to have Olivia in "Hush" is that she's obviously a part of Giles' past, and if she could speak she would have to explain where she came from. Without having to create a backstory for the pair, Joss Whedon can just leave it to the audience to make whatever they will of Olivia, and not worry about her too much because she's not permanent.

Riley and Buffy, and Willow and Tara both fall into similar categories. Both couples are hindered by the fact that they are never quite able to get out what they want to say, and when they're finally not expected to say anything at all, their relationships have a chance to blossom.

The relationship that I actually find the most interesting is Anya and Xander's. Anya is always being corrected for all sorts of faux-pas that aren't socially correct. What's unfair about her situation is that she's the only character who's always honest. She has absolutely no filter, and her honesty is what gets her in to trouble. But, I noticed that after Xander thought Spike had killed Anya, it was okay for her to use hand signals for "let's go have sex" but it would have never been okay for her to say it out loud. To me, Anya seems like the victim of a culture that just can't handle the truth.

Does anyone else feel kind of sorry for Anya?

Communication, Community, and "Hush"

We've talked a lot about communication in class, especially when discussing Dracula.  Many people observed that communication was essential to defeating Dracula.  While the characters, especially Seward and Jonathan, rely heavily on written communication to record and share their knowledge of Dracula, they also recognize the importance of oral communication.  In fact, the oral traditions and legends of Eastern Europe ultimately provide the information that allows them to kill Dracula and the Three Sisters and, most importantly, to remove the taint from Mina's soul.  By accomplishing these tasks, the characters successfully protect the Western world and their little community from a dangerous outside threat.  As such, Dracula emphasizes the importance of talking to humanity and the crucial role it plays in the dissemination of knowledge and the protection of community.  "Hush" similarly explores the complexity of communication and how it affects the establishment and protection of human communities.

In the article, "Screaming to be Heard: Reminders and Insights on Community and Communication in 'Hush'," Patrick Shade argues that the episode, "Gains dramatic and educative value by imaginatively exposing these diverse modes of communication and, importantly, their corresponding impact on community and communal living" (2).  Joss Whedon states that, "What ('Hush' is) about is the idea that when you stop talking, you start communicating - the idea that language, because it's so specific and constrictive can interfere with actual communication.  Everything was about language" (Whedon as cited in Shade 3).  The first part of the episode emphasizes how talking often makes genuine communication difficult.  To do so, Whedon presents a series of conversations where language impedes rather than facilitates understanding between Buffy's main characters.

The exchange between Buffy and Riley following Dr. Walsh's class most obviously illustrates this point.  Although Buffy and Riley are clearly attracted to one another, their secret identities prevent them from acting on their mutual attraction.  Buffy employs her aptitude for verbal banter to mask the fact that she accidentally admitted her plans for the evening consisted of patrolling.  Likewise, Riley conceals his duties with the Initiative by claiming he plans on grading papers for her class that night.  When they lean in for their first kiss, Buffy stops short because she realizes that she hasn't turned in any papers for the class, so Riley doesn't have any papers to grade.  As a result, they part in confusion with feelings of mutual dissatisfaction.  Buffy recognizes that talking constantly impedes the establishment of a romantic relationship with Riley and tells Willow, "I get nervous and I start babbling, and he starts babbling, and it's a babble fest.  Plus, every time we talk I have to lie.  The slayer thing comes up one way or another.  I wish I could just come clean" (Buffy as cited in Shade 4).  Talking causes similar problems between Xander and Anya.  After Anya asks Xander how he feels about her, he fumbles for words and tries to deflect the weighty question with a joke.  However, this approach alienates Anya and makes her question the basis of their relationship.  As Shade notes, "Hush" demonstrates how, "The verbal sometimes undermines the usual goals of communication - whether sharing meaning, preparing for consummating action, or presenting the truth" (5).

Once the Gentlemen arrive and steal the voices of Sunnydale's residents, "Hush" vividly, "Highlights the advantages of the nonverbal by creatively exposing the vast field of gestures that underlies and often goes unnoticed because of the verbal" (Shade 6).  In fact, Buffy and Riley finally act upon their mutual attraction and reveal their true identities thanks to the loss of their voices.  When they run into each other in the streets of Sunnydale while out patrolling to maintain order, their inability to talk prevents them from using language to convey any creative excuse for leaving.  Instead, they, "Allow themselves to express the depth of their concern for one another with a first kiss" (Shade 6).  Similarly, their encounter while fighting the Gentlemen reveals their respective abilities and secret occupations and doesn't allow them to use words to avoid the truth.  Xander likewise benefits from nonverbal communication.  When he arrives at Giles's house and sees Spike standing over the prostrate form of Anya, he assumes that Spike has killed her and promptly punches him.  Anya wakes up, sees this, and finally learns how much Xander truly cares for her.  She displays her joy by using an explicit signal to invite Xander to bed.  Using these occurrences and others, Whedon, "Underscores the fact that genuine communication occurs in the absence of talking," and that, "Gestures can speak volumes, and they prove especially well-suited to revealing feelings and demonstrating abilities" (8).  However, Shade believes this is too simple an understanding of the message of "Hush."

