What do you think?
Rate this book
Popular Culture and Philosophy #4
Buffy: a Caça-Vampiros e a Filosofia: Medos e Calafrios em Sunnydale
O vampiro é um ícone presente na cultura popular, especialmente a televisiva. Assim, temos Buffy, a caça-vampiros. Um observador atento notará uma linguagem universal nesta série e noutros filmes. Estes códigos são as metáforas filosóficas. O aficcionado encontrará temas profundos e a leitura da alma humana na vivência dos personagens que muitas vezes funcionam como um espelho da própria humanidade. Neste livro, o editor James South, o coordenador William Irwin e seus colaboradores souberam identificar em Buffy a influência dos vários pensadores e da filosofia por eles criada. O livro traz sofisticados conceitos filosóficos em metafísica, epistemologia, ética e filosofia política. Alguns capítulos começam com uma questão filosófica difícil, como a amizade ou a punição, e mostram como a série pode ajudar a compreender melhor o problema, fornecendo exemplos e temas. A proposta dos académicos é ajudar o leitor a entender como teorias e conceitos filosóficos interagem com casos específicos, como a irracionalidade humana e o niilismo.
Paperback
First published March 13, 2003
81 people are currently reading
1795 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 102 reviews
May 9, 2014
I was going to give this book a four star rating. Up until the very last article, Feeling For Buffy: The Girl Next Door, I thoroughly enjoyed each argument, even if I had some qualms with them, primarily because, whether or not I agreed, each writer clearly loved both Buffy the character and Buffy the show. Thoroughly loved it. Even when chapter 6's Balderdash and Chicanery: Science and Beyond bored me to the point of, well, not getting the point, it was well-written and loving of the source material; or when chapter 10, "My God, It's Like a Greek Tragedy" increased my dislike for a particular character, when chapter 13's Angel/Buffy star struck Buffy in the Buff annoyed me, when chapter 15's Brownskirts frankly made me worry for its writer, and chapter 17's Justifying the Means sparked a wild argument in me, I was happy with the writing and I was happy with the arguments.
Then I got to the very last chapter. And note that this is where I lowered the rating. Not where I was bored, or annoyed, or weirded out, or argumentative - when I hit the end. Had this chapter been placed earlier on in the book, I might not have dropped a star, but this is something I hold the editor very accountable for. The last chapter, article, whatever, is the last note in your book, what you're going to leave your reader thinking about, the mood you're going to leave them in, even in a philosophy book when there is plenty to think about. That's your last chance to make an impression. The editor chose an article by two men who tout that Buffy is a fun, stupid show about sex.
Seriously. Why include something so insulting to Buffy fans (or at the very least, the people who bought this book and therefore clearly do look deeper at the show), especially at the end?
All the work of the previous articles is shot down and mocked by these two writers as "looking too deep" into a show that simply isn't that good. It claims any deeper discussion of Buffy is from seduction by the snappy dialogue or so on, that there is no depth, and that it brings nothing new to the table. It also claims that the over-evaluation is because these articles are written by adults, that Buffy only appeals to teenagers, and that it appeals to them because sex. And Freud. As an adult (young, but still an adult), who enjoys Buffy and is quite capable of enjoying thorough discussions about its moral repercussions and the questions it brings up, I remain incredibly...ticked off about this article.
For one thing, the article takes a misstep immediately by assuming that Buffy is only for teenagers and therefore adult's interpretations can only be a way of trying to understand how it appeals to teenagers. This is false. They are exploring how it appeals to them, as adults. Second, you cannot make a generalization about why something appeals to a vast group of people. This is what marketing tries to do, yes, and sometimes it's successful, but why I might like something might not be why you like it. For instance, some people are fans of both Buffy and Twilight. Because vampires. I hate Twilight, for many reasons, but for the purposes of comparison to Buffy, it's because I prefer to see vampires defeated, slayed, taken down. Mastered by girl power. (As for the vampires who are not slayed and enjoy a romantic connection to the Slayer, namely Spike and Angel, the ideology of soullessness and soulfulness is interesting enough in itself that I don't mind them. Too much.) Third, they posit that there is nothing deep to Buffy. If that were not so, then (a) there would not be so many perfectly intelligent scholars who write about it, and (b) this book would have sold zero copies. Fourth, their argument is that...sex. So...no.
I hate to go on too long about the negatives, but I felt it necessary to explain why this particular article bugged me so very much (even more than the one that posited that Buffy is racist...against non-humans...that one was just too ridiculous to make me angry) and why it brought down the collection, in my opinion. However, I thoroughly enjoyed the first Codex, as they're called, as well as several other articles exploring the ideals put forth by the show. Personal favorites included chapter 3 "The I in Team": Buffy and Feminist Ethics, chapter 11 Should We Do What Buffy Would Do?, and chapter 18 No Big Win. Granted, the first two are purely based on the fact that they are big Go Buffy! articles, but personal favorite involves personal bias, so I don't feel too bad about that.
So, I do recommend this to anyone who is looking for a deeper analysis of Buffy; however, for anyone who wants to read the collection in its entirety but doesn't want to end on a sour note, I would read Feeling For Buffy first, or at least at the beginning of Codex 5.
Then I got to the very last chapter. And note that this is where I lowered the rating. Not where I was bored, or annoyed, or weirded out, or argumentative - when I hit the end. Had this chapter been placed earlier on in the book, I might not have dropped a star, but this is something I hold the editor very accountable for. The last chapter, article, whatever, is the last note in your book, what you're going to leave your reader thinking about, the mood you're going to leave them in, even in a philosophy book when there is plenty to think about. That's your last chance to make an impression. The editor chose an article by two men who tout that Buffy is a fun, stupid show about sex.
Seriously. Why include something so insulting to Buffy fans (or at the very least, the people who bought this book and therefore clearly do look deeper at the show), especially at the end?
All the work of the previous articles is shot down and mocked by these two writers as "looking too deep" into a show that simply isn't that good. It claims any deeper discussion of Buffy is from seduction by the snappy dialogue or so on, that there is no depth, and that it brings nothing new to the table. It also claims that the over-evaluation is because these articles are written by adults, that Buffy only appeals to teenagers, and that it appeals to them because sex. And Freud. As an adult (young, but still an adult), who enjoys Buffy and is quite capable of enjoying thorough discussions about its moral repercussions and the questions it brings up, I remain incredibly...ticked off about this article.
