elisi | The problem with 'As You Were'.

Thanks to AOQ's reviews, I've been spending yet more time thinking about AYW. Because One Bit Shy (whom I usually agree with at least 95%), had a completely different take: Riley was Prince Charming, giving Buffy a wonderful boost and helping her enormously. Which kinda threw me, as you can expect. So I thought and pondered, and this is what I came up with.

(It all ties in with my Why Spike wasn't The Doctor post, which I've also amended. Not that it changes anything on that front. Spike was never The Doctor - the problem is Riley.)

So, what about this other option? Where Riley is Prince Charming for the day, saving Buffy and being the great hero and inspirer? Lets say he goes to Willy's and someone (deliberately?) lets him know that Spike has all these eggs at his crypt. Riley in true Action Hero mode storms off to confront Spike ("I shall undo his dastardly plot!") and is all in all exactly the same straightforward guy we met back in S4 - and his speech at the end can be taken at face value and we can pat him on the back and thank him for being such a swell guy who can show Buffy how amazing she still is.

But... I have a BIG problem with this interpretation. The end result is the same anyway (Buffy breaks up with Spike for pretty much the same reasons she broke up with Angel in 'Lovers Walk' - "What I want from you I can never have...") - but with Riley as Mr Nice Guy the whole thing is painfully simplistic. Yes there are simple episodes in S6 (DMP to name one), but they are usually selfcontained eps, dealing with one thing and wrapping it up (Buffy gets a job). AYW is when Buffy stops seeing Spike, the end of a fascinatingly complex and mutually damaging relationship... and why? Because of some idiotic demon eggs and Buffy remembering that Spike was eeevil (not that she holds it against him, but she finds the strength to say no to his wicked charms thanks to a pep talk from Captain Cardboard).

It's like IWMTLY with Riley as April. Execpt April was cuter. (How can Riley be Prince Charming when he isn't charming? Well except to Buffy. Usually I have no problems feeling what Buffy feels - in AYW I do. A lot. Riley just doesn't do it for me, and I think he's meant to. Stupid Petrie.)

So again - what is an episode as *important* as this one doing, being as simple as one from S1? In S6 which is all about the character's past deeds coming back to haunt them, about people's flaws making them behave very badly indeed, about choices and consequences... it doesn't fit! If it really is that simple and is meant to be, then I just have to write off Dough Petrie's good episodes as lucky flukes (and getting *a lot* help). So to make AYW sit comfortably amongst its fellow episodes and carry the same themes, I *have* find layers. More than just the whole thing being seen though Buffy's star-struck eyes.

And this is where Riley gets to be Machiavelli. And where Spike's role in breaking up Buffy and Riley comes back to bite him. Hard. No one knew about the vamp-ho's, as far as we can tell. Giles might have guessed, but I'm as certain as I can be that Buffy never told her friends. But Spike found out, and Spike used his information to humiliate Riley and Riley almost staked him because of it - he figured out (*way* before anyone else) that Spike was in love with Buffy - he could recognise a rival. He couldn't think of anything better than the plastic stake back then (which was kinda pathetic, seriously). But here in AYW he has the most shining opportunity when he walks in on the two of them... it's beautiful and simple and will accomplish many things at the same time. He'll say that Spike is The Doctor - it should hopefully shock Buffy so much that she'll stop seeing him. And then Spike would be without Buffy, just like Riley was. And then Buffy can find someone else, someone good enough for her - he makes darn sure to build her up as much as he can.

I don't think Riley is stupid - he majored in Psychology if I recall correctly. I think he knows exactly what he's doing in AYW, and he does it well. But he isn't Prince Charming. At least I sincerely hope not.

The problem being, that I don't know which option I'm supposed to be seeing - and that is all due to bad writing!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yes, I've read Megan's post, and while I think it's very clever, it's basically a fanwank, driven by her desire to exonerate Spike from the charge of being the Doctor that she believes the writers (not just Riley) have levelled against him. It would make a wonderful piece of fic (no surprise there, she's one of the most gifted fic writers I've come across, in any fandom), but it's not actually helpful when it comes to analysing the episode itself.

Not a change for the better, maybe, but certainly an evolution.

Given that one of Riley's outstanding characteristics in the series thus far has been his fundamental decency, I don't really think this kind of change can be called evolution, which, after all, proceeds in incremental steps, not wild leaps. Nor can I see what the point would be in radically changing the character for the sake of a single episode which is, as

aycheb, not about him. It would be different if the show subsequently went on to explore the "new" Riley, how he got to be that way, what implications the changes have for Buffy, but that's now what happens. I'm very happy with

aycheb's suggestion that Riley appears to have reverted to his starting point for the purpose of showing him to Buffy as he was before all the messiness happened, that makes sense of the retrogressive characterisation. Having him turned into a Machiavellian politician purely for this episode, without any explanation of how this character change came about about and without, to put it bluntly, any actual on-screen evidence that he really has changed like this, doesn't seem to me an improvement.