The episode also illustrates the complexity of communication and doesn't favor one mode of communication over another.  While "Hush" does emphasize the advantages of nonverbal communication, as already noted, it also exposes its natural limitations and and how, "Gestures can be misinterpreted, often with humorous results" (Shade 9).  The most humorous example of this occurs when Buffy, asking how to kill the Gentlemen, gestures vertically with her fist to indicate that she should stake them.  The rest of the Scoobies interpret her gesture as a sexual one and look at her strangely.  She clears up the misunderstanding by repeating the gesture with a stake in her hand.  A similar situation occurs when she gestures to Riley to destroy the box containing the voices of Sunnydale's citizens.  He assumes she wants him to destroy one of the jars containing the hearts of the Gentlemen's victims.  Buffy must redirect his efforts to the box by mimicking a hinge and the opening of a lid with her hands.  These incidents show that not only are gestures vague and easily misunderstood, but they restrict people to interacting and communicating with those nearby (Shade 10).  Additionally, Buffy and Riley must use their voices to progress to the next stage of their relationship, for progress, "Requires revelations about their identities that can only be conveyed through stories about the past" (Shade 12).  Thus, verbal communication allows people to expand the scope of their interaction beyond the present to the past and future.

Shade also made an interesting point about how necessary communication, both verbal and nonverbal, is to the establishment and protection of community.  By stealing the voices of the people living in Sunnydale, the Gentlemen restrict how the citizens can interact and isolate them from one another in many ways.  Shade bases his understanding of community on the insights of American pragmatists, such as Dewey and Mead, who state that communication enables community to develop in the first place, for, "Language utilizes sounds as signs for mutual assistance and direction, making participation - acting with rather than merely alongside others - possible" (15).  In other words, language, both verbal and nonverbal, enables people to actively help one another and to share common goals, thereby establishing a community.  As such, Shade would certainly agree that Mina, Holmwood, Jonathan, Van Helsing, and Seward form a distinct community for they use language to help one another and to elucidate and pursue a common goal, the destruction of Dracula.  The Scooby Gang constitutes a similar community, for their shared history, "Gives them a common understanding of the meanings of gestures, artifacts, and acts related to the practice of slaying" (Shade 17).  This remains intact after they lose their voices and allows them to confront the crisis with a relatively calm demeanor and to develop a plan of action.  Without this shared understanding, their gestures would be meaningless.

I mostly agree with Shade's interpretation of "Hush" and that it emphasizes the complexity of human communication and interaction.  However, I believe he discounts Whedon's statement that episode illustrates that people only begin to communicate when they stop talking too soon.  In fact, I would argue that the episode clearly demonstrates the superiority of nonverbal communication.  If one considers communication and common interests - the most powerful of which are economic and religious - to be the basis of community, nonverbal communication assures the survival of the Scooby Gang and Sunnydale as well (Shade 19).  While many of Sunnydale's residents are understandably disturbed by the loss of their voices and some chaos ensues, important signs of order remain.  Commerce and religion still exist.  As Buffy and Willow walk to Giles's house, they see people entering the liquor store, selling message boards, and gathering around a minister for comfort.  When people are faced with a crisis, "They resort to basic resources which include not only personal relationships of friends and family, but also the public structures represented by economics and religion" (Shade 19).  Although the gentlemen weaken these forces, they fail to completely destroy them.  While the Gentlemen successfully isolate their victims, they cannot eradicate the nonverbal modes of communication that society uses, which allows Sunnydale to maintain relative order and the Scooby Gang to share knowledge and coordinate the destruction of the Gentlemen.  In the end, "Hush" shows that nonverbal communication is clearly more powerful than verbal communication.

Shade, Patrick. “Screaming to be Heard: Reminders and Insights on Community and Communication in ‘Hush.’” Slayage: The Journal of the Whedon Studies Association. Whedon Studies Association, n.d. Web. 3 Oct. 2011. <http://slayageonline.com/>.

The Classroom: A Place to Learn and Make Convenient Segues.