For one thing, the article takes a misstep immediately by assuming that Buffy is only for teenagers and therefore adult's interpretations can only be a way of trying to understand how it appeals to teenagers. This is false. They are exploring how it appeals to them, as adults. Second, you cannot make a generalization about why something appeals to a vast group of people. This is what marketing tries to do, yes, and sometimes it's successful, but why I might like something might not be why you like it. For instance, some people are fans of both Buffy and Twilight. Because vampires. I hate Twilight, for many reasons, but for the purposes of comparison to Buffy, it's because I prefer to see vampires defeated, slayed, taken down. Mastered by girl power. (As for the vampires who are not slayed and enjoy a romantic connection to the Slayer, namely Spike and Angel, the ideology of soullessness and soulfulness is interesting enough in itself that I don't mind them. Too much.) Third, they posit that there is nothing deep to Buffy. If that were not so, then (a) there would not be so many perfectly intelligent scholars who write about it, and (b) this book would have sold zero copies. Fourth, their argument is that...sex. So...no.
I hate to go on too long about the negatives, but I felt it necessary to explain why this particular article bugged me so very much (even more than the one that posited that Buffy is racist...against non-humans...that one was just too ridiculous to make me angry) and why it brought down the collection, in my opinion. However, I thoroughly enjoyed the first Codex, as they're called, as well as several other articles exploring the ideals put forth by the show. Personal favorites included chapter 3 "The I in Team": Buffy and Feminist Ethics, chapter 11 Should We Do What Buffy Would Do?, and chapter 18 No Big Win. Granted, the first two are purely based on the fact that they are big Go Buffy! articles, but personal favorite involves personal bias, so I don't feel too bad about that.
So, I do recommend this to anyone who is looking for a deeper analysis of Buffy; however, for anyone who wants to read the collection in its entirety but doesn't want to end on a sour note, I would read Feeling For Buffy first, or at least at the beginning of Codex 5.
March 2, 2008
Okay, here's the thing...
I'm a total Buffy geek. It's true, I'm way dumb for the whole thing. I think it's an amazing show, some of the best television ever made. Maybe it caught me at the right time, maybe the themes explored just really float my boat, both of these things are probably true. Do I buy merchandise? Well, I have the calendar because my Mom buys it for me every year, and I've got the series. And I've got this book. (And a few other Buffy textbooks -- yes, textbooks, you read that right... that I would love to read.)
This book will probably only really float your boat on two conditions:
1) you're a Buffy fan. I don't think you have to be as insane as me, but you could be. I think even if you've just enjoyed the show, you're okay.
2) you're into philosophy. If you don't know who Kant is, if you don't really care about morality and ethics, than you're probably not going to be into this book either.
If both 1 and 2 are true, it's really a good, interesting read. In fact, I would go so far as to say that putting these ideas in the context of Buffy helped me to really understand the heart of what the philosopher was saying. It's a bunch of essays written by different people on different aspects of Buffy, but most of them are truly interesting.
Enjoy.
I'm a total Buffy geek. It's true, I'm way dumb for the whole thing. I think it's an amazing show, some of the best television ever made. Maybe it caught me at the right time, maybe the themes explored just really float my boat, both of these things are probably true. Do I buy merchandise? Well, I have the calendar because my Mom buys it for me every year, and I've got the series. And I've got this book. (And a few other Buffy textbooks -- yes, textbooks, you read that right... that I would love to read.)
This book will probably only really float your boat on two conditions:
1) you're a Buffy fan. I don't think you have to be as insane as me, but you could be. I think even if you've just enjoyed the show, you're okay.
2) you're into philosophy. If you don't know who Kant is, if you don't really care about morality and ethics, than you're probably not going to be into this book either.
If both 1 and 2 are true, it's really a good, interesting read. In fact, I would go so far as to say that putting these ideas in the context of Buffy helped me to really understand the heart of what the philosopher was saying. It's a bunch of essays written by different people on different aspects of Buffy, but most of them are truly interesting.
Enjoy.
August 15, 2013
A mixed bag of essays. Some of the standouts, in my opinion:
BtVS as Feminist Noir (Thomas Hibbs)
Feminism and the Ethics of Violence (Mimi Marinucci)
Balderdash and Chicanery: Science and Beyond (Andrew Aberdein)
"My God, It's Like a Greek Tragedy": Willow Rosenberg and Human Irrationality (James South)
Passion and Action: In and Out of Control (Carolyn Korsmeyer)
Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, and The Eternal Demon (Neal King) (A very provocative reading of BtVS as embodying fascist ideology.)
No Big Win: Themes of Sacrifice, Salvation, and Redemption (Gregory Sakal) (Not great, but has an interesting comparison of Xander and Spike, much the former's disadvantage.)
Old Familiar Vampires: The Politics of the Buffyverse (Jeffrey Pasley) (Very interesting: sees how far the case can be made that the Scoobies are "primitive rebels" in Hobsbawm's sense, and hence radicals, but ultimately argues that the better model is the liberal Superhero one.)
BtVS as Feminist Noir (Thomas Hibbs)
Feminism and the Ethics of Violence (Mimi Marinucci)
Balderdash and Chicanery: Science and Beyond (Andrew Aberdein)
"My God, It's Like a Greek Tragedy": Willow Rosenberg and Human Irrationality (James South)
Passion and Action: In and Out of Control (Carolyn Korsmeyer)
Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, and The Eternal Demon (Neal King) (A very provocative reading of BtVS as embodying fascist ideology.)
No Big Win: Themes of Sacrifice, Salvation, and Redemption (Gregory Sakal) (Not great, but has an interesting comparison of Xander and Spike, much the former's disadvantage.)
Old Familiar Vampires: The Politics of the Buffyverse (Jeffrey Pasley) (Very interesting: sees how far the case can be made that the Scoobies are "primitive rebels" in Hobsbawm's sense, and hence radicals, but ultimately argues that the better model is the liberal Superhero one.)
