While watching my DVD set box for Season Four of "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER", I came across this Thanksgiving episode called (4.08) "Pangs" and wrote the following article about it: "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER" RETROSPECT: (4.08) "Pangs"Season Four has never been that popular with fans of "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER". It was the first season that did not feature the vampire Angel as a regular character. And it marked the beginning of Buffy Summer's romance with university teaching assistant/Army demon hunter Riley Finn. And many fans were not that thrilled by the Initiative storyline. I have never had a problem with Season Four. Mind you, I would not count it as among my top four out of seven seasons. But it featured at least two of my favorite "BUFFY"episodes of all time. And one of them is the holiday-themed "Pangs".While preparing a Thanksgiving feast for her close friends in the absence of her mother, University of California Sunnydale student and vampire slayer Buffy Summers encounters the restless and vengeful spirit of a Native American, called Hus, whose people - the Chumash tribe - were wiped out by Spanish and American settlers. Hus's spirit was released during a groundbreaking ceremony for U.C. Sunnydale's new Anthropology building. Hus managed to murder the Curator for the building's museum and a local priest who had attending the ceremony. During her frantic efforts to prepare Thanksgiving and deal with Hus, Buffy is unaware that former boyfriend Angel has returned to Sunnydale to keep an eye on her, after a friend of his (former regular character Cordelia Chase) has received a vision of her being in danger. She is also unaware that soon-to-be boyfriend Riley Finn is part of an U.S. Army program called the Initiative, which hunts down and experiments on demons. One of the Initiative's victims turned out to be Buffy's current nemesis, vampire Spike, who had managed to escape from his Initiative prison in the previous episode, (4.07) "The Initiative". Due to his inability to feed upon or commit violence against humans, Spike is slowly starving. He first seeks help and refuge from fellow vampire Harmony, who refuses to have anything to do with him. Desperate, he turns to Buffy and the other Scoobies for refuge in exchange for information about the Initiative."Pangs" did provide a few problems for me. One, the episode's writer, Jane Espenson, erroneously stated that the Chumash had been wiped out. Despite the Spanish, Mexican and American governments; the band still exists. Two, Buffy informed her friends that her mother Joyce left Sunnydale to spend Thanksgiving with an aunt. Why did Buffy, who was eighteen at the time, stay in Sunnydale? Why did she fail to accompany her mother for what was obviously a family gathering? Did Buffy have something against this particular "Aunt Pauline"? Three, during her last fight with Hus and the Chumash spirits he had summoned, Buffy unsuccessfully used her knife on Hus and claimed that he and his fellow spirits do not die. Yet, in a scene later, Angel managed to break the neck of one Chumash spirit and impale another with a knife. Hmmmm . . . I smell inconsistency in the air. And four, Angel's visit to Sunnydale led to the "ANGEL" Season One episode, (1.08) "I Will Remember You", which I loathe with every fiber of my being.Aside from these narrative hiccups, "Pangs" remains a personal favorite of mine. At first glance, it seemed like a stand-alone episode that had nothing to do with the season and series' plot arc. As it turned out, it did."Pangs" marked the first time Spike would hang out with the Scoobies. It led to another setback in Buffy and Angel's relationship. It marked the first time that the Scoobies became aware of the Initiative, thanks to Spike. And it provided another chapter in Buffy's growing relationship with Riley Finn. This seems like an awful lot, considering that this episode mainly focused on Buffy dealing with a Thanksgiving feast and a vengeance spirit - two topics that were quickly resolved by the end. But Espenson and director Michael Lange. But the best things I can say about "Pangs" is that it featured superb performances and some incredibly funny dialogue and camera visuals. I tried to think of some of the best dialogue found in the episode and came across several lines. Among my favorites featured Buffy's ability to remain focused . . . or obssessed with her feast, while discussing their problems with Hus. However, one should not be surprised that Spike was responsible for the funniest moment in the episode in a scene that featured both Buffy and her friend Willow Rosenberg's reluctance to destroy Hus, due to their guilt over the country's past with Native Americans:BUFFY: Will, you know how bad I feel. This is eating me up -- (to Anya, who holds up the bottle of brandy) -- a quarter cup, and let it simmer -- (to Willow, as Anya goes back) -- but even though it's hard, we
have to end this. Yes, he's been wronged, and I personally would be ready to apologize...
SPIKE: Oh, someone put a stake in me!
XANDER: You got a lot of volunteers in here...
SPIKE: I just can't take this mamby-pamby boo-hooing over the bloody Indians!
WILLOW: The preferred term is --
SPIKE: You won! All right? You came in and you killed them and you took their land. That's what conquering nations do! That's what Caesar did, he's not going around saying "I came, I conquered, I felt really bad about it!" The history of the world is not people making friends. You had better weapons, you massacred them, end of story!
