I never liked all of Whedon's "There has to be the death of someone you care about" rhetoric to justify it. It was like -- she redeemed herself as a killer by dying, blam, that's it.
I dont' have words for how much that quote annoyed me. If that's what they were going for, why not kill Xander or Giles? Why pick the one person that also comes with Free Added Redemption Accessory to complicate the message? If what he wanted was a simple, sharp shock, he shouldn't have picked a character that makes it seem as if something specific was being said about redemption equalling death, since we already had one example going up in flames in the same ep to reinforce that idea. He may have thought he was presenting a picture of "ooh, it's tragic because you care," how it came off was "this isn't tragic because nobody cares," especially with all the grating joking as a followup. Bleah.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Redemption = Death
Date: 2004-04-30 12:37 am (UTC)I dont' have words for how much that quote annoyed me. If that's what they were going for, why not kill Xander or Giles? Why pick the one person that also comes with Free Added Redemption Accessory to complicate the message? If what he wanted was a simple, sharp shock, he shouldn't have picked a character that makes it seem as if something specific was being said about redemption equalling death, since we already had one example going up in flames in the same ep to reinforce that idea. He may have thought he was presenting a picture of "ooh, it's tragic because you care," how it came off was "this isn't tragic because nobody cares," especially with all the grating joking as a followup. Bleah.