"Remember, I’m arguing that you should sympathize with Riley, not that you should like him — you were never supposed to like him."

Oh please, we weren't not MEANT to like him, we were INVITED to like him - it just wasn't neccesary, unlike other certain characters...

But then again, I suppose you could argue that it's not neccesary to like anyone.

aapac | February 06, 16:34 CET

Interesting read. I pretty much agree with the writer regarding Riley ... and it makes me feel bad that I haven't watched a great deal of DS9. But somehow I never got into it, I preferred B5 as a space station series.

ETA: aapac, if you liked Angel, you'd never like the next guy ... no matter how perfect a son-in-law he would make.

[ edited by Ariane on 2006-02-06 14:39 ]

Ariane | February 06, 16:36 CET

I do sometimes wonder, especially if i ever dare venture into posting boards less (how can i put this politely) mature than Whedonesque, if i'm the only Buffy fan that actually understood and liked Riley right from the start.

It was always really obvious to me that he was "the replacement" and i viewed him and his character in that context. His main reason for existing on the show was always that he wasn't Angel! Simple as that! But for me that wasn't a reason to dislike him, in fact i only appreciated the character more.

If Riley had been there as a Scoobie and nothing more then he would likely have been accepted. His downfall was that he was Buffy's new boyfriend and, again, not Angel. That was always going to be a problem even if Joss and the writers actually wanted him to be accepted and stick around for the longhaul but in truth they never did. He was there to fill the role of the transition of Buffy's feelings away from Angel but not to hold on to them for good.

It annoys the hell out of me when people say they "hate" Riley. What for? For being a decent, caring boyfriend who was ultimately not really suited to the girl he fell for? Yeah, that is a really great reason to hate somebody. That ranks him right up there with murderers, rapists and child molesters. How could Riley manage to sleep at night knowing how caring and decent he had been all day? What a bastard!!! ;)

The fact is that Riley was what Riley was always meant to be and he was hated for it whilst sadistic, evil characters like the Mayor, Drusilla, Darla and Glory (who i also love, by the way, lol) are constantly praised for being what they were meant to be. I just don't think that is fair to either the character or the actor.

Buffysmglover | February 06, 16:41 CET

I liked Riley from the start. He was Mr Normal Bloke (well as normal as one can be on Buffy).

Simon | February 06, 16:47 CET

Well, I never liked him very much. At least not until I saw him getting eaten by a vamp, then I thought he was ok. I suppose your all entitled to your own opinion, so long as it doesn't conflict with mine.
'Cause then I'd get cranky! : P

[ edited by nixygirl on 2006-02-06 14:57 ]

nixygirl | February 06, 16:57 CET

Just like there would never be anyone else for Angel but her, there would never be anyone else for her but Angel.

The writers sure botched it up well with Parker/Riley/Spike (on Buffy) and Cordelia/Dog-girl (on Angel). I can forgive minor indiscressions like Darla, seeing as she created Angelus, but other than that... meh!

[wcip]Angel | February 06, 17:04 CET

I never liked Riley, but i also didn't like the Buffy/Angel relationship. As for why i don't like Riley, it's fairly simple. I don't like his character and views on the world. I have no problem with killing demons, what i don't like is humans experameting on them and trying to use them as weapons.

sethsky | February 06, 17:14 CET

Yep, I third or fourth the Riley regard. Always seemed a decent guy, if perhaps a little dull (Spike for a 3 day bender, Riley to help you clean up afterwards ;).

I think some of the reason he's disliked is partly (as VWaG says) that he wasn't Angel but I also think some people felt he had a go at Buffy when she was at her lowest ebb (during her Mum's health issues) and it wasn't justified. Well, I don't agree. I think everything he said was true and needed to be said. Also, the arc ends with an absolutely stand-out Xander moment and tho' i've seen people unhappy with Joss' alleged comment that Xander was 'done' - which I interpret to mean fully developed - by the end of S4, his little speech in 'Into the Woods' basically left me thinking 'Now there's a grown man'.

I think the article's comments about Bashir from DS9 were spot-on tho'. For me he had one of the most satisfying arcs in the show (especially, as i've said before, his friendship with O'Brian) and it's refreshing to see TV creators realise that good guys are sometimes still kind of annoying and can even be real gits (see House, Gregory) just like bad guys.

Saje | February 06, 17:17 CET

I do sometimes wonder, especially if i ever dare venture into posting boards less (how can i put this politely) mature than Whedonesque, if i'm the only Buffy fan that actually understood and liked Riley right from the start.

Everything you said, Vampire With a Gun, was exactly what I wanted to say - except you said it better!

I agree with the assessment of Bashir as well. At first, i wanted to like him, but he was so smarmy it kind of irked me; but his character arc was intriguing, and his friendship with O'Brien (my favorite DS9 character) was always amusing. His friendship with Garak, though, was possibly one of the best parts of a great show.

This was a great article! Thanks, Simon.

Nebula1400 | February 06, 17:29 CET

I always like Riley, apart from in As You Were - yuck.

He was the regular guy and was nice and inoffensive. His "crime" was being the first boyfriend after Angel. Whoever that was was never going to be accepted. Parker was rebound guy, Riley transitional guy, Spike was her next proper bloke and was accepted by most fans, apart from the obvious fans who didn't want to move with the story.

Poor old Riley has had a tough time and I think unfairly so.

exoticmushroom | February 06, 17:46 CET

I didn't like Riley because he was an idiot.

The fact that there was absolutely no chemistry between Marc Blucas and Sarah Michelle Gellar didn't help much either.

TwisTz | February 06, 17:55 CET

The thing with Spike is inconsistant as hell with the storyline from the end of the 3rd season.

The reason Angel and Buffy couldn't be together despite their love for one another, was that a vampire who would essentially live forever could never be with a mortal girl - the "no-babies/no outdoor-picnic"-argument as it were. So what changed between the end of season 3 and season 6 with the Spike-thing? All of a sudden, the argument made in season 3 was just sweeped under the rug with NO EXPLANATION WHATSOEVER. (Sorry for the emphatic use of the shift key, but I feel rather passionately about this.)

The Spike-thing is one of the most non-canonical plots of the series.

[wcip]Angel | February 06, 18:02 CET

I liked Riley because she needed a normal (bording on blah) relationship after the crazy Angel-love chaos.

[ edited by MySerenity on 2006-02-06 16:06 ]

MySerenity | February 06, 18:06 CET

[wcip]Angel, I don't see anything wrong with the Spike relationship as by that point Buffy wasn't the same person as she was in S3 and she wasn't sleeping with Spike in the hopes they could have daytime picnics.

Jackal | February 06, 18:10 CET

Well, I've been one of the people to dislike Riley. Not hate him, I'm not so much with the hate, but dislike him? Certainly.

I wasn't just that he was the guy after Angel. That sure didn't help, but that wouldn't have been too bad, after all was said and done. It was just a combination of things. Riley was kinda boring to watch and he was heavily connected to The Initiative, which I still feel is the worst element of all the Buffy seasons.

Now as for the character itself: he wasn't a bad person. In fact, he was a quite decent guy. I just never enjoyed watching him in this show. Not because he was 'normal' and 'decent' (Xander was both those things and we all loved him), but just because he was the wrong character (initiative army guy) at the wrong time (during the switch to college when viewers already had to adjust to a whole bunch of other stuff).

Now as for the central premise of the linked article: bad guys making interesting viewing...well, it just depends. I, for instance, love The Shield and there's not a whole lot of decent, good characters to be had in that show. But all of them have redeeming qualities which make them likeable. And one of 'em is a bad cop who killed a collegue in the very first episode! ;-) Same goes for Bashir, who was very likeable from the start, in my book.

Now Seinfeld, for instance, I can't watch. It's not that the characters are evil, bad, morally bankrupt people...it's just that they're annoying individuals who I wouldn't want to hang around in real life, much less watch on television.

So to me, in the end, it comes down to likeability. As for unlikeable characters making better shows: grey area is good. Watching a cast of annoying characters isn't. Thankfully, you can have a show where everything is grey, yet people are still likeable (just look at Mal and Jayne, for instance - two other prime examples that could've been used in this article, I'd think).

GVH | February 06, 18:12 CET

re: The Buffy/Spike relationship.

It was never about, "I want to go on a date with you like a normal girlfriend and boyfriend." It was never about planning a future life together.

It started off as something dark and degrading for both characters, and ended in this place where they both cared deeply for one another, and had a connection much different then the one she had with Angel, but it was never going to go anywhere long-lasting, and they both knew that.

But remember, that argument of "no-babies/no-outdoor picnic" was Angel's and Joyce's for her own good, not Buffy's. Spike was never as unselfish in that regard.

And having Buffy have feelings for another undead guy isn't a canonical logic problem, it just says something about Buffy as a person and her relationships. What it says, however, is open to interpretation. ;-)

[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-06 16:24 ]

[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-06 16:25 ]

pat32082 | February 06, 18:23 CET

Yeah, i'd have to agree that comparing what Buffy wanted from Spike to what she wanted from Angel is completely missing the point.

With Angel the relationship was about love, first and foremost. With that comes thoughts of spending your lives together, making plans and getting all you can out of the relationship. Buffy and Angel both knew that their lives wouldn't allow them the safe, normal relationship they both desired and that was what led to them going their seperate ways.

