Buffy the "just warrior"

During time of war, we can see the distinct roles that man and woman play. Men go to the battlefield as soldiers. They are “ ‘just warriors’ [who] fight and die for the greater good”. While women stay at homeland working in factories to produce the equipment necessary for the war. They are “ ‘beautiful souls’ epitomize the maternal war-support figure in need of male protection”. This image is reflected in the war movies where the male “just warriors” fight and die for their country.

In “Tabula Rasa”, we see a reversal of this role, where Buffy is a natural female “just warrior”. It’s natural because every character in this episode starts with their memory wiped, in other words each one of them starts with a blank slate. When the vampires attack the group, the men in the group should stand up and fight to protect the women. Because their memories are wiped, they don’t know about Buffy’s ability, thus by nature the men should be the ones to fight off the vampires. However, the men stood back and it was Buffy who stood up and protected the group. This reflects that she is chosen to be a slayer, a “just warrior”. As Early puts it, Buffy the TV show “brings women out of the shadows to center stage and permit protagonists to be disruptive and to challenge patriarchal values … in society”. Putting Buffy in other kind of shows, her appearance of high school girl would make her the first target to get protected, the first person to be scared. However, in Buffy, the female characters holds the center of stage, the ones whose powerful enough to cast spell to wipe everyone’s memory and the ones whose strong enough to protect the group in danger.

Early, Frances H. "Staking Her Claim: Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Transgressive Woman Warrior." Journal of Popular Culture 35.3 (2001): 11-28

The Heroine and The Addict

The thing that has stuck with me from “Tabula Rasa” (aside from the extremely grating quality of Michelle Branch’s voice), is how even when the Scooby Gang has no memory of who they were, they still retain certain aspects of themselves. According to Jacqueline Reid-Walsh, “the Gothic taps into unconscious needs and fears”(503). And though that is one of the more obvious points of the episode, I think by maintaining those attributes at the heart of his characters, particularly Buffy’s “I’ve got this under control” attitude and Willow’s attraction to Tara, Joss Whedon is making a larger statement about their roles in the show.

In her article entitled “Power Girl/Girl Power: The female action hero goes to high school: a review of the television show Buffy the Vampire Slayer” Reid-Walsh highlights how “young women...prefer stories with strong, active female protagonists”(503). Obviously, Buffy fits this description perfectly. She’s feisty, funny, and “has a black belt in Tae Kwan Do.” Buffy is on the surface, many things young girls should and do aspire to be. This idea is only perpetuated further as Buffy/Joan maintains these characteristics. Even though she knows nothing about herself, she still tries to be the ideal “ female protagonist” (503).

However, this episode shows Willow in a far less positive manner. The beginning depicts her as nothing short of a magic addict. Though she believes she is doing good, her actions are extremely selfish and almost immoral Young female viewers are far less likely to connect to Willow, as she is on a downward spiral in her life, though as the Scooby Gang, and especially Tara discover, it is difficult to dislike a formerly beloved character. It is also interesting to that when her mind is wiped clean, she retains not her attraction to magic, but her attraction to Tara. So in her most natural state, Willow’s “unconscious needs” are for love (503). A concept as fabled as magic, but far more true. So to return to this idea of the “unconscious,” “Tabula Rasa” solidifies this Gothic convention(503). It made me wonder what I would remember if my mind was magically wiped clean. I’d like to think that I would hold onto positive qualities, maybe even things I don’t know I have. As this episode shows us, sometimes it’s the things we take for granted that are actually the most important. These are the things we should get hooked on, not the superficial stuff.

Also, just so we’re clear. Drugs are bad. Live above the influence.

Power Girl/Girl Power: The Female Action Hero Goes to High School (A Review of the Television Show "Buffy the Vampire Slayer")

Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Review by:Jacqueline Reid-Walsh and Krista Walsh

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy , Vol. 42, No. 6 (Mar., 1999), pp. 502-503

Do You Get It? ("Tabula Rasa" vs. Northanger Abbey)

Much can be said about the similarities between “Tabula Rasa” and Northanger Abbey. Some of these include the critique of female friendship as embodied by Isabella and Willow, the comparable sense of predictability combated by reaching conventional endings in unexpected ways, and the similar goal of redefining heroine archetypes. All of these comparisons are important examples of how “Tabula Rasa” and Northanger Abbey are complimentary texts that are fitting to read together. However, instead of focusing on just this episode in light of Austen’s novel, I’d like to compare the overarching structure of Buffy to that of Northanger Abbey.

I believe that one of the most gratifying qualities of both these texts is that they possess a sense of self-awareness. For Buffy, it is an understanding of Gothic texts, and for Northanger Abbey it is a knowledge of the form of eighteenth century novels. As George Levine says in his article “Translating the Monstrous: Northanger Abbey,” “parody always involves itself in certain contradictions, not only because the need for mockery is invariably a sign of respect for the power of the thing mocked, but also because the parody must exist in the medium of its predecessor” (337). Both texts play with the respective conventions of the Gothic and the novel in this way, and in doing so are able to be playful and entertaining.