An interesting parallel I noticed between "The Body" and "Hush" was the use of a classroom environment to set up important themes to later reappear or to accent events in the episode. In "Hush", this happens on two separate occasions. First, at the opening of the episode, Professor Walsh is discussing communication in Buffy's psychology class. She explains the difference between talking and communication, implying that understanding this difference will be important for the viewer later on. This is also an opportunity to show Buffy and Riley's relationship in this awkward phase, and finally to show Buffy's dream foreshadowing the arrival of the Gentlemen. The second instance of classroom learning comes when Giles explains the presence of the Gentlemen, their purpose for being in Sunnydale, and how to defeat them. This is important, obviously, because without this information the episode would not have made any sense. In "The Body", Buffy takes Dawn out of her art class to tell her of their mother's death. The art teacher instructs her students to draw the empty space around an object. The last shot in this scene is of Dawn's painting, an outline of a woman's form without any filling and nothing on the surrounding page. This image emphasizes the idea that their mother's body is now empty, just open space, with nothing inside. Thus, we see Joss Whedon take advantage of the classroom environment and his viewers' expectance to learn something there to present information that will be vital for their overall perception and understanding of the episode.

I'd like to end my post by posing a question to you all: Why do you think Joss Whedon chose The Gentlemen for the villains of this particular episode? How do they connect to communication, silence, that sort of thing? All I could think was that Gentlemen tend to be soft spoken, but I'm sure there's more to it than that. I'm just curious if any of you have thoughts on the matter!

"Hush"

In the article, “Staking Her Claim: Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Transgressive Woman Warrior” Frances Early discusses the independence of Buffy’s character, which also has a strong desire to pursue peaceful means of problem solving. What I thought was particularly interesting about this article was the perspective on Buffy’s independence. Although in some ways, the article describes it in feminist terms, I think that it has more to do with pure independence, not just female independence. One of the scenarios that are discussed in the articles has to do with the unstable relationship between Buffy the Slayer and the Initiative (22-23). The episode discussed deals with the final butting of heads between the modern military organization and the traditional methods of the past, where Maggie Walsh attempts to assassinate Buffy when she refuses to follow her orders. Although we see Buffy as the strong female lead in a feminist way, there is also the fact that she is simply standing up for her beliefs and encouraging others to do so. However, not only does Buffy fight for her beliefs, she also helps Riley to do what he thinks is right. This is challenging because Riley had always had faith in the authorities and believed that they were doing the right thing, but when he realizes that this is not the case, he has difficulties standing up for himself. The fact that Riley was so involved with this progression of events suggests, to me, that this particular episode was more about the flaws in authority and the need to stray true to yourself, than about the female figure standing up for herself. As the article says, “[Buffy] represents the discerning and ethical citizen’s ability to take a stand against evil wherever it is found,” (23) not just the need for a powerful female figure. This relates to the other aspect of the article about Buffy’s desire for peaceful means of dealing with ‘slayage’ problems (21). In these examples, Buffy further demonstrates her great strength of will and strong morals by not allowing herself to ever step across the line of slaying versus murder or slaying for the wrong reasons and unnecessarily.

This aspect of the article and Buffy relate, in many ways, to the episode “Hush” that we just watched. Although there was slayage and violence, it was interesting that the way to actually kill the gentlemen was not with weapons, but with the simple use of the voice. Even though this example isn’t as dramatic as those discussed in the article, it is still a way in which Joss Whedon has created an incredibly strong moral character who sticks to her beliefs without falter. Much of this is emphasized through the fairytale telling of this story, since it is the young princess who must find her voice in order to save the town, not the strong handsome prince with his sword and steed. This peaceful element of Buffy is something that I have rarely considered and something that we haven’t talked about at all. The fine line that Buffy is able to walk between peace and doing what is necessary is incredibly interesting and something that must be very challenging, as a writer, to maintain.

Early, Frances H. "Staking Her Claim: Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Transgressive

Woman Warrior." Journal of Popular Culture 35.3 (2001): 11. Academic Search

Premier. EBSCO. Web. 2 Oct. 2011.

The Importance of Solidarity and Leadership in "Buffy"

When I was searching for an article to use in this post, I came across James B. South’s “'All Torment, Trouble, Wonder, and Amazement Inhabits Here': The Vicissitudes of Technology in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.” South’s premise is that the themes and conflicts of the Buffy universe are compatible with the examination of the problem of living in a technological world. South believes that vampires represent the ways that technology affect humans, or at least the more evil effects of technology. I think that this premise is fairly problematic, as my conception of vampires is much more primal and representative of more natural (albeit dark) problems of human nature than those issues that technology might present. We have discussed at length the applications of technology (and their limitations) within Buffy’s world, and I think it is a discussion worth having, but I am not completely sold on South’s approach of the issue.