With Spike is was nowhere near as romantically challenged. Buffy wasn't worrying about the details of how the two of them could have a future together, she wasn't really thinking all that much at all, at least to begin with. It was about sex and the immediate needs both she and Spike had.

The two relationships may both have involved vampires but the emotions involved meant that the similarities beyond that fact were few.

EDIT: I just saw a comment GVH made concerning Riley and i have to agree. I have always thought that a big part of the problem people have with Riley was that he became the poster child for everything that was different about season four.

We were adjusting to no Angel, no Cordy, no Sunnydale High, no library, very little of Buffy's home and Joyce, no Snyder ... so on and so on. Poor old Riley ended up being the easy target for all the people that missed the status quo of the previous seasons and so not only had to compete with the memory of Angel but also with the memories of all the other things that were now gone from the show. Not surprising that he ended up being unfairly judged as a character.

[ edited by Vampire With A Gun on 2006-02-06 16:42 ]

Buffysmglover | February 06, 18:35 CET

Buffy The Vampire Slayer was a show about misfits, for misfits.

Riley was not a misfit.

gossi | February 06, 18:40 CET

Gossi, ironically i would say that being relatively normal was what made Riley the biggest misfit of all the Scoobies, at least within the context of the show.

Buffysmglover | February 06, 18:44 CET

I think there's an important distinction to be made between liking a character as a character and liking a character as a person. Take Riley and Spike, for instance.

As a person, Riley is perfectly fine: a nice guy, caring, cute, whatever. As a character, he's dullsville.
On the other hand, as a person, Spike is abominable: a liar, a killer, a general jerk. As a character, he's wonderful.

Which one is more entertaining and cooler? Spike.
Which one would you actually rather know in real life? Riley.

And, of course, Angel is the paradoxical balance between the two, which is why he was complex and interesting enough to get his own show.

Septimus | February 06, 18:52 CET

Oh yeah, totally.

I mean, in theory it's a great idea from a story teller perspective - let's bring a love interest in for Buffy who's everything Angel wasn't - dependable, expendable, always nice, not a serial killer. In reality, a bunch of episodes later you end up with the question of, you know, what do we do with this character? Why does Buffy love him, aside from the niceness? What flame of story can he cause?

And I think that's roughly where you end up returning to 'Oooh, he's nice!'.

Which quickly turns into bland.

Which quickly turns into bad TV, unfortunately.

If people actually knew Spike in real life, you know, he's incredibly sarcastic, annoying, testing and you'd probably want to punch him after a few weeks. With Riley, not so much. But what we want in TV is characters who test and reveal things in each other (which is one of the reasons - probably the main one - Firefly worked so well - each of those characters conflicted the hell out of each other).

gossi | February 06, 18:53 CET

If people actually knew Spike in real life, you know, he's incredibly sarcastic, annoying, testing and you'd probably want to punch him after a few weeks.

Yeah, plus, you know, he'd probably kill your whole family just for the rush...

Septimus | February 06, 18:57 CET

Nail on its head, VwaG. I'm not ashamed to admit that with me, this was certainly also the case. Added to all this was the fact that the whole Initiative storyline, to me, is the weakest seasonal arc Buffy has had over the seven seasons and Riley was also heavily tied to that. So while I feel that Riley has been treated somewhat unfairly by us as fans, I just can't help but dislike the character on screen (even though I normally tend to like the 'decent' guys/girls) exactly because he became a poster child for the things I disliked about S4. Isn't the human psyche grand? ;-)

GVH | February 06, 19:02 CET

Ahh.. I haven't had this argument in years!

I LOVED Season 4.

And am utterly unrepentant.

*fends off torch-weilding villagers valiantly*

Bad Kitty | February 06, 19:21 CET

Gossi, i don't think that the writers ever struggled with Riley and it was never a case of what to do with him next because they always did with him exactly what they intended to.

The questions of why Buffy loved him and what his purpose on the show was outside of his relationship with the slayer were not difficulties that the writers had to deal with but rather the exact reason why Riley had been created. He didn't really fit into his life in Sunnydale or into the relationship with Buffy, that was the whole point and what made him, to me at least, an interesting contrast to what we had seen with Angel.

As for who i would really prefer to know in real life, most of my friends are rude, sarcastic, annoying and very testing (not to mention the fact that many of them are Ramones fans) so that could explain a lot about why Spike has always been my favourite character on the show! ;)

Buffysmglover | February 06, 19:22 CET

I didn't have a problem with Riley until his last few episodes, when he started expecting to be at the center of Buffy's life even as Buffy was dealing with Joyce's illness. Until then, he was a good counterbalance to the "misfit-ness" of the rest of the Scoobs.

Riley was certainly a thankless role to step into, though, every bit as much as Kennedy was in S7.

I gotta disagree about Xander at the end of Into the Woods. To me, that was a Xander low point, much lower even than "kick his ass." His lecture to Buffy that Riley was "the one," just after Riley had betrayed her and topped it off with an ultimatum, was inexcusable. Xander was meddling in something that was none of his business, and being extremely callous in his disregard of Buffy's feelings. That whole speech was about Xander, not about Buffy or Riley. Even worse, just after Buffy had made perhaps her first mature decision ever about a relationship that had gone bad, Xander manipulated her back into "addicted to the pain" mode. Boo, hiss.

Xander's speech to Anya just after that wasn't really a whole lot better. What it showed about Xander was that he had no sense of self, that love to him meant losing himself so thoroughly in someone else that he wouldn't have to face up to his own issues. The road to leaving Anya at the altar in Hell's Bells was commited, right then and there.

Want to talk about an unlikeable good-guy character? Xander had that one nailed sometimes, and Into the Woods was one of those times.

MissKittysMom | February 06, 19:25 CET

I liked the Initiative story line until Adam showed up. He was a pretty lame Big Bad. He looked like a He-Man character action figure, and really didn't feel like a threat to the universe.

I never had a problem with Riley. He seemed to be an appropriate transition guy between Angel and Spike. It seemed to me that Angel had run his course in BtVS, and sending him off to his own series was the best thing for the character. I thought Angel was bland until he got his own series, and was a better character without Buffy.

Nebula1400 | February 06, 19:33 CET

I'm with Bad Kitty here; season 4 was a great season. Its only major flaw was that neither Professor Walsh nor Adam ultimately had the complexity to be great villains.

Yes, season 4 was a transitional season, and I often wonder whether it got re-directed at some point. Buffy was always ambivalent about college, and with both Xander and Giles excluded from the college scene, there wasn't really the glue to hold the Scoobies together. I don't think that the college setting could have survived another season even if the writers had tried. I wonder when they realized that.

As for missing high school.... High school was so over. The writers could not have made it any plainer at the end of Graduation Day that BtVS was going to go in an entirely new direction.

MissKittysMom | February 06, 19:36 CET

I don't see anything wrong with the Spike relationship as by that point Buffy wasn't the same person as she was in S3 and she wasn't sleeping with Spike in the hopes they could have daytime picnics.
Jackal | February 06, 16:10 CET

Bwa!

Buffy didn't want to love Spike and that's what made it for me..

Angel/Buffy's love story wasn't all THAT to me, so I didn't mind the girl moving on. Most of us have more than one serious relationship in our lives. My problem is that Riley was so...dull.. I didn't dislike him but he didn't perk me up, either. I think Blucas did decent job, but he didn't have chemistry with Gellar.

spikeylover | February 06, 19:53 CET

Well, friendship is all about accepting each other's little foibles ;).

MissKittysMom: I could not have a more different perspective on that episode ;). Yes, he had his thing with the vampire but to me that was written to flag Riley's deep unhappiness with the relationship (how heartbreaking is it to absolutely adore someone who doesn't/can't reciprocate ?). And let's not forget that Riley had his entire world, even his reason for being, taken away from him as well. Buffy saw it as an ultimatum but to me (and Riley) it was a choice (the entire show is about young women making their own choices after all) and as Xander says 'Why wouldn't you run after him ?' if Buffy really did genuinely feel for him as deeply as she said. Likewise, Xander doesn't say 'You should go back to him' he says 'If you think he's the one, you should go back to him'. However, I do agree that they didn't have a long term future and that, despite Buffy's dramatic run after him, it was mainly because she just didn't really love him. To me the episode showed Buffy making one of her few genuine mis-steps (as she does for example in season 7) and being corrected by one of the things that made her so strong i.e. her friends.

Your right tho' that Xander was no paragon of virtue ('Kick his ass' being a good example and, as you say, a low point) and I totally agree about high-school being over. Buffy was partly about the journey to adulthood and you can't stay in the cradle forever (as was beautifully symbolised in Graduation Day Pt 2).

Saje | February 06, 20:31 CET

"Remember, I’m arguing that you should sympathize with Riley, not that you should like him — you were never supposed to like him."

I don't think that's correct. I think the writers did intend for us to like Riley, but for the most part we didn't, so they had to come up with a way for the character to exit the show.

killinj | February 06, 20:32 CET

MissKittysMom, I so agree with you about Xander, especially his meddling with Buffy's love-life. I think what Xander's speech is all about is that HE wants Riley to stay. Xander wants another boy in the group that he can relate to. And that could never be Angel or Spike, because Xander hates vampires so much even when they've been working on the same side.

