Season One, Retcons, and Souls. A Ponderment by Fender.

[fenderlove]

My thoughts are all a-flame over a conversation on the IDW Forum about souls in the Buffyverse. Can souls be involuntarily taken away? We saw Buffy get half of hers involuntarily sucked out in S4, and we know that the Mayor voluntarily sold his, but can the average Jane-or-Joe on the street have their soul taken away against their will in the 'verse?

How do you feel about Season One of BtVS? Do you ignore it? Is it okay to ignore it because of writer/director interviews? Because some stuff gets retconned later, do you pretend that those earlier instances didn't happen or do you find your own personal explanation? Do you have an explanation from a writer, actor, or director that you point to as how you explain particular retcons? Do you have a explanation from another fan (a fansplanation, if you will) that you use? Is it fair to argue that because a writer/director/actor says one thing that flies in the context of the show that one's explanation is somehow more correct than someone only using the show as a basis for their side of the discussion?

Is there really a concrete mythology of the Buffyverse? Or do you believe it can change when the writers/directors decide that it needs to change or it's convenient to change?

F**king magnets. How do they work?

Talk to me. Tell me what you think. :D

Comments

[kerry-220.livejournal.com]

In general I've never really had a problem with retconning and inconsistent canon. Some of the most entertaining debates I've ever read revolve around people trying to fit some of these inconsistencies into a logical sequence. The slayer's and vampire's ever altering powers, character's ages, vampire physiology, time frames, locations, prophecies, Heaven , Hell etc. Some fans are absolutely BRILLIANT at explaining away what is blatantly a goof.

It is, afterall a illusory universe and the writer can do whatever he pleases. I'd absolutely agree that the fundamentals deserve respect, but in most cases 'tweaking' doesn't strike me as much of a sin.

[fenderlove.livejournal.com]

I think everyone's going to have their own perspective of how things work, and you're right, some people are awesome at coming up with ways to make all the pieces fit. I've never really seen the 'verse as all that consistent so I've never really worried all that much about it, but watching others getting offended on behalf of the show's supposed set-in-stone canon has been amusing me greatly. Too bad the thread got locked. Good stuff in there.

My favourite bit of fluctuating vampire power: Angel not being able to open a flimsy security cage door that's got a small padlock on it in Becoming, Part 1 or 2. I love it! XD

[kerry-220.livejournal.com]

I've got a dozen favourite inconsistencies, but the prize for me always goes to "Why We Fight". Really? You can sire a vampire in the ad break? :)

The arguments regarding canon that drive me nuts are those which blatantly ignore everything else that the show has put forward. In particular (and I mention it because it is relevant to the IDW thread) is the absolute belief that the only true representation of souled/unsouled is Angel/Angelus. The more I watched, the more obvious it seemed that Angel was the exception not the rule. Spike is different. Anya is different, Human Darla, Connor-ensouled Darla - all different and offering all manor of perspectives. I love that so many pointed out that you can't pin things down that easily. These things made the story all that more interesting.

[fenderlove.livejournal.com]

I love that so many pointed out that you can't pin things down that easily. These things made the story all that more interesting.
Exactly. There's a rich tapestry to work from and expand. I love Darla and all her twists and turns. While pregnant, she's adamant that she and Angelus never loved another yet in S1 she says that she still loves Angel even if he doesn't love her (situations like that are the saddest thing in the world, according her) and she makes no distinction between Angel and Angelus (Drusilla, on the other hand, does sometimes make a distinction). I can explain these as she just said what she was feeling at the time or whatever would have the maximum effect, and it also could be explained that the love she talked about in S1 was a perverse kind of love, not the hearts and flowers "true" kind, but sometimes I wonder if the writers remembered her earlier appearances in the show.