Nevertheless, South did make some points that I think are worth exploring. He concludes that human solidarity (like we see within the Scooby Gang) and the existence of leader figures with charisma or power that is not born from technology, and so appears “magical” to the rest of society (Buffy, of course, fulfills this role) are the keys to maintaining humanity in an increasingly technological world. South also discusses the role of Willow and her acknowledgement on the importance of both ancient magic (nature) and technology. Willow has the perfect combination of forces to use technology for good: “there must first be a prior commitment to the side of the slayer and there must be a facility with magic that is both natural (and presumably rare) as well as rooted in tradition and books” (South 99). Willow fulfills both of these conditions, and so becomes ideal as a figure to help overcome technological evils.

I think that this discussion is interesting in the context of “Hush,” because we see the roles of both solidarity and leadership highlighted when normal communicative patterns are eliminated. Willow displays the solidarity that South discusses when she interacts with Tara. I found it incredibly interesting that Tara was banging on every door and no one came out, but Willow came out to help her before Tara even reached her door. Willow’s involvement in the Scooby Gang has conditioned her to be incredibly good at the form of solidarity that South describes as humanity’s only hope. Willow uses her skills very effectively as part of a team, and she is willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary to be part of the fight against evil.

If Willow is the perfect representation of a mindset of solidarity, then Buffy is the perfect leader that South describes. We discussed in class the moment that Buffy steps forward, casting herself as the “princess” without a second thought. Just as interesting as the fact that Buffy thinks of herself as the princess is the fact that no one else gives her assertion a second thought, either. It is natural that Buffy should be the princess, because she is the slayer, and because that is simply the way the Scooby Gang works. Buffy is a very unique character. Her power is unique, but her personality is just as important; she has embraced her role as leader and proceeds with confidence. There are several times that she withdraws from her role as leader (as well as an alternate universe where she didn’t move to Sunnydale), and we see that without Buffy’s presence and forcefulness, the Scooby Gang cannot function as a team. Similarly, when Willow withdraws from the group and uses her considerable power on her own, the results are disastrous. We see this a few times, but most significantly at the end of the sixth season when Willow revenges Tara’s death using darker aspects of her power.

Both solidarity and leadership, then, are based primarily on mindset. Buffy and Willow could each possess the same set of skills they already do, but if they embrace different roles or withdraw from the group dynamic, they do not accomplish the same positive goals. I can agree with South on this much, although I think that this same discussion can be expanded far beyond technology as the big bad.

Works Cited:

South, James B. "'All Torment, Trouble, Wonder, and Amazement Inhabits Here': The Vicissitudes of Technology in Buffy the Vampire Slayer." Journal of American & Comparative Cultures 24.1-2 (2001): 93-102. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 2 Oct. 2011.

(P.S. Because I am inept at blogging, I can't get my citation to be formatted properly. It's driving me crazy but I'm leaving it the way it is because when I try to fix it, I end up with indentations in inexplicable places.)

Third Wave Feminism and Buffy

In the article, “The Third Wave’s Final Girl”, Irene Karras challenges the notion of second wave feminists that third wave feminists do not appreciate all that was done for them in the 60s and 70s as seen by the popularity of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. She points out that Buffy challenges the typical stereotypes of the horror, action, and sci-fi genres. Typically women in those genres are victims, who are very often killed or terrorized with phallic symbols (knives, guns etc.). Buffy, however, rather than being a victim is the killer. Her use of stakes takes the traditional mode a girl dying by a phallic symbol wielded by a man and completely reverses it. She uses the phallic symbol to kill male and female characters alike. She is not as feminine as her name and physical appearance would suggest. Instead of letting men like Riley and Angel take control of situations, she acts first without hesitation. However, she is still a pretty teenage girl, not a masculine woman. She is not trying to be a man, but rather a stronger woman.

In Hush, there is a tension between Riley’s role and Buffy’s role. Riley is the standard action hero: good looking, home-grown American military boy. In fact, he is a Clark Kent/ Superman character. He is a mild mannered student by day who tries to retain some vestige of normal life by chasing after Buffy. His life in The Initiative is a secret, a burden he, as a hero, is forced to carry in order to protect all the poor fragile people around him. However, despite his qualifications, it is Buffy who saves the day. She realizes that the box is the key to the Gentlemen’s power. She tries to signal that to Riley, who does not understand and even after all of Buffy’s desperate communications breaks the wrong thing. He requires a second attempt to follow Buffy’s orders. Buffy is the person who screams and kills the Gentlemen. Riley just stands, looking completely surprised. Buffy completely reverses sexual roles on poor Riley. He is so used to being the best soldier and always saving day, that he does not know how to handle Buffy’s secret identity. Despite all her abilities, she is still a girl and Riley is unable at first to comprehend Buffy as both a female and a hero. As a third wave heroine, Buffy can be both a ditsy, cheerleader type and an ass-kicking hero.