A poignant example of such use of parody can be seen in the episode “Buffy vs. Dracula,” in which the Dracula mythos is turned on its head and satirized. Yet this humor is out of reverence, and is used to legitimize Buffy in the Gothic world in comparison to Stoker’s renowned Dracula. Similarly, and perhaps more consistently, Northanger Abbey satirizes the conventional expectations of the novel and the Gothic form. Austen continually uses narrative intrusion to point out how the story deviates from convention. For instance, in the opening paragraph of the book Austen writes of Catherine’s mother, “she had three sons before Catherine was born; and instead of dying in bringing the latter into the world, as anybody might expect, she still lived on” (15). This example illustrates how Northanger Abbey is aware of, and plays with, past literary traditions – here, that a heroine should be without a living mother as a role model. Similarly to Buffy, Northanger Abbey uses self-awareness and parody to create a new, legitimate, and elevated work of Gothic fiction that teaches its readers how to read anew.

I think that the use of self-awareness and parody in these texts is both successful and captivating. However, as we discussed in class, a less well-read audience member might miss much, if not all, of the satirical references in these texts. For example, when Henry jokes, unbeknownst to Catherine, about what her stay would be like at the Abbey if life were like a gothic novel, he references in content and near quotation the Mysteries of Udolpho, Romance of the Forest, Castles of Otranto, and The Recess. Only a reader with a substantial background in gothic literature would be able to discern these allusions. A less well-read viewer of Buffy would similarly not understand the significance of Xander’s behavior in “Buffy vs. Dracula.” Thus, to varying extents Buffy and Northanger Abbey are pleasing to two different audiences, one that is well-read and one that is more naïve. My only lingering curiosity is whether there is a third viewer category for Buffy: the portion of the audience who has seen the series in its entirety? Based off of the various discussions of Willow’s role in “Tabula Rasa,” – some advocating that she is a truly bad Isabella-like “friend” and others deeming that she is a kind-hearted sturdy companion throughout most of the series – I believe that this third category does indeed exist. As a result, though perhaps unintentionally, Buffy successfully manipulates the modern media sphere to augment the criteria of what makes a well-read viewer. In my opinion this feat, although technologically impossible in 1798, is comparable in importance to Northanger Abbey’s overall accomplishment of redefining the possibilities of fiction in the eighteenth century.

Levine, George. "Translating the Monstrous: Northanger Abbey." Nineteenth Century Fiction. (1975): 335-50. Web. 19 Oct. 2011. .

Austen, Jane. Northanger Abbey. New Chronology and Updated Further Reading Addition. London: Penguin Books, 2003. 15.

Identity - Who's Who in "Tabula Rasa" and Northanger Abbey

And now I'll apologize for posting twice in a row.

In his article "She's Not All Grown Yet: Willow as Hybrid/Hero in Buffy the Vampire Slayer", Jes Battis discusses how Willow's character changes throughout the series. To me, this morphyness is interesting in the context of "Tabula Rasa" where everyone's character is kind of obliterated because of, not insignificantly, Willow. Battis argues that Willow's character varies more than the other characters do throughout the series, citing her vampire doppelganger, Dark Willow, Light Willow, and her various identities as straight, gay, computer geek, shy high schooler, and powerful witch. When everyone forgets everything they know in "Tabula Rasa", different things happen to their identities. Although Buffy doesn't remember that she is the slayer and she names herself Joan, she still takes charge of the situation and realizes that she's a "superhero". Giles, Xander, and Anja's characters seem to stay pretty much the same except that they forget their relationships. Tara's shy and quiet nature remains unchanged. Spike re-identifies himself as a good vampire, and I would argue to Battis' article that Spike's character changes nearly as much as Willow's does throughout the show. Willow's identity also changes drastically when her memory is wiped. Though Buffy and Spike discover their "superpowers" almost immediately and begin to use them, Willow does not ever identify as a witch until her memory comes back. Even though Buffy's identity doesn't change much while Spike and Willow's do, I think that how their identities change might be more important. But more on that later.