There's a couple of moments toward the end of Season 5, when Xander is able to recognize that Spike has more going on than just being the evil vamp, but by Season 6, when they bring Buffy back, he just falls right back into the same old anti-vampire bigotry. And that that's what it is, is never clearer than in seasons 6 and 7 contrasting his relationship with Anya with Buffy and Spike. It's alright for him to love a woman who has, twice, made a decision of her own volition to become a vengence demon and kill thousands of people, yet he feels that he has the right, more he demands of Buffy the right to have say in who she has a relationship with.

Xander's lowest moment comes when he tries to kill Spike at a time when Spike isn't even able to defend himself, because Spike had completely consensual comfort sex with the woman that Xander has publicly abandoned and humiliated.

As for Riley, I liked him a lot more the second time I watched the series through. It seemed nice to me that Buffy had an opportunity to have a reasonably normal safe, enjoyable sex partner for a while, between the sturm and drang that was her relationships with Angel and Spike. I also appreciate the fact that Riley understood himself that Buffy didn't really love him, and that gave his character a bit more depth and humanism. I'm glad for him that he found a woman who was right for him. (Of course, I also think it's significant that Spike verbally acknowledges that Buffy doesn't love him either).

Actually my biggest problem with Riley as a character is that I didn't find his dark side believable. The scene when Buffy finds him with that skinny little vampire chick gnawing on his arm like a bone just struck me as funny, not dark or pathetic. Maybe if it had been shot differently, if the vampire was sitting on his lap and sucking on his neck so that it looked like they were embracing and he was experiencing something passionate it would have worked better.

barboo | February 06, 20:47 CET

MissKittysMom:



As i understand it they realised that right from the start. The most important aspect of the season was how college life can pull apart the friendships made in school. That was probably the theme that Joss intended to develop the most, right from the beginning. The Freshman showed Buffy starting to feel alienated from Willow, Xander and Giles and the events of the rest of the season only made the divisions more obvious and real, culminating in what was seen in The Yoko Factor.

The Riley and college aspects of season four are great examples of Joss and the other writers succeeding all too well in what they intended. Both storylines managed to create the exact feelings in the fanbase that they were envisioned for but those feelings ultimately made too many of the fans dislike the season, despite the fact that it does exactly what was required and works amazingly within the context of the development of the whole series.

Barboo, again that was exactly what you were supposed to see. Riley wasn't either dark or broody, he was just desperately trying to fake it. You were never supposed to start believing that Riley had suddenly gone all dark side of the force. He came across as a guy trying really hard to be something he could never really be for the love of a girl, just like he was supposed to.

Buffysmglover | February 06, 21:03 CET

Well, in fairness Riley had to exit the show anyway - Marc was very busy on other projects, and continues to be probably the busiest cast member of any of the actors in the 'verse.

I believe we were supposed to like all the characters in the show, pretty much. Even most of the 'bad guys'. When we feel something for a character, you are putty in story tellers hand.

gossi | February 06, 21:06 CET

Marc was very busy on other projects, and continues to be probably the busiest cast member of any of the actors in the 'verse.

I think he and Seth Green could duke it out for that title!

Rogue Slayer | February 06, 21:30 CET

I think this is probably very true - for the majority of viewers. However, I'd have to say I prefer Riley as a character to Spike. I don't find him dull at all. This is not to say I have any problem with the Spike character, but I don't have the great abiding love for him that many fans do. He's just one of many interesting characters in the show.

Possibly, my reaction to the introduction of Riley was influenced by the fact that I made no great emotional investment in Buffy/Angel. It was a storyline that was brilliantly realised but for me Angel's departure benefited the show because it was time to move on.

As to Riley, I thought he was the right character at the right time. I've increasingly grown to appreciate the nuances of the S4 narrative and the same goes for Riley's story as it plays out in the first half of S5. Whether or not it was exactly as had been planned is another matter, but I thought it all worked superbly well.

alien lanes | February 06, 21:43 CET

Vamp with a Gun, I agree completely that S4 succeeded extremely well on a character level; everyone made all the changes that they needed to make for the rest of the series to work so beautifully. (I'm one of those who loves S6 and S7, almost to the point of being able to overlook the Potentials.)

The thing that bothered me about the "college pulls people apart" theme was that after Yoko/Primeval, the whole issue kind of disappeared.

Saje, I think we can agree to disagree on this one. I'm ok with that.

The thing that makes Riley's ending an ultimatum was the whole package: "I've been a jerk, it's your fault, so take me back by midnight or you'll never see me again." The relationship was over and he knew it. The decent thing to do would have been to apologize, say goodbye, and leave town quietly. But that's a hindsight perspective, and with your first big love it can be very hard to let go gracefully. Love makes you do the wacky.

I do understand that Riley's entire world fell apart in S4, both externally and internally. I thought that story arc was extremely well done, and having been there myself, I can really appreciate both the artistry and the emotional impact on Riley. It's not something you bounce back from. Riley needed a fresh start, and clinging to Buffy wasn't going to get that for him, whether she truly loved him or not.

But Xander.... Yikes. All he did in that scene was manipulate. He knew Riley wasn't "the one" for her, and he had Riley's own word on that. But there's Xander anyway, pushing Buffy's buttons about her attraction to bad boys and to be the "fixer" to put things back together. As well as pushing her loyalty buttons.

I'll agree that Buffy made a mis-step here, and a big one, but the mistake was in chasing after Riley at all. Xander wasn't helping her correct that mis-step; he pushed her into it.

MissKittysMom | February 06, 21:43 CET

I fall on the side that, occasionally, Xander needs a slap. Or a stern look. Or, you know, both. I would suspect it's occasionally the indiviual writers fault, but I don't because many of those times have been at the hands of Joss directly.

Don't get me wrong - I love Xander's character dearly. But there are a few occasions where he does things and you think - jeeze, you've got that backwards, Xan Man. Example: Riley is The One. (Although, story structually, somebody had to push Buffy back to Riley at the very last minute for The Harsh Goodye, so it'd either be Willow or Xander who you'd assign to that job).

gossi | February 06, 22:24 CET

MissKittysMom, i see what you are saying about the rapid change of pace that we saw with the Scoobies various relationship problems in The Yoko Factor and Primeval. It did seem a very sudden shift back to the core four status quo.

Mind you, i think that made sense for the most part. None of them wanted to lose touch with each other, life simply pulled them in four seperate directions. It was only when Spike used that fact to really drive them all apart that they were in a position to see how much they had lost touch with each other and realise how much they missed the bonds they once had.

I think it's a case similar to that of the two Xanders in The Replacement being artificially created and kept seperate by magical means (weird analogy alert!!!). The natural state of the Scoobies was as a tightly connected group of friends. It was only the pressures of their new lives which pulled them apart. Once they saw the problem and acknowleged what was going on, not to mention realised just how unimportant those issues were in comparison to their friendships, it was really only natural that they pulled back together again as quickly as they did.

Buffysmglover | February 06, 22:41 CET

MissKittysMom said ...



Oh, absolutely ;). It's always interesting to hear the well reasoned opinions of other fans and i'll certainly watch the episode with a fresh eye in future (especially towards detecting a false note in Xander's intentions). Just have to invest in the boxed set. Hmm, maybe if I Ebay my 'spare' kidney ... ;)

In general tho' I agree with VWaG that quite often the writers do such a good job that we change our opinions of a character in exactly the way they want us to. People have told me that they 'went off' Buffy in season 7 which is, obviously, exactly what we were meant to do as she became more and more autocratic, callous and basically male (in the traditional Military Industrial Complex kind of way - in fact Riley may have been partly intended to show that not all blokes in this mold are bad guys). IMO, it was just one more reason to enjoy the character since heroes that never make mistakes are fairly uninteresting to me (and, i'd imagine, most people).

Yep, gossi I agree, sometimes you just want to take him aside and 'explain things' the old fashioned way. I'd say the two lowest points were 'Kick his ass' and the way he handled the whole Anya situation but they weren't the only ones. Xander, more than any other character and despite his insightfulness, was just a normal guy so it makes sense for him to fall prey to the most ordinary of character flaws (pettiness, jealousy, insecurity etc.). The fact that he does so relatively rarely shows how heroic he really is (well, that and the whole saving the world thing ;).

Saje | February 06, 22:46 CET

Saje, I don't think there's a false note in Xander's intentions. There's no doubt that Xander believed what he said and believed that he was doing the right thing. It's just that he did all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons in that episode.

I grew up in a family that combined some of the worst aspects of Xander's family and Willow's family. I know where he's coming from! Xander doesn't really start to mature until after Hell's Bells. It took a couple more kicks (Entropy and Selfless) to really get that process started, especially seeing Anya self-destruct and realizing that the best and only thing he could do was to stand aside and let it happen. It's exactly what he should have done in Into the Woods.

The thing about Xander is that all his insight and all his courage were directed outward. It wasn't until near the end of season 6 that he began to have the courage to look inward. It is a very difficult and scary thing to do.

I'll agree with you about Buffy in season 7, though. All of seasons 6 and 7 were about making huge mistakes and having to live with the consequences. Everyone does it, most of them more than once. It does make for great drama.

