![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Why the soulquest *couldn't* have been a ret-con.
Look! A fandom post! I've been meaning to write this down for ages, and suddenly remembered today. And then thought - why not? It is after all why I'm here.
Also, if I remember correctly, I have![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
stormwreath to thank for this flawless proof.
So, let's look at some dates. 'Seeing Red' aired on 7th of May 2002 and tried to make us think Spike blamed the chip for everything:
SPIKE: It's the chip! Steel and wires and silicon. It won't let me be a monster. And I can't be a man. I'm nothing.
'Villains' aired on the 14th of May and it was this episode that more than any other tried to make people believe that Spike wanted the chip out:
SPIKE: Thinks she's better than me. Ever since I got this bleeding chip in my head, things ain't been right. Everything's gone to hell.
DEMON: And you want to return to your former self.
SPIKE: Yeah.
So, did they change the outcome at the last minute? Or is it just that the execution of their mislead was rather clumsy? Well, lets look at the script for 'Grave', dated 27th March 2002 - that is MORE THAN A MONTH before SR aired:
SPIKE (cont'd)
So, give me what I want. Make me
what I was... so Buffy can get what
she deserves.
VOICE
Very well.
A GNARLY DEMON HAND reaches out to Spike's bare chest
VOICE (cont'd)
Your soul is returned to you.
As the hand touches him, Spike throws his head back and SCREAMS in agony...
QED (Unless of course Joss can travel in time...)
Also, if I remember correctly, I have
stormwreath to thank for this flawless proof. So, let's look at some dates. 'Seeing Red' aired on 7th of May 2002 and tried to make us think Spike blamed the chip for everything:
SPIKE: It's the chip! Steel and wires and silicon. It won't let me be a monster. And I can't be a man. I'm nothing.
'Villains' aired on the 14th of May and it was this episode that more than any other tried to make people believe that Spike wanted the chip out:
SPIKE: Thinks she's better than me. Ever since I got this bleeding chip in my head, things ain't been right. Everything's gone to hell.
DEMON: And you want to return to your former self.
SPIKE: Yeah.
So, did they change the outcome at the last minute? Or is it just that the execution of their mislead was rather clumsy? Well, lets look at the script for 'Grave', dated 27th March 2002 - that is MORE THAN A MONTH before SR aired:
So, give me what I want. Make me
what I was... so Buffy can get what
she deserves.
VOICE
Very well.
A GNARLY DEMON HAND reaches out to Spike's bare chest
VOICE (cont'd)
Your soul is returned to you.
As the hand touches him, Spike throws his head back and SCREAMS in agony...
QED (Unless of course Joss can travel in time...)
no subject
But still, I'm not sure your logic quite works: surely what counts isn't the air date but the filming date? If Seeing Red was *filmed* before 27th March, then theoretically, it could be a retcon, couldn't it?
no subject
Neither did I until I found fandom (post-Chosen, thankfully). But trust me, there are people out there who'll swear blind that the whole thing was a ret-con, that Spike was EVIL, wanted to the chip out so he could kill Buffy (although - hey! He could do that anyway) and everyone just lied about it. *shakes head*
If Seeing Red was *filmed* before 27th March, then theoretically, it could be a retcon, couldn't it?
*wraps mind around the concept* (Sorry, I've got a cold, my head ain't working right.) But... I guess you could say that - technically - although that would change the reason for the ret-con from 'trying to placate fans' to... Um not sure.
Oh wait, let me check when SR was written... Feb. 21. Which doesn't really help.
no subject
But yeah, your basic argument is sound. Buffy filmed more than one episode at a time and that part of Grave would have most likely been in the can by the time Seeing Red even aired, much less Villains.
Haters need to let it go 'cause, you know, even it was *was* retcon (which it wasn't), it's still canon.
no subject
My guess would be that they filmed all of Spike's Africa scenes at the same time (since he had to go away for another job). So filming-wise there's probably just days between 'Villains' and 'Grave'.
it's still canon
Exactly. (Unlike, say... S8! Heh.)
no subject
Yep. That and the entire sequence with the battles and all isn't really *that* long, so to wrap up the set, then come back to it just isn't efficient filmmaking. It's similar with the scenes at Revello (filmed in Torrance), they were usually done in chunks rather dumbly hauling the production back and forth.
S8 and this are apples and oranges. ;) If they were 4 years earlier and we didn't have both Joss and Marti lamenting how exhausted and out of ideas they were, I might include it. Also if they were on TV (I mean they could've recast the characters since apparently having the artwork look like the actors isn't important). :P
no subject
Especially since they did it becaue JM was going off to film something else...
If they were 4 years earlier and we didn't have both Joss and Marti lamenting how exhausted and out of ideas they were, I might include it.
It's like you read my mind... (And incidentally this is why I'm much more excited about AtS S6 - they were planning it out and then couldn't do it!
I mean they could've recast the characters since apparently having the artwork look like the actors isn't important
Ouch! But I'm right there with you! (My davice - buy Spike:Asylum. I'll write up a proper review of some sort after issue 4 comes out, since I don't feel like tearing S8 to pieces before I discover to what degree it deserves it.)
Oh and I should be posting schmoopy Spuffy soon (either tomorrow or Monday) which I think you should enjoy! :)
no subject
Yay!
no subject
I suppose it all comes down to exactly what one considers a retcon. It's all very zen tree-falling-in-the-woods; can canon be retconned before there is a broadcast canon to retcon? At what point does canon become canon - when it's thought up by Joss, when it's written, when it's shot, or when it's seen by fans? Etc. It's quantum canon theory! :-)
Personally, I think the more interesting "retcon" of this is the one which the eternal romantic Spike (canonically) does himself:
SPIKE: I fought for my soul. Went through the demon trials. Almost did me in a dozen times over, but I kept fighting. 'Cause I knew it was the right thing to do. It's my destiny.
ANGEL: Really? Heard it was just to get into a girl's pants.
Which, to me, puts a pretty good spotlight on why so many of these retcon debates miss the point: Jossverse characters lie, repress, rationalize and are not always to be trusted - especially those (Spike, Willow, Wesley and Connor for instance) who have a tendency to believe their own spin. Spike fancies himself a poet; if you take everything he says as canonical literal truth, you're bound to think you're looking at contradictions and retcons where there is actually character development.
/Off topic for this particular piece, I guess.
no subject
Or: How To Make Yourself Go Insane In 3 Easy Steps! *g*
Jossverse characters lie, repress, rationalize and are not always to be trusted
Spike can't even remember his own age! ;)
if you take everything he says as canonical literal truth, you're bound to think you're looking at contradictions and retcons where there is actually character development.
An excellent point. And going off topic is always fun!
no subject
It's about the context... which in this case, was some
idiotsposters on atbvs claiming that 'Seeing Red', 'Villains' and 'Two To Go' were all filmed on the understanding that Spike really did want to get the chip out. However - according to thesedingbatspeople - Joss was so horrified by the negative reaction from Spike fans that he did a last-minute re-write of the last scene of 'Grave', to make it that Spike wanted his soul all along.The fact that 'Grave' had already been written before the preceding episodes even aired kind of destroys that theory, doesn't it?
no subject
Utterly and completely. Then again, it sounds like a pretty stupid theory to start with.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Thank you for explaining the background (and for the proof itself)! :)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject