Back then I was assuming that whatever was behind the Slayer's power and destiny was a holy force, and Buffy's brush with death might have supercharged her due to brief closer proximity to it.

That explanation doesn't gibe with the Shadow Men and the swirly gray cloud of disturbing symbolism, but I guess the metaphor of the Hero's Journey with a return from the underworld resulting in newfound strength and knowledge still works pretty well.

I guess the metaphor of the Hero's Journey with a return from the underworld resulting in newfound strength and knowledge still works pretty well.

It does. What is more amazing is that DVD commentary leads me to believe that Joss hadn't planned out the two slayers at one time thing when he had her die in S1. It just occurred to him in S2 that there would be another one. There could have been a world without Faith!

Speaking of the Joss. Aaron Sorkin was on Charlie Rose last night. He seemed to think that no good television could really come from a team of writers - that really good shows had to be done by One True Egomaniac only. I love the WW - but dude. Get over yourself already.

But it sparked this question: would it have been better to have had seven seasons of Buffy with Jossy goodness sprinkled among otherwriter goodness (and, yes, sometimes not-so-goodness) OR four seasons of Joss-only Buffy and no Angel and no Firefly and one truly crazy and annoying Joss?

I take seven seasons and the resulting only mostly crazy Joss, myself.

Hmm, tough call. I think Angel and Firefly tip the balance for me, but if it were based on Buffy alone, almost everything I go back and rewatch frequently from Seasons 4-7 are Joss episodes. I'd have voted for 4 Joss-only seasons, provided the mushrooms only affected his personal life and not the quality of the show.

provided the mushrooms only affected his personal life and not the quality of the show.

Snerk! It was kind of - not good - but, right somehow - to watch Sorkin squirm when Rose asked him if he was "clean." I mean, I felt bad for the guy - but COME ON! You can't think of one good mushroom joke for those occasions? You're a writer!

His next series is going to be a behind-the-scenes of a sketch comedy show. Lord help him.

Sort of Sports Night Live, then?

One can only hope it's as good as Sports Night.

But here's a little prayer I'll be saying until then:

TV Powers that Be: Please stop everyone, including Sorkin, from doing that *thing* where they have characters rapidly go back and forth using the same words over and over in different ways as a representation for how.people.actually.talk. I don't talk like that. No one I know talks like that. And it's spreading - it's on almost every show now. Please make it stop.

You know what I mean.:

Character 1: "The meeting is on Thursday."
Character 2: "Thursday?"
Character 1: "It's Thursday. The meeting? It's Thursday."
Extra walking quickly through scene: "Did she say the meeting was Thursday?"
Character 2: "I think she said the meeting was Thursday."

Maybe it's just me, but I see this EVERYWHERE now.

They all stole that from Sports Night.

Or from the Gellin Dr. Schol's commercial, who stole it from Sports Night.

(20 - not 19, not that that matters, but...)

I don't see how this was bad of Willow. She thought she was doing the right thing - and so did Xander, Anya, and Tara. If you think Willow was wrong in doing this, then she shares the blame with the others.

No. Willow knew she was doing wrong. She knew this, because Forever was a huge bang-up set-up for it. Tara also should have questioned it. Anya's never had much of a moral compass. Xander is too trusting.

Willow didn't tell anyone she had to slaughter Bambi to raise Buffy - and lied to the other three about the "vino de madre". Willow was behind not telling Spike, Dawn, and Giles. Willow was the most culpable, and Willow had various reasons for wanting to raise Buffy. The world was undoubtedy a scary place for them without Buffy (so - that's an understandable reason); she mourned the loss of her friend (also understandable); she was concerned about her friend's fate (understandable); she wanted to raise the dead, because it's fucking cool, and maybe you'd better not piss her off.

She didn't only not imagine Buffy was in heaven because it had been their experience that people went to hell. When Angel went to Acathla-Hell and Buffy went to Anne-Hell, their bodies disappeared. She didn't want to know that Buffy was in heaven, so she didn't ask herself the hard question, and didn't try to determine the answer. And when she found out her friend was in heaven, she didn't take step one towards trying to help her, other than mind-swiping that friend and the whole rest of the gang and herself as well.

I don't hate Willow, but Willow doesn't fool me. I think Willow suffered some consequences from the flaying of Warren. I don't know what else they could have done to her without making the narrative suffer. But she left me cold after that.

That was the other problem with the magic crack. It dis-engaged Willow from the arc she'd been following up till then, which had actually been really well set-up. As far back as season 4, with the 'my will be done' spell and nearly casting the dark spell on Oz and Verruca. After the bizarre crack storyline, Willow got some consequences from the flaying of Warren, but we never get to see her apoligise to Buffy or Giles, (or Tara, sniff) or deal with any of that early season 6 stuff. And I don't think we could have, cause the crack broke the storyline. Suddenly all Willow's motivations were different and the set-up went to waste.

But I gather this is only the millionth crack rant on this board, so I'll stop now.

Woo-hoo! Wrod Cindy. Why do I post anything? (Note to self: Stop thinking thoughts. Just wait until Cindy thinks and writes them and then nod.)

Willow was manipulative and deceptive through the whole thing because she knew it was wrong.