MissKittysMom | February 06, 23:22 CET

I find myself in agreement with MissKittysMom. I don't think Xander ever really came across as false. In fact, out of all the character writing in the show, I think Xander came out of it the best. Also, despite the mistakes I think he made, I think he often realised them. He didn't go too far off the rails, either: somebody like Willow, as much as I love her also (and yes, I know it's a fictional character, get over it) - she made mistakes, didn't realise it until it was too late, went off the rails and crashed (literally). Xander did similar things, but not as badly - and I think some times he dealt with things early on. Example: him and Anya. Something was wrong. Marriage could well have ended badly. He made a choice.

gossi | February 06, 23:39 CET

I've always been a major Riley supporter and in fact, I believe that Buffy and his relationship is the only one that had any chance of working at all. Both when it comes to her relationship with Angel and especially Spike, both were destined to make her miserable. And the Immortal then? Please, that just will just never work. What is it with Buffy and all her undead romances. Jeez...

Regarding the implosion of "Biley" (as it's called) I think that their problem was their failure to communicate. It seemed that Buffy sort of wanted to shelter Riley due to the fact that he wasn't "action man" anymore and in that regard, she didn't treat him as an equal. And in a relationship you gotta be on even ground, otherwise it will start to tilt and general unpleasantness ensues.

I see a lot of people mentioning the unfortunate timing of Riley's debut, right in the transition between high school and college etc, as a reason for their dislike of Riley. First of all, I regard them as completely unrelated but that's a personal structuring thingy. But seriously, how much time do you need to deal with a new environment. You knew it was coming all summer. Heck, I got adjusted half way through the second episode and since I got in late to the show and watch through the whole thing in an insane speed we're talking about a transition period that lasted about 2 hours top. Seriously, that can't be it can it?

As a side note, had Cordelia not died I'm pretty sure they could have made it work in the long run. Maybe it's just me, but I think Cordelia and Angel's chemistry even eclipsed Buffy and Angel's chemistry, and that's saying something.

Oh, and MissKittysMom, if you take that first post you wrote and then turn it completely upside down, then there's my opinion. Maybe it's just cause I kinda relate to the whole situation there sort (although, ironically the one I relate to is Buffy in this situation). Just like Buffy I didn't get fully get how my pain reflected onto others and how devastating it was for them to feel so desperately powerless to help. It eats away at you. So thematically it was the same and the only thing I lacked was a Xander to make me see what I was doing before it was too late. Although, in Buffy's case it was too late aswell so yeah, maybe it's kinda the same. In fact, Xander's role in Buffy was the role he played in my life aswell, I realised after watching it that I never quite got it until that episode.

I would even go as far as saying she never actually got over him completely, atleast not until some time after As You Were. Cause you could so clearly see her butterflies when he arrived, atleast until it was revealed that he was married and thus kinda off-limits. Although, this might have something to do with previously mentioned relatibility.

Djungelurban | February 06, 23:39 CET

I did not particularly enjoy the Riley character, as his Iowa white bread personality did not appeal to me. As far as his actions in ITW, I suppose it was an ultimatum but I viewed as as: “I have other opportunities, if you love me, give me a reason to stay”. I think this is not an unreasonable request; the fact that Buffy was going through so much turmoil with Joyce is just an example of life sometimes overwhelming ones abilities to cope.
As to Xander’s actions in this episode, I tend to focus on the If Riley is the guy part of his speech. I don’t see how Xander could know that Riley was not the guy since I am in doubt whether Buffy actually knew whether he was the guy (certainly her reaction to seeing Riley again in As You Were indicates some doubt on this score). All Xander knew was that Riley had serious doubts as to whether he was the one. I cut Xander some slack in ITW – perhaps he could have been more sensitive in his approach, but this is Xander, not exactly an emotional wordsmith. I also think his declaration to Anya was honest and sincere. So he was totally subsumed in his love – not really a bad place to be in the early stages. In order for the relationship to last long term, he would have had to develop a more sustainable relationship that included more of a self-knowledge. I just don’t think there was anything wrong with his feelings at that time.
GVH says above that “we all loved Xander”. I for one not only did not love him, I didn’t even like him. He was judgmental, sanctimonious and emotional coward. He was quick to take the moral high road and criticize any perceived lapses of his friends but consistently did not apply the same standard to his own behavior. Time and again (see Dead Man’s Party, Doppelgangland, Something Blue, Entropy), he piled on his friends when they were in emotional crisis. There is a time to be critical and there is a time to offer unconditional support: Xander almost always chose critical. He never cared about Willow romantically until Oz showed an interest and then he took advantage of her long held love for him to almost sabotage the Willow/Oz relationship. The low point, I believe, was in Entropy where, after abandoning his supposed true love at the altar, he has the balls to condemn her for a bit of solace sex with Spike. Then, instead of recognizing the pain that Buffy was in, pain that he was complicit in since he helped to pull her out of paradise, he chose to add to her pain. Some friend! In S7, I was actually hoping that Caleb would take out his other eye so I could enjoy watching him stumble around and bump into furniture. That, I believe, would have been poetic justice, as the boy never could see what was plainly in front of his face.

Sunshine | February 06, 23:42 CET

I think Gossi has a great point that for the structure of the episode someone had to push Buffy into going after Riley. That said, I stand by thinking it suited Xander to do it because Xander himself was emotionally invested in Buffy being with Soldier-Guy (as later on Buffy becomes invested in Xander and Anya staying together).

VwG, I don't know that I buy that Riley wasn't supposed to be seen as turning dark. I don't think a man leaves the bed of the woman he loves after just making love with her to go out in the middle of the night to a dangerous and disgusting place in order to fake being dark. At this point in the story Riley's life has completely imploded, he's been betrayed in multiple ways by his most trusted mentor, he's been physically violated without his knowledge through drugs and an implant, he's had to go through wrenching physical withdrawal from both, he's been thrown out of the organization that provided structure and meaning to his life, the one thing he has left to hold onto is his love for Buffy, and he's realizing that he's not the right person for her. It'd be a little strange if he wasn't feeling some bleakness. I just think this is a case where the direction didn't live up to the storyline. It happens.

As for the core four pulling together so quickly at the end of season 4, it's true they do, but they don't stay that way in succeeding seasons. They stay in touch, they continue to work together, they continue to love each other immensely - but they come apart. After Buffy returns from the dead, she is unable to share the truth of what she went through with the others - the ending of "Once More with Feeling" ironically highlights the fractures in the group not their solidarity. Buffy hides the fact that she is in an addictive relationship, Willow succumbs to and hides her own addiction, nearly gets Dawn killed, and that's even before the getting all veiny and trying to destroy the world. Giles leaves the country. In season 7 Buffy more and more acknowledges her feelings of isolation as the slayer, and the group literally expels her, so once more has to turn to Spike the outsider for a sense of connection.

Yes, the Scoobies all come together one more time to save the world, but once Sunnydale is destroyed, are they really all going to get off that schoolbus at the same stop? We know that Buffy is in Rome with Dawn, but Willow, Giles, Xander? They may all now be working together to locate and train the new Slayers but are they all physically in the same place together? I don't think so. What makes BtVS so heartbreaking is that it is so very much about the need to connect and create a caring community - but it is also acknowledges the truth that when you grow up and leave high school, you don't get to live in a big house with your bestest friends in the whole world. Whether its college, marriage, a job in a different city, graduate school, the outside world will separate you. Unlike Peter Pan, Buffy and the Scoobies DO grow up, with the loss that brings.

barboo | February 07, 00:21 CET

Barboo, there is no doubt that later events led to the relationships of the Scoobies changing again, not always for the better. That is the way things happen in life though. You make friends, drift apart, become close again, drift apart for different reasons. That kind of goes without saying. I think that MissKittysMom was just talking of the events of the fourth season though, which is certainly what i was referring to, rather than the later seasons ups and downs.

As for Riley dipping his toes into murkier waters, whilst i would agree that Riley was under a lot of pressure and had gone through a great deal of pain in the previous year i still don't think that it was ever intended for us to believe he truly was becoming darker. At most it was that he wanted to believe that he could do so, in order to be the kind of man Buffy wanted, but in truth it was all superficial. He knew that Buffy could never really love him because of the man he was and so tried to find that dark impulse inside himself that he thought Buffy needed. The problem was that it just didn't exist and deep down he knew that.

Buffysmglover | February 07, 00:34 CET

MissKittysMom, gossi: Just to be clear, I don't feel Xander was being false at all, that was a mis-interpretation on my part of what I thought MKM was saying (boy, that made things clearer ;). Gotta say tho' I can't really see how his intentions could be good but he's still doing it for 'all the wrong reasons'. To me, he was doing it with (what he perceived to be) Buffy's best interests at heart. Rather than meddling, as a few folk have mentioned, he was giving advice to one of his best friends, one that he believed was making a big mistake, and consequently he was doing his very best to convince her (maybe even to the extent of using a few rhetorical tricks or emotional manipulations tho' i'm not convinced of that). If that's not the right reason to do something, I don't know what is. Contrary to what some have said, I think you do have some right to an opinion of your friends life decisions, especially if they're going awry, because if they actually are your friends then to some extent their pain is your pain (i.e. you don't want to see them get hurt). Tho' obviously you also have to let people live their own lives.

I know what you mean about Xander's family, MissKittysMom (I recognise some of his psychological hang-ups in myself), and agree that he does a lot of introspective grappling after Hell's Bells (tho' personally I didn't really see what he was fussing over, maybe because in Scotland if there aren't at least 4 obnoxious drunks and 3 fights between brothers and/or cousins at every wedding I don't think the marriage is legally binding ;). I also totally agree that sometimes the hardest and best thing to do is to stand back and let folk come to their own realisations.

Here's a quote (thanks to buffyguide):
To me, that doesn't sound like someone who has anything but his friend's best interests front and centre of his mind. Of course, everyone sees things differently, variety is, after all, something to do with spices ;).



Couldn't disagree more sunshine. To me, the Willow/Xander thing was always presented as an entirely mutual, hormonal attraction that both of them were surprised by. There was no advantage taking involved. And although I agree that he sometimes timed his outbursts badly (i'm thinking particularly of the start of season 3 when Buffy comes back to Sunnydale), I think that a true friend is the one who will tell you when you're being a plonker, and not just what you want to hear, when you want to hear it. Course supportiveness is important too but i'm better at the telling people they're being a plonker thing. Everyone should play to their strengths ;).

Saje | February 07, 00:42 CET

Yes, Vampire with A Gun, I agree. And I agree with the writer of the article. Marc Blucas did a good job portraying Riley exactly as he was meant to be portrayed. There wasn't supposed to be a lot of sparks and chemistry. The casting was perfect. That was the whole idea. Buffy was still hurting from the Angel thing, and she had shut down. Riley was a safe relationship exactly because she could keep him at a distance, and he didn't spark any intense reaction in her. That's why she didn't go all angsty with him, as she did with Angel, or all obsessed and passionate and crazy, as she did with Spike.

As a teen, she was wide open and let Angel into her heart. Then ouch. So she finds Riley, who she can appreciate and enjoy, but she doesn't have the big passion thing going, so it's easy to keep him out of her aching chest. Then she hooks up with Spike, who does get to her big time, so it's not easy keeping him out of her heart, so she has to freeze up and bring the hammer down really hard, and that just makes her kind of crazy. Until Season 7, when, in Chosen, she very significantly reveals to Angel (of all people) that Spike is in her heart.

I thought that signaled - not that Buffy was now going to be Angel or Spike's forever love - but that Buffy's heart had healed, and she was actually ready to love again someday - if she so chose, after she had baked.

Riley was a wonderful character, and well portrayed by Marc.

sari | February 07, 00:51 CET

VwG, I may not agree with you about Riley, but I think you have a valid, well-reasoned interpretation. Clearly, Riley felt he needed to be able to touch the darkness in order to understand Buffy. Whether he actually touched it or not is maybe something only his soul knows. But it's also clear that he would never have the well-honed, brooding skills of Buffy's previous favorite. (Do you think he Riley even ever read Sartre?)

What I do see is that when he comes back in As You Were, Riley has matured tremendously, and he knows himself in a way he didn't before. He's also incredibly better-adjusted at this point than Buffy. Granted - he didn't die and get torn out of heaven. But I think Buffy's death was only an intensification of the alienation she was already showing from well in the middle of season 5. One of my theories about the series is that one of the things it is about is combat fatigue. What being in an ungoing state of combat does to a person emotionally. Some of that is suggested in "Fool for Love" in Spike's comments about Slayers wanting to dance with death, and later in Buffy's own fears about her abilities to love. Buffy has been in a nonstop war since she was a teenager, and it's not one she chose. Riley on the other hand is in the same war, but he chose to go into it. Maybe their relative comfort with themselves is a reflection of the fact that Riley belongs in the army.

Or maybe it's just not having to have stabbed his first love to death, seen his mother die, being asked to kill his sister to preserve the world, died etc., etc.

I do think Buffy's obvious attraction to him in As You Were is a longing for normalcy, or the closest she has ever had to normalcy. Her life at that point is horrible - of course she wants an old love to come and rescue her from it.

This is a great discussion!

barboo | February 07, 01:15 CET

Agreed, Saje. I don't think he díd have anything but Buffy's best interest in his mind when he said that. Now for Buffy it wasn't the best possible advice she could get at that point, but I don't think it was anything else than heartfelt concern for where Buffy was going from Xander's part.

Now Xander's character is not perfect. There were lapses of judgement, bad decissions and there was some selfishness and envy there as well. But honestly, which character in Buffy doesn't have his or her weak sides or low points? Compared to Willow's whole 'going evil' thing, Buffy's self-destructive behaviour, Giles' willingness to kill (Ben, Spike), I think Xander actually isn't all that bad. Not perfect, certainly not, but who is?

Sunshine: words can't begin to describe how much I disagree with your assesment of Xander, so let's just agree to disagree :-)



Well, djungelurban, it actually is that :-). You say you watched the show at an insane speed and that would probably explain it. I've watched other shows at an insane speed and I tend to find that I except changes of the status quo more easily.

Now with Buffy, we had a show I was very much invested in. I'd already lived in that world and the fandom for three whole years, discussing, disecting, reading every little tidbit of information. Buffy S1-3 was the show I fell completely in love with. And then it changed.

Now I think there did need to be a change. Status quo gets boring after a while and for dramatic purposes shaking things up a bit is good. But I missed the library, the close scoobygang friendship, the more 'mythological' aproach to the show (the Initiative storyline felt like I had wondered into a James Bond movie all of a sudden - and I don't much like James Bond). There was a whole bunch to get used to. And on top of all that, the overall tone of the episodes shifted more towards the 'funny' than the 'dramatic', the lighting changed (it got lighter in the literal sense all of a sudden) - things felt, looked, were different.

Now, as I said, different isn't bad. I wasn't expecting another high school season (that part of the show got perfect closure with Oz's 'we survived' line). But, it's not just that things were changing - on top of everything, the direction of the season was supposed to shake things up, make the viewer unconfortable. And guess what, it worked. So coupled with a storyarc I wasn't that big a fan of, the fact that several elements never quite worked for me (the conclusion to the Initiative storyline examplified what was missing in that arc for me - lots of pretty explosions, not a whole lot of emotional connection) season four just isn't my favorite season.

Now I could've dealt with the change in a stronger season, but I feel season 4, as a whole is weak on everything except the alienation character arc and some individually great episodes. So my dissapointment at the season coupled with my difficulty to adjust to the new status quo and eventually found a poster boy in Riley.

While I know it doesn't make much sense, Riley's presence just sort of started to represent the things I missed and the things I disliked about the season, so I never got round to apreciate the guy and that lifted over to season 5 (which in my opinion is one of the strongest Buffy seasons we've seen). Even without that feeling he wouldn't have been my favorite, but if he'd been introduced at a different time, I think maybe I (and others?) would've at least felt somehwat differently. So yes it's petty, but I just can't help it ;-).

GVH | February 07, 02:14 CET

I haven't really got anything else to add to this thread at this point except to agree with barboo in that this has been a great discussion. Regardless of whether i agree with somebody over one issue or disagree with somebody else over another (although i have to second GVH in that i strongly disagree with Sunshines's take on Xander), all the points have been very well made and i have really enjoyed reading these opinions.

Beats the hell out of "I H8 Riley cuz he woz crap and borin and Angel roolz!"! :)

Buffysmglover | February 07, 02:47 CET

As usual I agree and disagree with almost everybody.

I never hated or even disliked Riley. IMO he was a great character for the show because he was everything Buffy dreamed about and was totally wrong for her. If you doubt that the fans were not supposed to take to him, look at who he was presented as being and who the fans and other characters were. The show was about outsiders and nerds and loved by the same. Riley was a jock in a fraternity who later turned out to be military. Riley was not created to be loved by the fans, he was created to give insight into Buffy and move her through another part of her life.

I thought he was the epitome of the normal guy who was getting into something much more complex than he could ever imagine. He was in way over his head before he ever had any clue. In some ways you could compare his journey to Buffy’s when she first met and fell in love with Angel. She had a much more innocent, straight forward view of life and love before Angel, and she fell for him before she knew how many deep corners there were to him. When she found out, it was just enough to be exciting and intriguing without fully understanding it’s dangers. She was fully in love with no going back by the time she found out that the relationship was capable of being incredibly destructive to her. The same thing happened to Riley except that he could not handle the darkness as well as Buffy could, and eventually got out. One could argue that Buffy would have been better off if she had had a little less tolerance for the darkness. Of course she also would not be nearly so interesting.

IMO Riley was not suited to Buffy. He was too shallow and was not capable of understanding the complexities of her personality and her life. That does not make him a bad person. I think he did go to a dark place, but I do not think he was dark. It was a place that his relationship with Buffy, through no fault of hers, took him and it would have destroyed him if he had stayed there. It was not natural for him and he could not live there. That is why he had to go. His ultimatum to Buffy, and IMO it was an ultimatum, was a weak thing to do, but something that desperate people who are in love and see the relationship crumbling around them do. They know it is over and they have to leave, but they reach out anyway just to make sure that everything isn’t really okay and that they are not going to live happily ever after.

As far as Xander, well, he has always been an Everyman with the emphasis on the man part ( or should it be Everyboy?) I remember sitting in a living room after an incredibly hard breakup that took more than a year to actually happen, having my best friend’s boyfriend try to convince me I was making a mistake and challenging me on why we had broken it off...for hours on end. As I recall I ended up suggesting that he give my old boyfriend a call and see if he needed a roommate since he was so fond of him. ;-)

Xander did the things that guys do, good and bad. He made mistakes and got jealous, among other things. I think he did what he thought was right, and told Buffy what he truly believed. But I do not think it would have been good for Buffy, and especially Riley, for Buffy to have caught that helicopter.

newcj | February 07, 02:58 CET

Contrary to what some have said, I think you do have some right to an opinion of your friends life decisions, especially if they're going awry, because if they actually are your friends then to some extent their pain is your pain (i.e. you don't want to see them get hurt).