September 24, 2018
This was an interesting read. In most ways I didn't find it a particularly in-depth analysis of the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer: rather, I found it an interesting introduction to various topics of philosophical thought, discussed through the lens of this television show. I learned much more of interest in regards to philosophy, for example, schools of thought on ethical choice and moral decision making, than I expected. I'm still not much of a studied philosopher, but many of these essays offered nuggets of insight or perspectives that I had not really considered previously. Not surprisingly, perhaps, as this was not actually the stated purpose of the book, I did not find much here offering critique of Buffy in terms of its literary or media merits, arguing for or against the success of the show, or analyzing the plot or actions of any of the characters. For the most part (the final essay was a notable exception) these writers took the show's depth and merit as unquestioned fact and used the plot and characters as a springboard to develop and illustrate their ideas about philosophical thought. This is not really literary analysis, it is a different beast. I enjoyed it, but not enough to want to revisit it repeatedly. I think a deeper understanding of philosophical thought would require more in-depth texts, and a deeper analysis of Buffy the Vampire Slayer would require an entirely different work.
September 23, 2016
I was really enjoying reading this book; getting different takes on my favourite TV show, different things to consider. Until I got to the last chapter "Feeling for Buffy: The Girl Next Door". After having to read through a lot of quoted/referenced work of Sigmund Freud, the authors of the essay attempted to attribute Buffy's success and devoted following to "the draw of schoolgirl sex", and if the authors are to be believed, to the exclusion of any other possible reason.
Perhaps the authors (men, assumed from their printed names) have a difficulty understanding what the appeal would be for a teenage girl or woman (or even teenage boys or men) to see Buffy kicking ass and taking names, and flipping the "ditzy, blond cheerleader who-gets-killed-first" stereotype in entertainment on its head. Or, a female (who often go underestimated or are frequently one dimensional manic-pixie chicks) who is the titular character, not perfect, but human despite her supernatural strength.
If you are a Buffy fan and interested in reading this book, do so. But also do yourself a favour and forget the last chapter exists. It really has no place in the book and my distaste for it has completely overshadowed and partially ruined my enjoyment of the rest of the book.
Perhaps the authors (men, assumed from their printed names) have a difficulty understanding what the appeal would be for a teenage girl or woman (or even teenage boys or men) to see Buffy kicking ass and taking names, and flipping the "ditzy, blond cheerleader who-gets-killed-first" stereotype in entertainment on its head. Or, a female (who often go underestimated or are frequently one dimensional manic-pixie chicks) who is the titular character, not perfect, but human despite her supernatural strength.
If you are a Buffy fan and interested in reading this book, do so. But also do yourself a favour and forget the last chapter exists. It really has no place in the book and my distaste for it has completely overshadowed and partially ruined my enjoyment of the rest of the book.
August 30, 2014
An academic collection of essays and articles which applies philosophical theory to the popular television show, Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
This book is not for the casual fan. The concepts and themes are on a high intellectual level. Discussions are in-depth and not terribly enjoyable to read, but those looking for a deeper understanding of the show will be rewarded. Some essays will cause you to question your enjoyment of the show and some will challenge you to re-think your conception of your favorite characters. One in particular that got me thinking was Karl Schudt's "Also Spach Faith" which looks at the Nietzschean conception of happiness as it could be applied to Faith's behavior on both Buffy and Angel.
The oft taken for granted concept that Buffy is a feminist hero is also called into question by several authors, holding up a lens to ways in which Buffy reinforces patriarchal society even while kicking all that ass. Plus, far from being as subversive as most believe it to be, the show actually panders to typical Christian morality, even casting Buffy as a Christ-like savior in Season 5's "The Gift".
The editors should be applauded for including treatments which are critical of the show as well as those which praise it. However, die-hard "Joss can do no wrong" fans might become nonplussed after a comprehensive study of the text. Also, it is recommended that the reader does not attempt to devour the text in a protracted amount of time. A careful reading of each essay followed by some exploration into the concepts presented would be ideal. An entire collegiate class could be taught just using this as a textbook. Quite impressive.
This book is not for the casual fan. The concepts and themes are on a high intellectual level. Discussions are in-depth and not terribly enjoyable to read, but those looking for a deeper understanding of the show will be rewarded. Some essays will cause you to question your enjoyment of the show and some will challenge you to re-think your conception of your favorite characters. One in particular that got me thinking was Karl Schudt's "Also Spach Faith" which looks at the Nietzschean conception of happiness as it could be applied to Faith's behavior on both Buffy and Angel.
The oft taken for granted concept that Buffy is a feminist hero is also called into question by several authors, holding up a lens to ways in which Buffy reinforces patriarchal society even while kicking all that ass. Plus, far from being as subversive as most believe it to be, the show actually panders to typical Christian morality, even casting Buffy as a Christ-like savior in Season 5's "The Gift".
The editors should be applauded for including treatments which are critical of the show as well as those which praise it. However, die-hard "Joss can do no wrong" fans might become nonplussed after a comprehensive study of the text. Also, it is recommended that the reader does not attempt to devour the text in a protracted amount of time. A careful reading of each essay followed by some exploration into the concepts presented would be ideal. An entire collegiate class could be taught just using this as a textbook. Quite impressive.
February 1, 2008
Is Buffy a good role model? How about a feminist figure? Perhaps she's a proto-fascist icon? And how about Faith - does she prove or disprove the nihilist philosophy of Nietzsche? Why is Spike a better human being than Xander? And what does the tragedy of Willow Rosenberg tell us about the irrationality of the human mind? Or is all of this just so much spitting in the wind, reading too much into what just amounts to a hijacking of base Freudian impulses?
It's a fascinating book, especially for Buffy and Angel fans, and it really says a lot about the series that so many thinkers and philosophers can find enough themes and theories to fill an entire book. The writers explore numerous facets of the series, asking questions about the show's morality and metaphors, the meaning of Good and Evil, and the merits of Buffy's method of extra-normal law enforcement.
Most of the essays are reader-friendly, though a few do indulge in a little more philosophical mumbo-jumbo than I usually like. Enjoy!
It's a fascinating book, especially for Buffy and Angel fans, and it really says a lot about the series that so many thinkers and philosophers can find enough themes and theories to fill an entire book. The writers explore numerous facets of the series, asking questions about the show's morality and metaphors, the meaning of Good and Evil, and the merits of Buffy's method of extra-normal law enforcement.
Most of the essays are reader-friendly, though a few do indulge in a little more philosophical mumbo-jumbo than I usually like. Enjoy!
May 28, 2009
I'm no philosophy expert or anything, but I know my Buffy. I've seen the whole series multiple times (yeah, I'm one of those people). When I saw a book that combined Buffy with philosophy (especially given that I was taking a philosophy course in college at the time), I obviously had to buy it.
It's a really interesting book, mostly just expanding on things that I had thought about while watching the show. The thing is, an intelligent show like Buffy (which yes, I believe it is an intelligent show despite being about a teenage girl who kills vampires) deserves a book like this, for those of us out there who think a little deeper about the episode than just "Buffy staked another vamp, woo".
Now that I'm thinking about it, it deserves a re-read.
It's a really interesting book, mostly just expanding on things that I had thought about while watching the show. The thing is, an intelligent show like Buffy (which yes, I believe it is an intelligent show despite being about a teenage girl who kills vampires) deserves a book like this, for those of us out there who think a little deeper about the episode than just "Buffy staked another vamp, woo".
Now that I'm thinking about it, it deserves a re-read.
June 16, 2013
Another really well written and interesting book of academic essays pertaining to the show. Definitely worth the read.
September 21, 2025
ok first off this book is a really fun read if you’re a Buffy fan. the book made me want to talk about it with my friends which i think is a good thing. this book was written before the final season of the show came out which was an interesting choice, as the events of the final season would definitely have a big effect on many of the essays. i disagree with a good chunk of the arguments, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re bad or invalid. but that’s how philosophy is i think. my favorite essay was probably the Brownskirts one, which I actually mostly disagree with, but it’s probably the one i enjoyed reading the most.
i skimmed the reviews before reading this and the top review where they knocked off a star for the final essay had me thinking “it can’t be that bad, can it?” but it really was that bad. i think this essay was truly a bad and invalid argument and probably shouldn’t have been included. written by two men, it basically argues that anyone trying to do a deep analysis of the show is wrong because the show isn’t that good and not that deep, and it’s actually only about buffy’s sex life. like, i’m sorry, just because YOU can only focus on buffy’s sex life and start drooling and go brain dead anytime you see a hint of cleavage, that doesn’t mean the majority of the populous has the same experience. it also really leaned heavily into freud’s theories on sexuality, which are honestly freakish and totally invalid to begin with. freud had some good ideas that really advanced the field of psychology, but his beliefs about sexuality are not among them. this last essay really PMO.
overall, i think this book needed more essays by women.
i skimmed the reviews before reading this and the top review where they knocked off a star for the final essay had me thinking “it can’t be that bad, can it?” but it really was that bad. i think this essay was truly a bad and invalid argument and probably shouldn’t have been included. written by two men, it basically argues that anyone trying to do a deep analysis of the show is wrong because the show isn’t that good and not that deep, and it’s actually only about buffy’s sex life. like, i’m sorry, just because YOU can only focus on buffy’s sex life and start drooling and go brain dead anytime you see a hint of cleavage, that doesn’t mean the majority of the populous has the same experience. it also really leaned heavily into freud’s theories on sexuality, which are honestly freakish and totally invalid to begin with. freud had some good ideas that really advanced the field of psychology, but his beliefs about sexuality are not among them. this last essay really PMO.
overall, i think this book needed more essays by women.
September 28, 2024
found this in an amazing bookstore in seattle with my bestie. i enjoyed reading it (but much preferred the bits that i read by the lake with an iced coffee in the summer in seattle vs the rest that i read at home on my couch in freezing nz winter). the essays did not make a lot of points that i hadn’t already considered about btvs, but considering how many years ive spent watching, analyzing and talking about this show it would have had to be revolutionary to make me go “oh! i’ve never thought of that!” but it was nice to see some of the ideas i’d had previously written down. there were a couple of standouts and a couple of duds, but mostly i enjoyed reading all of them because i could tell the people who had written them love the show as much as i do.
i did learn about a lot of different philosophical perspectives that i wasn’t aware of. tbh philosophy isn’t really my thing and i prob won’t remember most of them but it was still interesting and i was engaged and learning. solid overall!
i did learn about a lot of different philosophical perspectives that i wasn’t aware of. tbh philosophy isn’t really my thing and i prob won’t remember most of them but it was still interesting and i was engaged and learning. solid overall!
December 26, 2021
Each of these essays was not only well-thought out, but well laid out. The theses were clearly delineated and easy to follow, and arguments were all supported.
I took the advice of another reviewer and read "Feeling for Buffy" (the last essay in the collection) first - and I am glad I did. The authors are both (self) described as Buffy fans, yet their whole essay is dismissive, arrogant, and pedantic, and I question the inclusion of it in the anthology. They strike me as men who watched the show because they wanted to fuck Buffy, and (yes, I'll gatekeep here), Buffy isn't there for them.
This is part of the "Pop Culture and Philosophy" series and I'd encourage anyone to find one of these books that focuses on a pop culture area of their liking and read it. Like "The Good Place," this book places dense philosophical (and thus life) concepts in palatable form and illustrates them using relatable/familiar fiction/art. It's unique and its fun, and it legitimizes mediums (in this case Buffy) that people often don't give enough credit.
This collection elucidated a lot of philosophical concepts I wasn't familiar with, and because it was juxtaposed with BtVS, I thoroughly enjoyed the academy of it.
Some of my favorites:
"The I in Team: Buffy and Feminist Ethics" [Jessica Prata Miller]
"Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Feminist Noir" [Thomas Hibbs]
"Feminism and the Ethics of Violence: Why Buffy Kicks Ass" [Mimi Marinucci]
"Buffy in the Buff: A Slayer's Solution to Aristotle's Love Paradox" [Melissa M Milavec and Sharon M Kaye]
"Justifying the Means: Punishment in the Buffyverse" [Jacob M Held].
I also want to give a special shoutout to Neal King's "Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, an the Eternal Demon" - While I thought his take was, for the most part, bizarre, his unrelenting championing of Willow's flaying of Warren resonated with me. I didn't think his exploration of Buffy's racism in terms of how they treat their non-human characters was convincing or coherent (there is plenty of actual racism to be addressed in Buffy), but as a whole metaphor for what he was arguing, it came together, and his piece was perhaps the boldest and most interesting. Also - as already mentioned, he's one of the few I've ever seen celebrate Willow for what she did and argue that she should have fully been allowed to do it: I agree with him. Willow's flaying of Warren is, for me, one of the most visually satisfying moments of bloody vengeance in the show, and I love her for it.