BUFFY: Well, I think the Spaniards actually did a lot of... not that I don't like Spaniards...
SPIKE: Listen to you! How are you gonna fight anybody with that attitude?
WILLOW: We don't want to fight anybody.
BUFFY: I just want to have Thanksgiving.
SPIKE: Yeah, good luck.
WILLOW: If we could talk to him --
SPIKE: You exterminated his race. What could you possibly say that would make him feel better? It's kill or be killed here. Take your bloody pick.James Marsters really acted the hell out of that scene. And I am not surprised. To this day, I believe that his portrayal of Spike was one of the best television performances I have ever seen . . . period. And he was really marvelous in this episode. So were Anthony Stewart Head, who did a top-notch job in giving a comic twist to a Rupert Giles who found himself manipulated by Buffy into holding the Scoobies' Thanksgiving feast at his apartment; Alyson Hannigan, who was also superb as best friend/witch Willow Rosenberg, who did not hesitate to express her conflict between dealing with Hus and her guilt over the region's ugly past in dealing with the Chumash people. Nicholas Brandon and Emma Caufield gave fine support as Buffy's two other friends, Xander Harris and former vengeance demon Anya Jenkins. Marc Blucas was charming as Buffy's soon-to-be boyfriend, Riley Finn. And he was ably supported by an exuberant Leonard Roberts. Mercedes McNab displayed excellent comic timing in scenes that featured recently sired vampire Harmony Kendall's encounters with Spike and Xander. David Boreanaz took a break from his new series at the time, "ANGEL" to give an intense, yet at times funny performance as Buffy's ex-vampire squeeze, Angel. But the real star of this episode was Sarah Michelle Gellar. She gave both a hilarious, yet poignant performance, revealing Buffy's somewhat obssessive determination to make her Thanksgiving a success. In fact, I believe I enjoyed her performance even more than Marsters. And that is quite an accomplishment, considering that Marsters is a natural-born scene stealer.Yes, "Pangs" had a few problems. And its main narrative surrounding the dangers of a Native American vengeance spirit did not exactly strike me as memorable. However, I do believe that the narrative made an interesting comment on how conflicted Americans have become in viewing our county's history. More importantly, Spike's comments on the cirumstances that led to Hus' path of vengeance is a brutal reminder of how monstrous human beings can be - a foreshadow of the Scoobies' future behavior later in the series. Thanks to Jane Espenson's hilarious script, Michael Lange's direction and a superb cast led by Sarah Michelle Geller, "Pangs" remains one of my favorite "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER" episodes to this day.
"WHY RHONDA WILCOX DOES NOT MATTER"
I am feeling very emotional right now. I have managed to read nine out of twelve chapters of "WHY BUFFY MATTERS: The Art of Buffy the Vampire Slayer". After reading the latest chapter called, Fear: The Princess Screamed Once - Power, Silence and Fear in "Hush", I decided not to finish the book. Why? The last chapter really pissed me off.
What I am about to say will probably not generate any sympathy toward my views. It has a lot to do with Rhonda Wilcox's opinion on the character, Riley Finn. And Riley, bless his heart, is probably one of the more hated characters in Buffyverse. But you know what? Regardless of how other fans may view Riley, what Wilcox had to say about him in her book pissed me off. It was the last straw.
The first straw - at least for me - had nothing to do with Riley. It had to do what Wilcox had to say about a character created for another fictional universe. Earlier in the book, Wilcox compared the characters of Buffy Summers and Harry Potter in a chapter titled, When Harry Met Buffy: Buffy Summers, Harry Potter and Heroism. Not only did Wilcox compared Buffy and Harry in this chapter, but their friends as well. This idiot woman had the nerve to compare the characters of Xander Harris (BUFFY) and Ron Weasley (HARRY POTTER) in the following manner:
"Their (Xander and Ron) lack of special gifts accentuates the loyalty and bravery that Ron and Xander each offers as a friend to a character frequently placed in abnormal danger.
Thus, in each world, there is a triumvirate of friends: Harry and Buffy each have a modest, normal male and an unusually intelligent female as friends."
Ron Weasely lacked special gifts? Ron? He was a wizard. He did not lack any supernatural powers like Xander. Nor was he a less gifted magic practitioner than Harry or Hermioine. Ron lacked Harry's special gift for Defense Against the Dark Arts and Quidditch. But he was still proficient in both skills. He lacked Hermioine's intelligence. But so did Harry. And Ron was better at Defense Against the Dark Arts magic than Hermioine. Most importantly, Ron was a very skillful chess player - something that neither Harry or Hermioine could boast. Apparently, Ms. Wilcox has forgotten this and decided to judge Ron's character based on his "Idiot at Hogswarts" portrayal in the movies. Not a very good researcher, is she?