As we discussed in class, we can use the memory wipe to represent the process of discovering ones identity, which we can compare to Catherine learning and growing and defining her character along the way in Northanger Abbey. I think Catherine begins to define herself for the first time when she makes up her own mind that she no longer wants to be on the carriage ride with John Thorpe because he mislead her into thinking that the Tilneys had abandoned their walk. By making up her own mind, she begins to choose her own identity. This is similar to Buffy naming herself Joan and taking charge of the situation in "Tabula Rasa". I would argue that Willow, unlike Buffy, does not actually redefine her identity when her memory is erased - her identity as a witch simply goes away and while she does rediscover her identity as a gay female, I think that her sentence "I think I'm kinda gay" doesn't act in the same autonomous redefining way as Buffy's "I think I'll call me Joan" does. I think this is because Buffy is the heroine and Willow, much as I love her, is only the sidekick. Spike also takes an active role in creating his new identity as a good vampire by defining himself as such, so maybe he is acting as the hero in this episode. Do you guys think autonomy in defining one's identity can make a character a heroine?

Citation:

Battis, Jes. "She's Not All Grown Yet: Willow as Hybrid/Hero in Buffy the Vampire Slayer." Slayage: The Journal of the Whedon Studies Association 2.4 (2003): n. pag. Web. 14 October 2011.

What Doesn't Kill You Makes You Stronger?

After class on Wednesday and after reading the Grace and Amelia’s blog posts, I started thinking about the differences between Buffy in “Tubula Rasa” and Catherine Morland in the way experience changes characterization. Although Catherine Morland has been criticized for being a weak heroine, I would argue that she demonstrates increasing strength of will and integrity throughout the course of Northanger Abbey. On the other hand, Buffy, who normally embodies all things strong and super, breaks down after gaining back her memory in ‘Tabula Rasa.” As we’ve discussed, both Buffy and Catherine start out in the novel and the episode as “blank slates,” and this allows their innate characteristics to shine through. However, as any student learns from Psych 101, it is the combination of nature and nurture that creates the final product of a character.

In her post, Amelia wonders whether or not ignorance is bliss. She notes that while Buffy had no memory of her past, she was able to regain her happiness and drive to be a force for good in the world; however, when she remembered her misery and pain from being brought back to life, she curled up in the fetal position and literally gave up. It’s Spike who rescues her by beating up the vampires around her, showing the distinction between pre-memory, heroine Buffy and post-memory damsel-in-distress Buffy. Although Buffy’s innate make-up seems to be that of a strong, independent person, her experiences shape her outlook on life in this episode and turn her into a weak character that doesn’t want to fight.

In the beginning of Northanger Abbey, Catherine Morland does not seem to have the same innate strength as Buffy. She is described as a character who, “never could learn or understand anything before she was taught; and sometimes not even then, for she was often inattentive, and occasionally stupid” (Austen, 38). She comes across much more as a damsel than a heroine, especially when she befriends Isabella and John Thorpe, both interested in her for selfish reasons. However, as the novel progresses and Catherine gains experience, we see her take on the role of heroine. She consciously turns down John Thorpe’s proposal, and terminates her friendship with Isabella after recognizing Isabella’s inconsistent character. Furthermore, Catherine learns from her experience at Northanger Abbey. Henry Tilney, who seemed superior to Catherine in the beginning of the novel, proposes to her at the end of the novel at the risk of displeasing his father. This action suggests that the two characters have become equal partners. Catherine moves from her position as a damsel to that of a heroine, as her experiences help her face the difficulties she encounters.

Is Ignorance Bliss?

In class (and in Grace’s post), we talked about how even through their minds are wiped clean, the character’s basic personalities survive. Buffy does not stop being a hero, Willow doesn’t stop being gay, and Dawn doesn’t stop being a brat. What I found more interesting was not what the Scooby Gang and Spike remembered, but what they didn’t and how they reinvented themselves. The problem begins when Willow attempts to make Buffy and Tara happy again by making them forget their troubles. Yes this makes Willow a bad friend and a terrible girlfriend, although the characters are terrified, they are happy. Like a dream, the spell suspends all the characters problems and allows them to be blissfully unaware of the gaping issues in their lives. Tara falls in love with Willow again, who is not a power-obsessed, magic abuser, but just another person. Buffy has no recollection of her experience in Heaven. She is not depressed at being on Earth, but rather she has found her purpose again. As Joan, Buffy is more like her younger self: brash, energized, and ready to kick vampire butt. Spike reinvents himself as the son of Giles and as Angel: a vampire with a soul who stands with the Slayer to destroy the evil vampires. He believes himself to be the hero, not a sometimes-villain. Spike’s new point of view is supposed to be funny, but it also poignant that Spike is incredibly happy to have a father. In his real life, Spike is woefully alone which is why he keeps returning to Buffy. It is when the spell is broken and real life comes flooding back that the characters feel unhappy. When Buffy’s memory is returned, she stops fighting altogether and gives up being a hero. She curls up on the ground like a terrified child. Tara and Willow break up, leaving Willow a broken shell. Giles leaves Sunnydale and Buffy for, presumably, forever. Whether it is possible or not, the overwhelming unhappiness at the end of the episode begs the question whether the gang would have been happier to remain under the spell.