I took the advice of another reviewer and read "Feeling for Buffy" (the last essay in the collection) first - and I am glad I did. The authors are both (self) described as Buffy fans, yet their whole essay is dismissive, arrogant, and pedantic, and I question the inclusion of it in the anthology. They strike me as men who watched the show because they wanted to fuck Buffy, and (yes, I'll gatekeep here), Buffy isn't there for them.
This is part of the "Pop Culture and Philosophy" series and I'd encourage anyone to find one of these books that focuses on a pop culture area of their liking and read it. Like "The Good Place," this book places dense philosophical (and thus life) concepts in palatable form and illustrates them using relatable/familiar fiction/art. It's unique and its fun, and it legitimizes mediums (in this case Buffy) that people often don't give enough credit.
This collection elucidated a lot of philosophical concepts I wasn't familiar with, and because it was juxtaposed with BtVS, I thoroughly enjoyed the academy of it.
Some of my favorites:
"The I in Team: Buffy and Feminist Ethics" [Jessica Prata Miller]
"Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Feminist Noir" [Thomas Hibbs]
"Feminism and the Ethics of Violence: Why Buffy Kicks Ass" [Mimi Marinucci]
"Buffy in the Buff: A Slayer's Solution to Aristotle's Love Paradox" [Melissa M Milavec and Sharon M Kaye]
"Justifying the Means: Punishment in the Buffyverse" [Jacob M Held].
I also want to give a special shoutout to Neal King's "Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, an the Eternal Demon" - While I thought his take was, for the most part, bizarre, his unrelenting championing of Willow's flaying of Warren resonated with me. I didn't think his exploration of Buffy's racism in terms of how they treat their non-human characters was convincing or coherent (there is plenty of actual racism to be addressed in Buffy), but as a whole metaphor for what he was arguing, it came together, and his piece was perhaps the boldest and most interesting. Also - as already mentioned, he's one of the few I've ever seen celebrate Willow for what she did and argue that she should have fully been allowed to do it: I agree with him. Willow's flaying of Warren is, for me, one of the most visually satisfying moments of bloody vengeance in the show, and I love her for it.
March 27, 2022
definitely would’ve been better if it had been written after the show ended and without the final essay.
content/trigger warnings; discussions of sexism, misogyny, ableism, death, murder, sexual assault/violence, physical violence, death of mother, suicide, death of loved one, anti-roma slur, racism, antisemitism,
i enjoyed the essays about buffy & feminism, willow, faith, spike (especially the one comparing spike favorably against angel and xander. finally some GOOD and CORRECT spike analysis). i don’t care much for the rest of the essays, topics ranging from science, ethics, politics, and religion. we don’t speak of the “buffy is fascist” essay.
some essays were really good with how the author summarized the philosophies they were drawing from as briefly as they could, but unfortunately for me, a lot of authors spent multiple pages explaining them before getting into how they relate to buffy, which made for a very tiring read.
let’s talk about the final essay. the two (presumably) men authors take a contrarian stance against the entire purpose of the book and explicitly insult the show and its viewers and the book’s scholars and readers. they state with finality that buffy isn’t successful or beloved because of any “remarkable” or “unique” writing, plot, acting, message, or meaning, but rather because the show is mindless “fun” for “narcissistic” teenagers. and that anyone who seeks to “make the show more” than “sex and escapism” by “bizarrely” trying to find deeper or greater meaning in it are “off-base”, “peculiarly wrong”, misunderstood, and overestimating the intellect of its teenaged audience. and that scholar attention to buffy is “unreflective and narrow critical analysis” by people who have been “seduced” by the show. all the while, seriously and uncritically citing freud for five pages. yeah.
one author equates vampires feeding on unwilling humans to rape. and this makes me uncomfortable. the author says the primary evil buffy fights is symbolic of rape, but makes no convincing argument, based entirely on the fact that most humans are not willing blood donors to vampires. but i cannot stress enough that not every instance of unwillingness or violation is comparable to sexual violence. it’s overall a very contradictory and shallow essay. (the author also refers to spike as a rapist, even though no rape occurred.)
an author argues that angel is buffy’s “complete friendship”, meaning erotic love that includes both utility and pleasure; they argue riley was just utility and spike was just pleasure. but their reasoning would make spike count as “complete” instead of “pleasure”. and i think this is because the book was written before the final season, so they hadn’t seen the continued development of buffy’s relationship with spike. but i do kind of take issue with the general premise of this essay. there are three types of friendship and buffy had three main relationships, so each one had to have their own category. but that’s a flawed and convenient interpretation. you can have multiple relationships of the same type or no relationships of one type.
an author says angel and spike aren’t too different because they were both punished with the inability to hurt humans (angel’s cursed soul, spike’s chip) but spike fights for his soul and the chip gets removed. not to mention the difference in treatment and portrayal of angel and spike. souled angel is embraced as if him without a soul is completely different person (note that there’s angel and angelus, but spike is always spike), whereas spike is an outsider regardless. angel alternates between being a caricature of “good” and “evil”, whereas spike’s characterization is consistent regardless (note that he’s canonically able to feel love and affection and care without a soul, unlike angel). i feel like these things make angel and spike fundamentally different.
content/trigger warnings; discussions of sexism, misogyny, ableism, death, murder, sexual assault/violence, physical violence, death of mother, suicide, death of loved one, anti-roma slur, racism, antisemitism,
i enjoyed the essays about buffy & feminism, willow, faith, spike (especially the one comparing spike favorably against angel and xander. finally some GOOD and CORRECT spike analysis). i don’t care much for the rest of the essays, topics ranging from science, ethics, politics, and religion. we don’t speak of the “buffy is fascist” essay.
some essays were really good with how the author summarized the philosophies they were drawing from as briefly as they could, but unfortunately for me, a lot of authors spent multiple pages explaining them before getting into how they relate to buffy, which made for a very tiring read.