I'm sorry if I'm starting to sound stuffy - the thread seems to have developed into something of a bash-Riley fest and it always irritates me when people let their emotional response to characters interfere with a discussion.

one of Riley's outstanding characteristics in the series thus far has been his fundamental decency

Sleeping with a student, running an illegal secret police squad, trying to kill a caged prisoner (Oz, even!) in a blind rage, treason, willfully and repeatedly disobeying orders for personal benefit, infidelity, murdering sex partners in the act as a kinky game, lying, and disloyalty to his men and his service add up to fundamental decency?

What color is the sky in your universe?

Yeah, right, let's immediately reach for the insults.

In my universe the sky is blue, and in my universe questioning the value of an institution that has shown itself to be morally at fault is a good thing, so I don't regard "disobeying orders" or "disloyalty to his men and his service" as anything other than admirable behaviour under those circumstances.

Treason is a crime against one's own nation and since Riley doesn't even try to sell out the United States to a foreign power, you can scratch that one from your hate list. Ditto "murdering sex partners in the act as a kinky game" - or perhaps I missed that episode of Riley the Epitome of Evil. And I seem to recall that he helped to rescue Oz *even though he was a werewolf*, which shows a really remarkable and sadly rare ability to question what he's always been taught and recognise that this "service" of his, to which you want blind obedience, is not in fact worthy of such obedience. You can't have it both ways - either torturing Oz is right because the Initiative wants it, or it's wrong and Riley has to disobey them. But that would require actually *thinking* about Riley, instead of simply spewing hate, which doesn't seem to be your sort of thing.

Moderation, please!

Following your line of thought, Angel was a pervert who slept with an underage child, Spike was an evil rapist who was tricked into a soul and Buffy was a stone cold bitch who smiled at the end of the season because Spike was finally dead.

As for Oz (to mention just one of your points, because I'm in a hurry), that episode showed that Buffy's influence on Riley had changed what he believed, and was beginning to see that the world was shades of grey. He of his own free will decided to help Oz, and in the end chose Buffy's way of thinking over the one he'd been taught. I have no memory of him attempting to kill a caged Oz in a blind rage - as a matter of fact Riley tried to stop the experiments and later brought Oz clothes, before trying to smuggle him out.

I have problems with Riley, but I never saw him as amoral particularly - flirting with the dark side in S5, yes, blind spots the size of Iowa, yes, but not amoral. Also he's too dull to bother thinking about much. The point of this post mostly being that I'm annoyed at Doug Petrie for not making clear what Riley is supposed to be in AYW.

it's very clever, it's basically a fanwank
Oh I know. But it's fun! :)

I'm sorry if I'm starting to sound stuffy - the thread seems to have developed into something of a bash-Riley fest and it always irritates me when people let their emotional response to characters interfere with a discussion.
No worries - I'm surprised at the intesity of people's feelings. I had no idea that someone as bland could elicit such a response!

I'm very happy with aycheb's suggestion that Riley appears to have reverted to his starting point for the purpose of showing him to Buffy as he was before all the messiness happened, that makes sense of the retrogressive characterisation.
Yeah I understand that, and I can see why. It's all just too simple for me, although it makes me Riley a lot nicer. But it glosses over everything that he did before he left, and that just annoys me. I can see why he's the logical person to give Buffy a boost, but I don't think he's earned the right.

Which I why I lean towards the 'he lied about Spike being The Doctor for Buffy's sake'. Not the huge complicated plot that

theohara weaves, but just as a response to seeing the two of them together. It fits well with who he is, and even more with his view of Buffy: Amazing woman, but with this odd affinity for vampires that she really should get rid off. See he'd been there himself with the vamp-ho's, and he maybe reckoons Buffy's got the same sort of thing going. So if she can jsut ditch Spike, then her life should get back on track and she can have a swell life just like Riley. (Of course what he doesn't understand is that Buffy's problem's run a lot deeper, and Spike is as much a victim as Buffy.)

(I sincerely hope that makes sense, I don't have time to read through it)

I can see why he's the logical person to give Buffy a boost, but I don't think he's earned the right.

You know, I really think that's what causes the most problems with the episode. It certainly leaves the impression that he was right about everything in S5...which is nauseating.

Yeah, that's what I've narrowed it down to as well.
You know what they should have done instead? Have Angel drop by with baby Connor and Cordy in tow. Would have done the same thing (except of course that he would have staked Spike... hm, maybe not so smart after all!).

Nah, I wouldn't go *that* far. Bringing Angel back for anything is never good.

However, having Riley, Mr. You Drove Me to Vampire Hos, be some kind of catalyst is very bad, IMO. I have serious issues with B/R, even more than with B/A if you can believe that. He wanted Buffy to conform herself to who he wanted her to be and the writers implying that was OK places any empowerment message on shaky ground.

The problem with 'As You Were'.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject