Going to a Higher Place

[botias]

From Jane Espenson's blog:

If I were sitting down to write a House spec, I think I'd start by listing emotional moments I want to see that character go through. Regret? Genuine undistanced anger? A need for a human connection? What would cause that emotion? What would that emotion cause? I'd start working backwards from there. Notice that I am not starting with a disease.

Me, apparently I sit down to write and go, 'Hmmm, what would make Buffy do Spike?'

Options:

1) Arrange for Buffy to be really depressed and disconnected and flailing

2) Make it her solemn Chosen duty

3) Put her under a spell

Comments

[herself_nyc]

Ha.
I never think so consciously about writing as that.
But subconsciously I seem to proceed from the same general assumption: what would make Buffy fall for Spike? What would make them have to temporarily break apart so I can bring them back together? Rinse and repeat.

[rahirah]

Huh. I start from "What are the possible implications of Background Information X and Philosophical Question Y?" I figure if I attend to that, Buffy will come up with a good reason to do Spike on her own somewhere along the way. I mean, let's face it, the girl's inventive.

[botias.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I don't know if I do or not. Jane Espenson, that seems to be her method. She says that she creates comedy not by 'being funny' but by analyzing comedy that works and reproducing it. The same with writing scripts that have emotional zing, apparently.

So far, my fic is pure self-indulgence. I start with something I want to happen and go from there, except for the claimy fic which I just thought would be fun(ny). This probably explains why my fic is short and devoid of interesting conflict. Now, Jane, she starts with something the characters want more than anything (and the audience as well presumably) and then arrange for them to get it it a way that turns out to cost them very, very dearly. No wonder she got on so well with Joss.

[herself_nyc]

I am always (admiringly) flummoxed by her writing advice, because it's so not at all what I do when I write fiction. My novels always arise out of some dim vague flicker of a thought about a person, some detail about them that catches my interest, and then I go from there. I never ask myself the kinds of questions she does. Maybe I should! But I don't.

[herself_nyc]

So intellectual. ;)

[botias.livejournal.com]

Spike is the very definition of an attractive nuisance. I'll give you that much. :) Someone really ought to file a class action lawsuit. I've lost untold hours of work time, and experienced a great deal of emotional pain and suffering.

It's hard for me, because I love the romantic potential, talk about epic, but it seems to me that doing Spike is strongly counter to Buffy's core values. It's quite possible to change Buffy, and Spike as well, and very interesting to think about what it takes to make people 180 on issues they feel strongly about, but I quite like 'because it's wrong' Buffy. I dun want her to change.

[botias.livejournal.com]

I don't write the way she does either, but I love reading her blog. I find I do the same sorts of things that she discusses sub-consciously (whether this is emulation from a decade or three of voracious reading, or some hard-wired way in which the brain creates narratives, or a bit of both, I do not know) so I find it wonderfully revelatory to have her discuss things and how they work that I had never before thought of as 'things'.

Some people like the Great and Mysterious Oz, but I've always been the sort that is delighted to discover it is actually a very clever trick that even a tiny old man can do.

[rahirah]

Well, a good deal depends on what definition of wrong you're using.

[rahirah]

Nah, I just like exploring the parts of the Jossverse marked "Here There Be Dragons."

[prophecygirrl.livejournal.com]

Or, possibly, 4)All of the above?

Whatever it takes, babe, whatever it takes.

[botias.livejournal.com]

5) Turn them both into characters from a romance novel

The list goes on and on.

[botias.livejournal.com]

I certainly think doing Spike might have some ethical issues, what with Buffy being the vampire slayer in residence. I think mostly though, I mean the aspect of Buffy that Faith was mocking. Buffy's idealism really. The belief that doing what one thinks is right and just has meaning, that human (human/demon?) relationships can and more to the point should be more than making very satisfactory use of someone. I don't think Spike was a good match for her on the show, so I don't think Buffy was just being bigoted in being unwilling to open her heart and her home to him. I like that Buffy did not become cynical and settle for what she could have with Spike or decide using him that way was OK.