by Dana5140 » Tue Mar 02, 2010 7:17 am
Well, I have studeied reader-response theory and follow what Stanley Fish has to say about it. In a nutshell, the basic point is that the reader constructs meaning from the story, and that meaning may not be what meaning the author intended. For example, Moby Dick is the story of a man obsessed with catching a whale, and it was written back in the 18th Century and carries with it the ethos of that time, but we could read this story as, for example, an example of how coroporate structure annhiliates the consumer, just saying. Now, certainly corporate structure did not exist at the time Melville was writing, but we bring to our reading our own values, beliefs, etc. and that can color how we read and interpret the story. Here is another example- did Willow and Tara have sex the night of "New Moon rising" at the end of the episode? You never saw it happen, right? So you construct meaning from what you see at the end, the words Willow says, the tenderness with which she says it, Tara's reaction, etc.
To make a long story short, reader-response sort of suggests that you can end Buffy before Seeing Red occurred, even though the canon of Buffy demonstrates it did. We can't pretend Seeing Red never happened, because it did, but we can construct a story where our tale ends before that happened, and then we can create a community where we set certain rules to follow. If you come here, well, you sort of agree to follow the rules; if you don't want to, then you go where you don't have to. Now, I do not say that to suggest this is not a viable topic. More and more time has passed since what happened, happened- it is now like, what, 9 years and this distance has for many people softened the pain they felt. Not all people, just for some- and this means that topics that previously were really OT might be more in than in the past.
There are a lot of reasons to dislike Joss Whedon. I thought DH sucked horribly, and made a virtue of prostitution- who th ehell were we supposed to root for in that show? Echo? She was never herself. Maybe Sierra, who I thought was a far more interesting character. But Dh was an overreach by Whedon. As is the current comic. More than anything, what he has done with these efforts is helped to extinguish my love of Buffy; I find myself not caring- I had hoped to see tara show up inthe comic, but we were told she would not- this is the one area where Whedon cannot move forward because to do so would be to admit a wrong, and in our current culture no one ever does that. So, the comic exists to put an end to Tara, not to valorize her.
Another way to look at this is in terms of shipping. Willow and Tara are a ship, of course. And shippers can be really invested in their ships- I am here for Willow and Tara, as I am in CSI for the GSR- and over on yourtaxdollarsatwork, if you ever try to discuss Grissom and Lady Heather, you will see comments far more foul and profane than anything you see here in discussing Whedon. Why? Becuase of investment. I invested in Willow and Tara; I ove that relation, it gives me pleasure, and I could hardly even tell you why. But it dodes. And when it ended, it hurt- rally hurt, not metaphorically hurt. It was a STUPID decision, and it carried risk and it hurts Whedon to this day. But this place exists to remember the good from that, not to obsess over the bad- because, boy, I did that.
Just a few comments here.
He hurt my nose!
my apologies.