let’s talk about the final essay. the two (presumably) men authors take a contrarian stance against the entire purpose of the book and explicitly insult the show and its viewers and the book’s scholars and readers. they state with finality that buffy isn’t successful or beloved because of any “remarkable” or “unique” writing, plot, acting, message, or meaning, but rather because the show is mindless “fun” for “narcissistic” teenagers. and that anyone who seeks to “make the show more” than “sex and escapism” by “bizarrely” trying to find deeper or greater meaning in it are “off-base”, “peculiarly wrong”, misunderstood, and overestimating the intellect of its teenaged audience. and that scholar attention to buffy is “unreflective and narrow critical analysis” by people who have been “seduced” by the show. all the while, seriously and uncritically citing freud for five pages. yeah.
one author equates vampires feeding on unwilling humans to rape. and this makes me uncomfortable. the author says the primary evil buffy fights is symbolic of rape, but makes no convincing argument, based entirely on the fact that most humans are not willing blood donors to vampires. but i cannot stress enough that not every instance of unwillingness or violation is comparable to sexual violence. it’s overall a very contradictory and shallow essay. (the author also refers to spike as a rapist, even though no rape occurred.)
an author argues that angel is buffy’s “complete friendship”, meaning erotic love that includes both utility and pleasure; they argue riley was just utility and spike was just pleasure. but their reasoning would make spike count as “complete” instead of “pleasure”. and i think this is because the book was written before the final season, so they hadn’t seen the continued development of buffy’s relationship with spike. but i do kind of take issue with the general premise of this essay. there are three types of friendship and buffy had three main relationships, so each one had to have their own category. but that’s a flawed and convenient interpretation. you can have multiple relationships of the same type or no relationships of one type.
an author says angel and spike aren’t too different because they were both punished with the inability to hurt humans (angel’s cursed soul, spike’s chip) but spike fights for his soul and the chip gets removed. not to mention the difference in treatment and portrayal of angel and spike. souled angel is embraced as if him without a soul is completely different person (note that there’s angel and angelus, but spike is always spike), whereas spike is an outsider regardless. angel alternates between being a caricature of “good” and “evil”, whereas spike’s characterization is consistent regardless (note that he’s canonically able to feel love and affection and care without a soul, unlike angel). i feel like these things make angel and spike fundamentally different.
December 20, 2021
Super fun. Some of the most interesting essays: Buffy as Feminist Noir, Buffy Goes to College, Willow Rosenberg and Human Irrationality, Brownskirts, High School is Hell, and Feeling for Buffy: The Girl Next Door.
September 13, 2008
I read this book on the L train, to and from my first professional Costuming job at the Goodman theatre in Chicago. I loved it. I was an immediate fan of the show after watching the very first episode. I'll never forget the vivid memory of rehashing every detail with my lab partner in Ms. Shaw's chemistry class the next day. I followed it all the way through to the end, which is a rarity in my life as I seem to loose interest or excitement for most shows after a few seasons.
This book justified my belief that there were, in fact, major philosophical points being underlined even within what seemed to be just a silly teenage drama for good girls who seemed intrigued by what the bad guy at school might really be like. Buffy is so much more than that. Not to mention that Jos Whedon introduced his audiences to types of film genres that they might never have been exposed to had they not been avid fans of the show.
This book justified my belief that there were, in fact, major philosophical points being underlined even within what seemed to be just a silly teenage drama for good girls who seemed intrigued by what the bad guy at school might really be like. Buffy is so much more than that. Not to mention that Jos Whedon introduced his audiences to types of film genres that they might never have been exposed to had they not been avid fans of the show.
January 16, 2012
My last thought upon finishing this book was "WTF?". The last article was literally one scholar who was thumbing his nose at all the other scholars on the playground because he, being the awesome person that he is, knew the true reason why Buffy was such a cult classic and all the other scholars out there were just simpering morons who couldn't count. While it made for an enjoyable article, and an interesting close to the book, it made me sad that no one once addressed what could possibly be the reason as to why this show was good. It just was. That's my opinion. Yes, you can put your scholarly twists and turns on it and I'm tipping my hat to you because some of the articles here, were actually good. But as for the rest, I wish I could just look at them and say "it's not that complicated. Sometimes, you just want to get lost in someone else s world for a little while." Overall, good book, but left me shaking my head at the authors more often than not.
Read
February 15, 2015I have only read a few selected essays and portions of essays so far. I found there were too many spoilers and I had not yet seen all the episodes when I received this book as a gift.
I came into the Buffy series originally in the middle of Season 5, watched through the end of Season 8, and saw scattered portions of Seasons 1 through 5 when it was syndicated, in no particular order. Since the DVDs came out, I have been working my way through the entire 7 seasons sequentially (mid-Season 6 now)and will finish the book after that.
The TV series may not be art, but it's about as good as pop culture gets. Then again, it may be art after all. I'm usually having too much fun appreciating it to worry a lot about the distinction.
I came into the Buffy series originally in the middle of Season 5, watched through the end of Season 8, and saw scattered portions of Seasons 1 through 5 when it was syndicated, in no particular order. Since the DVDs came out, I have been working my way through the entire 7 seasons sequentially (mid-Season 6 now)and will finish the book after that.
The TV series may not be art, but it's about as good as pop culture gets. Then again, it may be art after all. I'm usually having too much fun appreciating it to worry a lot about the distinction.
June 12, 2017
The writing craft of this book is pretty disappointing beside others in the series (e.g., The Matrix and Philosophy); many of the authors of the essays fail to reach meaningful conclusions about the significance of their comparisons between the philosophy and BtVS.
The contributors often also take on a myopic approach to the counter-arguments for their interpretations, and some (especially Neal King, Michael P. Levine, and Steven Jay Schneider) seem to strain believability in order to adopt a contrarian stance, demonstrating a limited understanding of the series up for discussion.
The book is additionally hampered by jumping the gun and releasing ahead of the release of the final season of the show, making it feel incomplete.
The contributors often also take on a myopic approach to the counter-arguments for their interpretations, and some (especially Neal King, Michael P. Levine, and Steven Jay Schneider) seem to strain believability in order to adopt a contrarian stance, demonstrating a limited understanding of the series up for discussion.
The book is additionally hampered by jumping the gun and releasing ahead of the release of the final season of the show, making it feel incomplete.