Karras, Irene. "The Third Wave's Final Girl." Third Space 1.2 (2002). Third Space Journal. Mar. 2002. Web. 2 Oct. 2011. .

"A Crucial Matrimony"-- "Hush" Reaction

In the article “Bibliographic Good vs. Evil,” GraceAnne A. DeCandido discuses the pertinence of Giles’ profession as a librarian. In class we have conventionally described Buffy’s watcher as bringing “old world” influences into the Southern California town of Sunnydale. DeCandido appropriately encapsulates our sentiments: “Giles is icon and image for us; in him we see our quotidian struggles to provide the right information and the right data resolved into a cosmic drama with the forces of darkness” (DeCandido, 45). What sets Giles apart is his penchant to research thoroughly before fighting a force of evil. Buffy may have the physical force to conquer the bad, but the empirical knowledge that Giles gathers for her is arguably as powerful of a weapon that Buffy can extract from her arsenal.

In Stoker’s Dracula, Van Helsing plays a similar role to Giles in “Buffy.” Van Helsing realizes that wooden stakes and swords will not be enough to ultimately vanquish Dracula. The group’s success relies on amassing information. Van Helsing travels back and forth between Amsterdam and London in order to gather empirical data that he hopes will lead to the demise of Dracula. Although Giles does not have to take an international train ride to gather information for Buffy, the tedious nature of research, especially to those who grew up accustomed to the facility with which information can be gathered using “new world technology”, can arguably be considered as difficult to perform as the train ride. In Dracula, it is the younger generation that is more inclined to pick up weapons without data. They crave immediate satisfaction. Van Helsing is the older force that advocates for the necessity of empirical data. Giles and Van Helsing are also akin in their advocacy for research. DeCandido remarks: “the plodding nature of research cannot be eliminated, even by brilliance and magic, even when we might not want to know what it is we are seeking. It is Giles’ particular gift to cast a glamour over the kind of dogged reference we practice daily. He invests the methodical search for the fact that will solve the problem at hand with a kind of fierce joy, but he never underestimates its cost in time or care” (DeCandido, 45).

The importance behind a matrimony of the “old world” knowledge that Giles exemplifies, and “new world” technology, is represented in the episode “Hush.” When all of Sunnydale loses their ability to speak, “new world” technologies are initially shown to fail. When Riley boards an elevator that requires a voice recognition code, his refusal to take the “old world” stairs almost leads to his death. One might infer that Whedon is suggesting that all “new world” technologies will be trumped by those of the “old world.” However, Whedon refutes the possibility of this analysis in the next scene when Maggie, uses the “new world” computer in order to assign tasks to the military members.

Giles seeks to find the answer to the mysterious “laryngitis” by looking in a book of fairytales. Due to his “dogged” research, he is able to find the answers. However, Giles does not have the capacity to fight as Buffy does. Without the younger generation’s physical strength to apply the research, Giles’ knowledge might be rendered futile. One of the final scenes of the episode demonstrates the importance of combining the “old world” technologies with the new. In this scene, Buffy represents the “old world” with her crossbow, while Riley uses the “new” technology to fight the gentleman. However, without the marriage of the two forces, the gentleman would have prevailed. In Dracula, without Jonathan Harker and Quincy Morris to put Van Helsing’s research into action, Dracula would not have been turned to dust.

Article Summary: The article was written by a librarian who argued that Giles’ role as a librarian had “done more for the image of the profession than anything in the last 50 years” (DeCandido, 44). I wanted to write about the importance of combining old world and new world knowledge to achieve greatness and conquer evil. DeCandido’s article was a perfect source in that she argued that Giles’ insistence upon researching information before fighting evil was necessary to Buffy and the Scooby gang. However, without Buffy’s corporeal strength and the Scooby gang’s knowledge of the new world technology, the computer, both of which make Giles wary, his research would be pointless.

Work Cited:

DeCandido, GraceAnn A. "Bibliographic Good vs. Evil in Buffy the Vampire Slayer

." American Libraries Sept. 1999: 44-47. JSTOR. Web. 1 Oct. 2011.