But her comparison of Ron Weasley and Xander Harris was nothing in compare to what she had to say about Riley in the chapter about "Hush". In one passage, Wilcox described Riley in this manner:
"It connects Riley with the myth of Virgil's Aeneas, the hero of 'Aeneid', one of the three great Greco-Roman epics. (And I refer you to C.W. Marshall's article on Giles and Aeneas in 'Slayage' to suggest the further applicability of this particular source.) Aeneas is perhaps the most purely patriarchal of the classic heroes. This (to me) dull and duty-bound hero is an excellent parallel for Riley, the least liminal of Buffy's significant others.
This woman is a moron. Okay, perhaps I may have been a little too harsh. But Wilcox actually have the nerve to label Riley as "purely patriarchal". Riley Finn? Had Wilcox been so blinded by her dislike of him that she failed to notice that he was hardly patriarchal? For me, Riley's problem - at least in early and mid Season Four - seemed to be his willingness to blindly adhere to authority figures, whether they were patriarchal or in the case of Maggie Walsh, matriarchal. If one good thing that came out of Riley's relationship with Buffy was that he learned to stop following authority figures in such a mindless manner. Yes, he had rejoined the Army. But post-Season Five Riley was open-minded enough to allow Buffy to make a decision on what to do about Spike when they learned he was smuggling demon eggs in Season Six's "As You Were". It was the same Riley who helped Buffy get rid of the chip in Spike's brain in Season 7's "The Killer in Me", despite his dislike of the vampire.
She also claimed that following the end of Riley's relationship with Buffy, he decided to invest his identity in being a fighter and not a lover:
"Those familiar with the Bufy story beyond the standalone "Hush" episode can see further parallels: after Aeneas and Queen Dido's love affair, he leaves to fight for his (future) country and she kills herself. Just so, Riley eventually decides to invest his identity in being a fighter, not a lover; he rejoins the Army and departs the Hellmouth, leaving Buffy to kill herself during the battle against Glory (and consider the military implications of that phrase: the battle 'against' Glory)."
Apparently, Wilcox forgot that not only did Riley rejoin the Army, he GOT MARRIED! She forgot or had decided to dismiss that one little tidbit.
Later, she accused Riley of fearfulness:
"But to return to the fearfulness of Riley. That phrasing ambiguously allows two implications: that Riley is fearful, and that Riley is to be feared. And I would argue that this episode suggests the same - and applies the fear to all that Riley stands for."
If Wilcox was referring to Riley's inability to communicate to Buffy his fears about their relationship in Season Five - I could understand this. But . . . as usual, she overlooked something else. Namely Buffy's inability to communicate her own fears to Riley. She also failed to mention that Buffy's fear of being emotional damaged in a relationship after her experiences with Angel led her to get involved with Riley in the hopes of having a "normal" relationship. I suspect that by Season Five, Riley began to fear this. And this is where Riley's fearfulness came in. He failed to communicate his fears to Buffy before it was too late.
Had Wilcox been so willing overlook Riley's more complex nature in order to paint Riley in such a one-dimensional manner? It seemed like it. In fact, she seemed so driven by her dislike of the character that she dumped the blame of their break-up solely upon his shoulders. And as I had stated earlier, she literally viewed Riley as some human version of the Gentlemen from "Hush":
"Riley is both Aeneas and the Gentlemen. Heroic self-denial and repression - with all the attendant miseries."
And;
"Consider the closing scene. This episode presents patriarchy as horror in the form of the Gentlemen, and patriarchy with its best face on as the kindly, brave Riley. Riley can help Buffy defeat that worst side of patriarchy, but is he, its best incarnation, enough for Buffy?"
Riley Finn is a symbol of the patriarchy of the Gentlemen? Riley Finn was the series' best incarnation of patriarchy? Wilcox was speaking of a character who had allowed his view points and his life to revolve around women - whether it was Maggie Walsh in Season Four or Buffy in early Season Five. I only hoped that he had managed to break this habit with his marriage between Seasons Five and Six.
Right now, I am desperately trying to maintain my temper . . . and remember that I am discussing fictional characters. I realize that Ms. Wilcox, like many Buffyverse fans disliked Riley. I understand. I dislike Angel. I have for a long time. But I have always felt that Angel had the capacity to grow as a character. I have also experienced moments when I have either sympathized or even liked him. But I hope and pray that I would never devolve into the kind of characterizations of Angel or any other fictional character I may dislike in the same way that Wilcox has characterized Riley Finn. Her portrait of Riley in her book only makes me realize that I had wasted my time reading her book.