May 21, 2010
Okay so I ADORE all things Buffy...but BtVS subject matter aside, this book took me longer to get through than any other book ever has! Philosophers and their writing can be so interesting when written well, but at times I felt as though the author was attempting to write things at a PHd level. I don't consider myself a genius by any stretch of the imagination, but as a Master's educated woman, I can certainly hold my own. That aside, this book was difficult to read, boring at times, and made me feel as though BtVS was an afterthought in the writing.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 10, 2015
Why make this book before the seventh season aired?
April 23, 2014
This books functions both as entertainment and intellectual exercise for BtVS fans, as well as a useful intro for philosophy novices. I knew essentially zilch about philosophy when starting this book, and I could still follow along without trouble. I don't know whether or not someone with more philosophy knowledge might find themselves frustrated.
While I didn't find any of the essays to be works of incredible genius, most of them are solid and interesting. I was especially fond of the two Faith essays (unsurprisingly, given that she's my favorite) even if I had some minor quibbles. One essay uses Faith as evidence for Plato's eudaimonism, while the other offers Faith as a possible refutation of Nietzsche's philosophy. I also liked Jessica Pratt Miller's piece on Buffy and feminist ethics.
Unfortunately, there are also some real clunkers. Neal King's execrable "Brownskirts" takes a inflammatory but intriguing premise--that Buffy, both the character and show, are proto-fascist--and completely fails to support it, egregiously misrepresenting Buffy's motives. Also, for someone who insists that Buffy is racist against demons, King is very eager to liken Jewish people to demonic forces. His intent is to prove that Buffy's campaign against demons and vampires makes her like a Nazi (no, really), but manages to do it in a way that feels grossly insensitive to real people and real victims of genocide. (He even compares vampires to concentration camp victims, because vampires go up in ash. No, really.)
Then there's Gregory J. Sakal's character analysis of Spike and Xander, which involves tearing down Xander as much as possible while venerating Spike. Sakal draws attention to Spike's better moments while ignoring his less admirable ones. For instance Sakal brings up "Crush" in which Spike feeds from a freshly killed victim only with reluctance, ignoring that in the same episode, Spike kidnapped Buffy, chained her to a wall, and threatened to kill her if she refused to love him. This sort of thing happens multiple times in Sakal's piece.
Finally, the books chooses a strange piece to end on, with Michael P. Levine and Steven Jay Schneider essentially declare that that book is waste of time, that BtVS is not deep or meaningful, has no moral value, should not be taken seriously, and that virtually every Buffy scholar is wrong, wrong, wrong, while they, of course, are among the very few who truly understand what the show is. Of course, they then base several arguments on Freud, without criticism, without examination, and ignoring all the developments in psychology since that suggest Freud is not the end all be all. All the men around Buffy should be impotent because Freud! Men need to degrade women because Freud! This, along with the authors' blatant self-satisfaction, made it impossible for me to take their arguments seriously.
I feel bad for focusing so strongly on the essays I didn't like, because I liked most of them, some of them very much. I'd recommend this book for any BtVS fan looking to critically engage with their entertainment.
While I didn't find any of the essays to be works of incredible genius, most of them are solid and interesting. I was especially fond of the two Faith essays (unsurprisingly, given that she's my favorite) even if I had some minor quibbles. One essay uses Faith as evidence for Plato's eudaimonism, while the other offers Faith as a possible refutation of Nietzsche's philosophy. I also liked Jessica Pratt Miller's piece on Buffy and feminist ethics.
Unfortunately, there are also some real clunkers. Neal King's execrable "Brownskirts" takes a inflammatory but intriguing premise--that Buffy, both the character and show, are proto-fascist--and completely fails to support it, egregiously misrepresenting Buffy's motives. Also, for someone who insists that Buffy is racist against demons, King is very eager to liken Jewish people to demonic forces. His intent is to prove that Buffy's campaign against demons and vampires makes her like a Nazi (no, really), but manages to do it in a way that feels grossly insensitive to real people and real victims of genocide. (He even compares vampires to concentration camp victims, because vampires go up in ash. No, really.)
Then there's Gregory J. Sakal's character analysis of Spike and Xander, which involves tearing down Xander as much as possible while venerating Spike. Sakal draws attention to Spike's better moments while ignoring his less admirable ones. For instance Sakal brings up "Crush" in which Spike feeds from a freshly killed victim only with reluctance, ignoring that in the same episode, Spike kidnapped Buffy, chained her to a wall, and threatened to kill her if she refused to love him. This sort of thing happens multiple times in Sakal's piece.
Finally, the books chooses a strange piece to end on, with Michael P. Levine and Steven Jay Schneider essentially declare that that book is waste of time, that BtVS is not deep or meaningful, has no moral value, should not be taken seriously, and that virtually every Buffy scholar is wrong, wrong, wrong, while they, of course, are among the very few who truly understand what the show is. Of course, they then base several arguments on Freud, without criticism, without examination, and ignoring all the developments in psychology since that suggest Freud is not the end all be all. All the men around Buffy should be impotent because Freud! Men need to degrade women because Freud! This, along with the authors' blatant self-satisfaction, made it impossible for me to take their arguments seriously.
I feel bad for focusing so strongly on the essays I didn't like, because I liked most of them, some of them very much. I'd recommend this book for any BtVS fan looking to critically engage with their entertainment.
February 11, 2015
This was a great collection, and a lot deeper than I had expected it to be. There's something for everyone in this tome. Some essays were less good than others but they were, mostly, greatly written and erudite.
For me "My God it's like a Greek tragedy" - the piece on Willow and irrationality, "Buffy in the Buff", "Between Heavens and Hells: The Multidimensional Universe in Kant and BtVS", "Prophecy girl and the Powers that Be" and "Feminism and the Ethics of violence", really stood out to me. (I've written separate reviews on them elsewhere because they're all worthy of attention)
Most controversial was "Brownskirts" which was just... wow, it was well written and thought provoking but yeah, if you don't want to see parallells drawn between BtVS and Nazi Germany etc, then stay clear of this one.
Now, the bad, there are some weaker or just less interesting (or sometimes repetititve piece.) but the bad, the really bad, is the last essay - "Feeling for Buffy". Honestly the placement of this one is an editorial mistake because it's a very sour note to leave your reader on the concept that there is "only skirt" in Buffy and that the whole success of the show is based on Freud's incest barrier.