I actually agree with this. I have been known to stick my oar in my friends lives, and say 'I'm not sure I agree with that.' or 'Do you know what you are doing?' to them. Should I? Who knows.

I'm also not suggesting I'm above Xander, Spike or any of the other characters I'll occasionally point a stick at here - in fact, I've made many of the mistakes those characters made. Occasionally, I'd watch Angel and cringe in a way like I do watching The Office - there are moments watching that character where I've related so much I've been a little worried. Except I tend not to kill people, and my hair is less lame.

All in all, if we're willing to talk about these characters like they are our friends - yes, I'm occasionally that scary - I'd have Willow and Xander as friends in a heart beat. I'd do beers with Spike. Buffy - as whinging and annoying I sometimes find her - would probably be the big sister I never had. And I'd be madly in love with Tara, casually ignoring the fact she likes girl parts. 50s big ass movie star eyes, see.

These reason I like these characters is because they are all flawed. Therefore I can relate them to the people I meet in real life. I'd still letcher Xander if I thought he was being a dick - rightly or wrongly - which is probably the point.

Occasional scary over.

gossi | February 07, 03:03 CET

Great thoughts, all. I always come away from these thread-types wanting to rewatch episodes with your varied perspectives in mind. It's almost like having new BtVS to watch, albeit, simply the old stuff, through new eyes. Kewl.

Coming a little late to the party, but wanted to say that I thought Riley was really well-drawn and well-played. He succeeds as a character to me, more so for how he functions to reveal things about the others, than he does about himself, and he does this well. I feel the same of Dawn and Connor -- peripheral characters who may, in fact, be crafted to bug some of us, and illicit sympathy from others, based on our own preferences and prejudices.

I've never been so much on-board with the reverence for the Buffy/Angel pairing -- it just never resonated with me as the legendary, soul-matey thing it seems to be for others. It's overblown angst and drama made for perfect metaphor for the highs and lows of young first love, and it was of vital importance to who they both would become. I adore it as such. It just lives in that same place in my head and heart reserved for my first, messy angsty, ill-fated, teen-aged love -- knowingly and happily idealized in memory, but not necessarily something it makes a ton of sense to revisit as an adult. So that's where my head was at for Buffy, going into S4. As such, I wasn't really 'threatened' by Riley; more just bemused by his corn-pokey-ness and nervously half-peeking through my fingers on his behalf, thinking "FarmBoy, this is not going to end well for you." I was sure he'd get trampled and that he'd never have the so-called "stones" to stop it from happening. I wasn't all-out rooting for him, but neither was I reveling in watching him try so hard, get some of it so wrong, and flame out even when he seemed to be getting it right. I cringed when I thought he'd been done wrong, especially when he managed to shatter the stereotypes I had lazily ascribed, but still -- I couldn't help but be more interested in watching Buffy with exasperation; how she messed things up and what that said about her. What it meant for her future and the future of our show.

And so I came away from S4 with new questions about Buffy's faults, her fears, and her failings -- whether she herself had the "stones" to ever be all-in again, or whether being the slayer, combined with the horror-show of her first love affair, had left our girl ill-equipped and ill-suited for matters of the heart. I guess I see Riley as sweet, valiant but misguided, critically important, collateral damage on the way towards answering that question. Ultimately, we knew it couldn't work between them, but couldn't that be more a commentary on Buffy, than a dislike for Riley? Weren't we wondering if she was doomed? Or ruined? Weren't we unsure that she'd ever be able to get it right? What a brilliant set-up that was for S5's gripping, gut-wrenching, but ultimately breathtaking exploration of Buffy's capacity for love. And Riley helped get us there.

ETA: ah, as i was posting, newcj went to some of the places i did above, way more succinctly. sorry for the repetition. :)

[ edited by barest_smidgen on 2006-02-07 01:13 ]

barest_smidgen | February 07, 03:11 CET

As to someone having a right to his or her opinion regarding their friend’s behavior, I agree. It is just a matter of when to voice that opinion and in what manner you frame that advice. Emotionally striking out at a friend when they are in obvious emotional turmoil is, in my opinion, not the proper time. For example, Xander’s tirade in Dead Man’s Party strikes me as a selfish attempt to make it all about his pain, not a sincere effort to help Buffy see the error of her actions. I think Willow’s approach to advising Buffy is more fundamentally sound – gently suggest, do not attack. As to liking the flawed characters, I too like the flaws but I guess pettiness (a flaw Xander has in abundance) is just not one of the flaws that I enjoy. As far as friends go, I would much prefer one like Tara in Dead Things than Xander in Entropy.

Sunshine | February 07, 03:16 CET

I swear this is the longest thread we have ever had about Riley. Excellent posts btw.

Simon | February 07, 03:24 CET

Uah... I have this big blind spot plastered all over Dead Man's Party, I just try to ignore it the best I can. They fight, that's as far as I wanna go in remembering the specific. Nothing in that fight they had their rang true to me and it's the only time the show actually commited the deadly sin of being stupid. The episodes can suck for the longest time and I'll still hang around in hope for better, but be stupid and I'm out. Honestly, I was on the verge on turning my back on the show there. Luckily Faith swooped in and saved the day.

So I would say that using Dead Man's Party as an example to show faults in Xander's character is unfortunate. Everyone in that episode was going overboard, or atleast the Scoobies.

Edit: So, you've noted that aswell Simon. It seems to me like as time passes, Riley gets more and more support from the Buffyverse community. I find this highly interesting, or maybe this is just me. It probably also a good candidate for the thread with the highest characters/post ratio in the history of Whedonesque.

[ edited by Djungelurban on 2006-02-07 01:41 ]

Djungelurban | February 07, 03:34 CET

Dude - what's not to like in Dead Man's Party? Xander being, well, a bit of a dick.. Willow trying to be cool and supportive but horrified at the same time.. Giles being just so very, very glad.. Joyce being, well, Joyce. I didn't think that episode was stupid at all. I thought the premise was a bit dodgy (although, Day of the Dead references never bad).

In that situation, I'd probably have been Xander. I probably would have gone off on one, against my better judgement. And yes, that'd make me a dick, and Willow cool.

Riley is everything Buffy and the show on some levels wants to be - normal. But, the show is anything but normal, and normal isn't great TV. That's my opinion of the character.

That said, I wouldn't actually remove him from the show. Riley's character provided a window into Buffy's thoughts and feelings - he showed us who she really is, as did Spike. Buffy and Riley -- no matter how 'ideal' it might have looked to Buffy on paper -- couldn't have sustained the long run. Or even the season and a bit run. And a lot of reasoning is down to Buffy Summers. So although I think Riley wasn't good TV on the outside, I think bringing him in ultimately taught us a great deal about the title character, which is never a bad thing.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-07 02:04 ]

gossi | February 07, 04:02 CET

I hate to dumb down this really fantastic discussion but that just made me laugh so hard! Thanks VWaG.

Spikecam21 | February 07, 04:37 CET

I agree that there's a lot to like in 'Dead Man's Party' (Giles' line is priceless and hopefully not too offensive to our cousins over the pond ;) tho' the part in question where they confront Buffy is pretty horrible. Of course, that's exactly the point. From the other character's perspective Buffy ran off for 3 months without so much as a phone call. They're bound to be upset, not particularly rational and in emotional turmoil and because of the way it's written, so are we. The fact that they don't react the way we all wish they would (i.e. with patience and total understanding) just shows that they're real (OK, not real real - no need for the rubber wall-paper quite yet - just, y'know, real ;) since, unfortunately, i'm pretty sure that's how most of us would react. Xander's little tirade tho' is as warranted as Anya's 'not better, just luckier' comment in S7 and about as unfair too.

Good thread everyone, BTW. Plenty of thoughtful opinions and new perspectives to chew over.

Saje | February 07, 04:46 CET

Well, the problem with the Dead Man's Party fight (I don't care either way really for the zombie theme) is that their reasoning for being pissed at Buffy just did hold. This is something that the show usually is excellent with, to present both sides with quality ammunition and meat on their bones. Prime example of that is in Empty Places where people's opinions are all over the map whether or not they did right in kicking Buffy out. Both sides had valid points and you could really understand why each and every character thought the way they thought. But the Dead Man's Party fight lacked all that.

Sort of like a prelude to that fight, there was in the otherwise perfectly good episode Anne the "I blame you" scene. Same problem there. Cause while she might be in her right to blame Giles for keeping secrets from her, the way she formulated herself is so very blunt, contrived and forced. And well of course, it was a little bit stupid (remember, you kicked your daughter out of your house).

Back to DMP, the fight there is sort of like "I blame you" XL. Every problem that scene had was magnified by 10 and played out over a longer period of time. It feels like they've decided the Scoobies should have an internal fight without actually being sure how to write it. Unfortunately I can't bring up any specific lines or such since I tend to avoid the episode at all cost and I get angry when I watch it so I won't check it out to refresh my memory. Even just checking out the transcripts over at buffyworld sounds like a bad idea. But it made me cringe with every line and I made me angry at the show. When I'm pissed off at the characters, the show is at its best and I love it the most, but DMP makes me angry at the show itself which is just bad.

Djungelurban | February 07, 04:52 CET

I shall disagree still with you here, Djungelurban.. Personally, I thought the characters reactions were pretty much spot on. I mean, Xander didn't react well to it - but then, he didn't react well to the situation at the end of S2 either. Mind you, the way Joyce confronted Giles in 'Anne' also rang true for me (were I a father, I'd do the same).

If Joyce, Xander, Willow and Giles had tackled the situation well, I'd be bothered. If nobody had got shouty with Buffy, I'd have been bothered. Joyce made a real mess of her relationship with Buffy. Xander made a real mess at the end. Willow? Well, she tried.

gossi | February 07, 05:09 CET

Saje, couldn't agree more.

For whatever reason sometimes the viewer seems to forget that the characters on the show don't have our perspective of events. They weren't able to see what drove Buffy to leave Sunnydale, or the life she lived in L.A. for those few months. We knew how she had suffered and how broken she felt inside. Xander, Willow and the others were not able to really understand that. How could they?

Sure, they accepted that Buffy had her reasons and that she had been hurting but they had been hurting too. Buffy coming back didn't change the fact that she had decided to up and go without a word of where she was heading, leaving the people who loved her to sit around waiting, not knowing if she was okay, or even alive.

It's one thing for us to appreciate her side of the story because we knew it all, having seen Buffy live through it. All the Scoobies knew was that they had spent months worried sick about their friend and now here she was back home as if nothing had happened. No matter how much they tried to ignore it you cannot blame them for resenting the worry and stress that Buffy had put them through.

So all in all i would certainly say that Xander and the others were a little hard on Buffy, given our perspective of events, but it was an understandable emotional outburst, given what they had been through themselves.

Djungelurban, regarding the Giles/Joyce scene, to me that was a perfect example of the repressed anger they were all feeling towards themselves and each other. Joyce was wrong to say what she said but that doesn't change the fact it was true. Giles had been a massive part of Buffy's life for two years, a life that put her daughter in danger on a daily basis, and Joyce had known nothing about it. Eventually, no matter how much she might have tried to hold it back, she was bound to let that out. It doesn't take anything away from the fact she clearly also blamed herself for Buffy leaving but from what she now understood Giles played his part too.

Buffysmglover | February 07, 05:11 CET

Well, I'm not really saying that they shouldn't be frusterated at Buffy, or that the whole fight was pointless, just that it was poorly written. For example, if the Empty Places fight had been written like this...
"Buffy: I rule supremely, you'll shall follow my command.
Everyone: Not if we we kick you out of the team.
Buffy: Oups, didn't think of that."
...then that wouldn't have worked either (extreme exaggregation mode turned off). There's much better structure and writing in general in it which even after two season was something you've come to except. DMP broke from that in a major way and while I understood why they were angry at her, they could have presented it better. I might be a bit miffed that I can't find anyone to relate to on that side of the argument aswell. And after that episode, the "stupid factor" never appeared again.

And I think we might have derailed here a bit, wasn't this topic about Riley? Good discussion indeed.

[ edited by Djungelurban on 2006-02-07 03:29 ]

Djungelurban | February 07, 05:28 CET

I think Riley was a splendid character, one who gave Buffy a chance to grow and understand herself in a way that supernatural lovers never could...and I think Mark Blucas was excellent in his depiction of "Joe Normal" in a world that was anything but normal...his sad, doomed attempt to grow closer to Buffy was heartrendingly realistic to me...I've seen (and have been) that guy who tries to somehow make an impossible relationship work, to the point of cheapening and abasing himself. Having this happen in the vampire sphere only made it creepier and more sad.

Also, the scene where Buffy and Faith have switched bodies and "Buffy" has sex with Riley is so painful and awful, because Riley had to know, somehow, somewhere, that this was not really Buffy...but how could he possibly know it for sure to the point of bringing it up?...just so poignant.

I didn't like Riley. I loved Riley. As a character in the story, and as a person.

Chris inVirginia | February 07, 05:34 CET

Although I haven't had time to more than skim all the wonderful and thoughtful comments in this thread, I wanted to put a marker down and say that as I read each comment, I find myself nodding in agreement.

Which is probably impossible as a logical matter, but is a great testament to y'all's rhetorical skills and knowledge of BtVS. I shall enjoy the thread again at much greater leisure when I've escaped from work's dread confines later on tonight . . . and possibly even have something substantive to say.

SoddingNancyTribe | February 07, 05:44 CET

I actually really liked Riley at first. I was still deeply sympathetic to Buffy at that point. I never cared for Angel particularly, (until he got his own show) but I understood that Buffy was really hurt by his decision to leave. Especially that "no goodbye" slinking off in the aftermath of an apocolypse.

Then she got totally screwed over by Parker, and no matter that she didn't know him that well it is devastating to a girls self-esteem, especially right after the Angel dumping.

So when Riley came along, nice guy, easy on the eyes, I was all for it. I wanted Buffy to be happy at least for a little while.

That thinking changed when I actually saw them interact physically together. Call it chemistry but they just didn't work. Their romantic scenes started making me roll my eyes, and their sex scenes actually made me wince and cringe. Nobody seemed to be enjoying themselves, especially me.

In contrast the Buffy/Spike love scenes raised my temperature. To say the least.

I could see that Buffy loved Angel, I could see that Spike loved Buffy. In the Buffy/Riley relationship all I saw was two actors doing a job and not really enjoying it. That may not have been the case but its what I saw.

And by the way, I loved Season Four. Great individual episodes, totally kick ass fight in Primevil. Loved it.

Xane | February 07, 05:45 CET

Late to the party here, but I like Riley more on every rewatching. I disagree with the post saying he was shallow. He was just the wrong guy at the time. And don't we all have one of those in our past, dammit?

cronopio | February 07, 05:45 CET

cronopio: And don't we all have one of those in our past, dammit?

Or, haven't we all been one of those in our past, dammit?

Chris inVirginia | February 07, 06:00 CET

Chris in Virginia Well said! What the heck, I made some bonehead decisions. And to keep this on topic, I don't think Buffy should have caught that helicopter.

cronopio | February 07, 06:07 CET

I think we were absolutely meant to love Riley. We were supposed to be wary of the Initiative but cheer on Riley as he learned the better way to deal with the supernatural. Everything about the way they set up Riley seemed to scream 'love me', and anyone who's listed to a Doug Petrie commentary knows at least one writer was smitten with the character, and not in a 'character you love to hate' kind of way in my opinion. Riley was the one who punched out Parker for instance. He was always standing up for Buffy to his friends and he was the one in "Superstar" who advocated trusting Buffy and her crazy 'something's wrong with Jonathan' theory when none of the Scoobies really believed her. I think the problem the writers had was that MB and SMG had negligable romantic chemistry and Angel was always going to be a tough act to follow. I thought the Parker/Buffy romance was placed specifically so Riley wouldn't be 'rebound guy'. So I suppose my key problem with this article is I disagree with its basic premise. However, it is nice to actually read some thought out discussion of the character.

helcat | February 07, 07:10 CET

Nicely put, helcat.

Riley...standup dude...righteous man...a good, church-going soul...and what a neat thing THAT was!...he was just the absolute right guy in the absolute wrong situation...and he was smart enough, emotionally, to realize it...pretty strong, and heroic to me.

Chris inVirginia | February 07, 07:40 CET

Ahhh, well, when people start talking about how good the thread was, it must be over. Was it good for you, too?

Anyway, to pile on Xander a little more, here are some of the things I think he got wrong in Into the Woods. Again, this is with full understanding of where he was coming from, and understanding that he acted with the best of intensions. It's also coming from about 30 years more life experience than Xander had; at his age, I would probably have been just as obnoxious.

First, he tried to fix his friend's relationship problems. This is number one on the list of good deeds that will never go unpunished.

Second, he didn't listen. He basically told Buffy off, without even a basic check-in to understand what had transpired in the past few minutes. Given the way the break-up fell out, with the ultimatum and all, Xander missed some crucial information.

Third, his message was very contradictory. As Saje noted, his words said "if he's not the one, let him go," but his tone and body language said "don't be an idiot, he's the one." That's the message that Buffy got, and it's the one Xander intended. Beyond that, the message was, "you're the one who has to fix this," and Buffy got that one, too. Perhaps of all the content in Xander's message, that's the one she really shouldn't have gotten.

Fourth, you don't give personal advice on painful issues by lecturing people. Yes, we all have opinions on our friends' personal issues. My best friend is in her mid-40's and will probably never have a happy relationship. I think I understand why, but there's no way I'll ever say it to her or to anyone else. Unless she asks, and even then I'll only answer the questions that she actually does ask. As a friend, I can be there to share the pain, and to be her companion on her journey. Beyond that, she has to find her own answers, if they're going to have any meaning for her. Xander didn't have a clue about that.

Fifth, Xander and Buffy were both under the delusion that there is a "that's the one" answer to romance. Finding a great match-up is hard, but they do tend to happen several times over the course of a lifetime. Beyond that, good relationships are much harder; they need communications and trust and respect and all kinds of other things that had all broken down between Buffy and Riley by that point.