Below is a look into (1.08) "I Will Remember You", a Season One episode from "ANGEL":
"ANGEL" RETROSPECTIVE: (1.08) "I Will Remember You"
One of the most popular episodes to air on ”ANGEL” is the eighth episode of Season One called (1.08) “I Will Remember You”. This particular episode served as a follow-up to the Season Four ”BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER” episode, (4.08) “Pangs” in which Angel, the vampire with a soul, had paid a surreptitious visit to Sunnydale in order to protect his former love, vampire slayer Buffy Summers, from a malignant spirit during the Thanksgiving holidays.
After Buffy had learned of Angel’s visit to Sunnydale, she pays a visit of her own to Angel’s detective office in Los Angeles. There, she confronts him about his surreptitious assistance back in Sunnydale. They are attacked by a Mohra demon. When Angel kills the demon, he is restored to mortality by its powerful blood. After The Oracles - a link to The Powers That Be - confirms that Angel is human again, Angel and Buffy spend a blissful night together. Unfortunately, Doyle receives a vision that the Mohra demon has regenerated itself. Instead of recruiting Buffy, Angel leaves her to kill the demon for good. In the ensuing battle, Angel discovers the consequences of having only human strength. Buffy must come to his rescue and slay the demon herself. Angel returns to The Oracles, who that if he remains human, Buffy will face the minions of darkness alone and die much sooner. They agree to turn back time, so that Angel, accepting the entire cost of the bargain, can kill the Mohra before its blood makes him human. They also inform him that Buffy’s memories of their day together will erase once time is turned back.
I might as well be frank. I really dislike this episode. I almost hate it. Honestly. And although I am not a fan of the Buffy/Angel relationship, the one thing I truly dislike about this episode is the paternalistic manner in which Angel treats Buffy, once he agrees to the Oracles’ bargain. One, I suspect that Angel could not deal having human strength. It still amazes me that many fans have castigated Riley Finn for being unable to deal with Buffy being stronger than him; and yet in this particular episode, Angel seemed to be suffering from the same problem. Then he does something even worse by making that deal with the Powers to resume being a vampire . . . after being told that Buffy would have no memories of their day together. As far as I am concerned, he committed psychic rape via the Oracles and the Powers to Be. Even worse, he only told Buffy about his decision . . . seconds before she lost her memories.
Some fans have used Buffy’s alleged desire for a ”knight in shinning armor” as an excuse for Angel’s behavior. Many of these fans still view Buffy as that 16-18 year-old featured in the series’ first three seasons. And apparently, so does Angel. I really do not see how this desire of Buffy is supposed to condone or excuse Angel's decision to becoming a vampire again at the expense of Buffy’s memories. Others point out that the Oracles had informed Angel that order to prevent circumstances from repeating exactly, he alone will remember all they have shared. Let me see if I understand this. Angel could not tell Buffy that he had erased her memories of their day together, in case the circumstances of that day repeat themselves. Yet, Angel went ahead and informed Buffy that she would lose her memories seconds before she lost them? If Angel wanted to avoid a repetition of that day repeating, he could have told Buffy what had happened . . . and add that they could not stay together, in case the circumstances of that day would be repeated. But Angel did not bother. In fact, he remained silent. Personally, I found his actions appalling.
To me, Angel was a selfish and controlling bastard who could not handle the lack of vampire strength needed to deal with the supernatural beings he had fought, in the first place. Without that strength, he could not be a hero. One, he was stupid enough to go after the Mohra demon when he lacked the strength to fight it. He could have easily allowed Buffy to do so in the first place. And when he found himself forced to depend upon Buffy’s strength to take down the demon, he turned to the Oracles to get his strength back. And all of this happened before he learned of the details surrounding his return as a vampire. I suspect that deep down, his act of sacrifice was nothing more than bullshit. I have always suspected that Angel was nothing more than a control freak, who got his kicks making decisions for others . . . without their consent. If he had really cared about Buffy, he would have never agreed to the spell in the first place. Or . . . he could have told her what happened after the spell went into effect, just as I had pointed out in a previous paragraph. Or he could have told her what he was considering, before he allowed the Powers to Be remove her memories and turn back time. But he did not, because he simply viewed Buffy as a child who had to be controlled . . . by him. And considering that Buffy ended up dead a year-and-a-half later (with Angel not around), it seemed that Angel had given up being a human for nothing.
”I Will Remember You” strikes me as a good example of why I have never been a fan of the Buffy/Angel romance. It has always seemed like an unequal relationship that was never able to develop into an equal one. This episode also reminded me that many seemed to prefer a fictional romance between an infatuated adolescent female and lovesick older man obsessed with her youth and his need to be controlling. To me, the relationship was nothing but a patriarchal wet dream. And Angel's actions in both the ”BUFFY” episode, ”Pangs” and this episode seemed to confirm this.