Which is perhaps the thing that grated most for me. Buffy had already made the right decision. She made that decision in the heat of anger, but it was the right answer. Unfortunately, Buffy wasn't sure enough of herself to stand by that answer when Xander started pushing her buttons. So the decision got un-made, which made the break-up all that much harder for her.

As for Dead Man's Party.... Horrible episode. No resolution to issues that needed serious resolution. Beyond that, the whole idea of throwing an open party in Buffy's house just didn't work. I can't imagine the Scoobies would have done that to a friend, no matter how angry they were. (Also, wasn't the party Oz's idea? Oz wasn't one of the people Buffy hurt, and Oz usually had more smarts than that.)

With that, it's past my bedtime. Nighty-night, all.

MissKittysMom | February 07, 08:01 CET

I'll be brief.
While your 30 years of extra life experience might be good and all, it's not everyone's cup of tea. I can just look to myself that I would really have needed a Xander during certain time in my past. So while those words might not have help you, they would have helped me in a similiar situation. Now, this is not the issue here, since he wasn't trying to help either me nor you but instead Buffy.

And yeah, some people you gotta be very direct with and Buffy would be one of those people. She's so caught up with being pissed off at Riley that she needs this kind of sledgehammer wake up call that Xander delivered to actually realise what she was doing, even though it turned out to be too late.

And I'm not convinced that it was the right decision. While he might not be the right guy for Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I'm personally think he was the right guy for Buffy Summers. And after the season 7 finale that was who she became it seems like and he'd fit like a glove there.

OK, so maybe not so brief, but atleast I tried to limit myself.

Djungelurban | February 07, 08:41 CET

Well I just read back through the thread more carefully and Sari's post way up above really resonated with me.

"Riley was a safe relationship exactly because she could keep him at a distance, and he didn't spark any intense reaction in her. That's why she didn't go all angsty with him, as she did with Angel, or all obsessed and passionate and crazy, as she did with Spike."

The idea that Riley was supposed to be the nice guy without a lot of spark and chemistry makes a lot of sense. So she went for the guy that was unable to hurt her, because she just didn't feel that much.

Sari, you made me feel better about Riley, Buffy, her relationships, Season 6 and 7, and even The Cookie Dough Speech!

Everyone should go up and re-read her (or his?) post.

Xane | February 07, 09:25 CET

I agree with VWAG in the last post and would like to add the theme of denial. I thought Dead Man's Party was dealing with people's lack of perspective on other people's lives and how difficult that can make communication as well as the role that denial plays in all that. Among other things, denial promotes putting blame on other people and keeping yourself from seeing things from other's perspective. The blame game was touched on in Anne both when Lilly accuses Buffy of causing the problems when Lilly had been the one to come to Buffy for help and when Joyce blames Giles for Buffy leaving. (So human, so annoying.) Joyce had every reason to be angry with Giles, but she never took any responsibility for telling Buffy not to come back. She barely acknowledged that it happened even when Buffy brought it up directly.

Xander has no way to know what effect his omission of telling Willow's plan to Buffy may or may not have had on her fight with Angel, but he has that to deal with and the fact that he did what Buffy told him to do, left with Giles and did not come back to help her. I mean logically he should not feel guilty about not coming back to help her, but he has never been logical. He has always tried to help her even against her orders and a year before, it had saved her life. If he lets himself, he has to feel like he failed her by not being there when whatever happened to her, happened.

Guilt makes people lash out and people lashed. I get angry watching it, and do not enjoy the episode very much, but I do not find it out of character or unbelievable at all...except maybe the, you know, zombies...if it weren't BtVS, and all.

As far as Riley being the right guy for Buffy as opposed to BtVS, I don't think they can be separated. Buffy always wanted to and that is what made her keep hanging on to this fantasy of how great a normal life with a normal guy would be. I think she did resolve that by the end, but IMO Riley would not have been the resolution. He had been the fantasy that she had clung to, not the reality of what she needed.

People on this thread have started mentioning knowing or having been that guy in someone's life, the good guy that was just not the right guy. I remember sitting alone, many years ago, during my second relationship, the one with the (semi) normal guy after the doomed, volatile, passionate first one, thinking something like, "OK, this isn't like my relationship with ______. That's good. Of course there's no passion, no excitement, no fire. It's boring, but we're not fighting. Maybe boring isn't so bad. Maybe that's more like what a relationship should be. What's so bad about boring?" Of course I not only found out, I already knew. It did not last long but we stayed in touch. When my son and I spent a great weekend with him and his wife and son at a reunion 20 years later, all I could think when I looked at his wife was "God bless that woman. She is great with him. I would probably have committed homicide 18 years ago and we both would have missed out on pretty good lives." ;-) We were both good people, as was my first boyfriend, but we were not good together. It is best to learn as much as you can from what you went through and move on.

Oh, and for whoever was worried that those of us on the Western shore of the pond would be insulted by Giles's comment, don't worry, we can take it. (I love that line.) It was after all written by Americans for an American audience and then sent to England. We rather like making fun of ourselves and others' views of us.

newcj | February 07, 09:37 CET

Ok, so if Riley is her fantasy and not what she needed, then what is Angel and Spike then. Definitely not what she need, one relationship made her miserable and the other made her "miserabler". Besides, Angel will never settle down enough to actually have a normal relationship, there will always be another The Scourge coming. Also, the fact that it was such a passionate relationship is worrying in itself, since those rarely work out. And Spike can't maintain a normal relationship anyway so that's out. So what does she need? All in all, I think its safe to say that Riley is her best long-term fit so far, but I can buy that neither actually works. Maybe she should just settle down with Xander. :)

Djungelurban | February 07, 10:09 CET

Uh, just for the record, I never said anything about Angel or Spike being good for her...or Buffy for them, though they all did help each other grow, painful as it might have been in each case. Why do we have to pick a guy for Buffy that she has already tried out or known for years? I don't get that. Does she live in a small town before the invention of the bicycle? She can have great affection for the men who have been in her life but have been wrong for her without getting back together with them. Personally I think she should move on and so should all of them. There are how many millions of other men out there (and who knows how many demons. ;-) ) Let her find someone new. Hey, none of us were fond of any of these guys until Joss introduced them to us. He can introduce us and them to some more sexy people...for Buffy...and for...the others...

...Goes to bed with expectations of very pleasant dreams...

;-D

newcj | February 07, 11:12 CET

MissKittysMom, those are all good points. Maybe we can meet in the middle ground that Xander acted for the right reasons (best intentions etc.) but reached the wrong conclusion. Buffy, as you say, acted from anger for the wrongs reasons but reached the right conclusion.

Re: interference, I normally hesitate to suggest things like this since people are seldom easy to categorise but do you think we may have a fundamental difference of perspective due to our respective genders ? It's a cliche but I think with some truth that woman tend to sympathise and understand a friend's feelings while men tend to look for a practical solution (i.e. 'to fix his friend's relationship problems'), sometimes with less understanding than is appropriate. And as you say, it's probably usually a bad idea.

newcj said ...



Good point ;). Joss (and, presumably, the other writers) have such a good ear for idiomatic British English that I actually sometimes forget he's an American (there've been a few mistakes over the years but nothing huge, the odd misplaced 'bloody' and I remember an Angel episode where Wesley refers to his 'pants' which I don't think a British male who moved to the US as an adult would ever do since 'trousers' are such a fundamental piece of clothing, could be wrong of course). I also think the line was poking fun at a certain type of British stuffiness as well so we all get a chance to laugh at ourselves (good for the soul ;).

Anyway, as this thread slides into yesterday's news, presumably to wrap the virtual equivalent of tomorrow's fish and chips, i'll just say again, good thread all.

Saje | February 07, 12:33 CET

"newcj said ...

It was after all written by Americans for an American audience and then sent to England. We rather like making fun of ourselves and others' views of us.


Good point ;). Joss (and, presumably, the other writers) have such a good ear for idiomatic British English that I actually sometimes forget he's an American (there've been a few mistakes over the years but nothing huge, the odd misplaced 'bloody' and I remember an Angel episode where Wesley refers to his 'pants' which I don't think a British male who moved to the US as an adult would ever do since 'trousers' are such a fundamental piece of clothing, could be wrong of course). I also think the line was poking fun at a certain type of British stuffiness as well so we all get a chance to laugh at ourselves (good for the soul ;)."


Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that we like laughing at you guys too. ;-)

A quick thought on the "pants" issue (that no one will see.) I don't know ATS very well and if Wesley said it, I could see that as being a problem. I have read people object to Spike using "pants" in the button to Anya's fake seduction scene in S7. ("I need my pants.") I thought, admittedly as an American, that it worked for two reasons. 1. "Trousers" would simply not get the laugh on the botton of the scene. It is not funny in that line. 2. I have no problem seeing Spike starting to use "pants" the moment he and Buffy are standing around naked after mad sex and Spike says, "Buffy, do you see my trousers anywhere?" To which Buffy says something like, " 'Trousers?' Yeah, your 'trousers' are underneath the hole in the wall we fell through at the beginning of the night." Spike would not want to be seen as being stuffy, and "trousers" is a formal, old-fashioned word here.

newcj | February 07, 17:23 CET

I don't have a problem with Wes or Spike using pants instead of trousers, especially Spike who watches lots of tv. I say pants all the time and that's just through watching lots of American tv/movies.

Paul_Rocks | February 07, 18:30 CET