Initially I thought it interesting, as it starts out by debunking all of the scholars who write about Buffy, saying that they are seduced by it and are projecting their own fantasies into their theories. Considering the amount of different takes in this book alone there is something to that.
But utterly denying any depth of BtVS and reducing its morality to a "cartoon" level is nothing but insulting.
It's not until they start quoting and positing Freud however that the shit hits the fan. Through years of reading I've learned that when someone starts to SERIOUSLY quote Freud it's time to get out because you're going nowhere good and honestly, you're going somewhere that is utterly redundant 99% of the time. Freud made major contributions to his field, without a doubt, but he is flawed. And reading Buffy's success through his incest barrier is something only equally self-obsessed, flawed, Freudian males would do. Leaving the book on this note almost ruined my appreciation of it entirely which is a real shame.
For me "My God it's like a Greek tragedy" - the piece on Willow and irrationality, "Buffy in the Buff", "Between Heavens and Hells: The Multidimensional Universe in Kant and BtVS", "Prophecy girl and the Powers that Be" and "Feminism and the Ethics of violence", really stood out to me. (I've written separate reviews on them elsewhere because they're all worthy of attention)
Most controversial was "Brownskirts" which was just... wow, it was well written and thought provoking but yeah, if you don't want to see parallells drawn between BtVS and Nazi Germany etc, then stay clear of this one.
Now, the bad, there are some weaker or just less interesting (or sometimes repetititve piece.) but the bad, the really bad, is the last essay - "Feeling for Buffy". Honestly the placement of this one is an editorial mistake because it's a very sour note to leave your reader on the concept that there is "only skirt" in Buffy and that the whole success of the show is based on Freud's incest barrier.
Initially I thought it interesting, as it starts out by debunking all of the scholars who write about Buffy, saying that they are seduced by it and are projecting their own fantasies into their theories. Considering the amount of different takes in this book alone there is something to that.
But utterly denying any depth of BtVS and reducing its morality to a "cartoon" level is nothing but insulting.
It's not until they start quoting and positing Freud however that the shit hits the fan. Through years of reading I've learned that when someone starts to SERIOUSLY quote Freud it's time to get out because you're going nowhere good and honestly, you're going somewhere that is utterly redundant 99% of the time. Freud made major contributions to his field, without a doubt, but he is flawed. And reading Buffy's success through his incest barrier is something only equally self-obsessed, flawed, Freudian males would do. Leaving the book on this note almost ruined my appreciation of it entirely which is a real shame.
June 11, 2015
My book blog/project site ---> http://allthebookblognamesaretaken.bl...
Firstly, I think this would have been better had it been written after the show ended. Leaving out season 7 was kind of huge. Joss made it pretty clear that 7 was the magic number, so we knew that was likely when the show would end.
As I said in a recent review of another Buffy-related book, I'm way stupid in love with this show, though it's been off the air some 10 years. It's even kind of awkward typing that sentence, but whatever. But that is why I take issue with the very last essay in this book. According to the authors of, "Feeling for Buffy", it's just another entertaining show that's pretty much just about sex.
Really?
I'm pretty sure, not.
Yes, sex and sexuality play their own roles and are themes, just like many other aspects of our daily lives. But to say that's ALL Buffy is about, and to end the book with this essay, when the couple dozen previous essays show otherwise, it's truly disrespectful to the reader and fan.
I'm not saying this opinion is invalid or wrong. It's an opinion. There are people who don't like the show after watching just one episode, or having watched none. There are people who THINK they know what it's about, "like, vampires and stuff?" who insist I will really like shows like 'Supernatural', because they know I like Buffy (I simply nod and smile at those statements). But to put together this (mostly) interesting collection of essays about one of the greatest television shows ever, and then end with that? Seriously? Ridiculous.
There are other minor issues I took note of through various essays along the way - some getting facts or quotes wrong. I just feel like if you're enough way stupid in love with this show to write essays about it, like those who would read said essays, you ought to know what you're talking about.
If I recommend this book, I might say read that essay first, the one that trashes the show and reduces it to the likes of whatever teen garbage is on tv now (I don't know, because I'm not a teenager anymore and I also only use Netflix). That way you get it done and over with. Otherwise it's just a crappy surprise at the end of an otherwise (mostly) interesting read about a show worthy of study.
Firstly, I think this would have been better had it been written after the show ended. Leaving out season 7 was kind of huge. Joss made it pretty clear that 7 was the magic number, so we knew that was likely when the show would end.
As I said in a recent review of another Buffy-related book, I'm way stupid in love with this show, though it's been off the air some 10 years. It's even kind of awkward typing that sentence, but whatever. But that is why I take issue with the very last essay in this book. According to the authors of, "Feeling for Buffy", it's just another entertaining show that's pretty much just about sex.
Really?
I'm pretty sure, not.
Yes, sex and sexuality play their own roles and are themes, just like many other aspects of our daily lives. But to say that's ALL Buffy is about, and to end the book with this essay, when the couple dozen previous essays show otherwise, it's truly disrespectful to the reader and fan.
I'm not saying this opinion is invalid or wrong. It's an opinion. There are people who don't like the show after watching just one episode, or having watched none. There are people who THINK they know what it's about, "like, vampires and stuff?" who insist I will really like shows like 'Supernatural', because they know I like Buffy (I simply nod and smile at those statements). But to put together this (mostly) interesting collection of essays about one of the greatest television shows ever, and then end with that? Seriously? Ridiculous.
There are other minor issues I took note of through various essays along the way - some getting facts or quotes wrong. I just feel like if you're enough way stupid in love with this show to write essays about it, like those who would read said essays, you ought to know what you're talking about.
If I recommend this book, I might say read that essay first, the one that trashes the show and reduces it to the likes of whatever teen garbage is on tv now (I don't know, because I'm not a teenager anymore and I also only use Netflix). That way you get it done and over with. Otherwise it's just a crappy surprise at the end of an otherwise (mostly) interesting read about a show worthy of study.
February 13, 2009
I got this book as a lark, because it combines (quite literally in the title) two very near & dear loves of mine: both of which contain the secret of life. But pop culture philosophy? HOW DO YOU TURN THAT DOWN? The larkiness compels me.
I read this mostly in the bathtub with a glass of wine and a lot of bubbles. At the same time i was working through my second viewing of the series in its entirety (after getting the special boxed set off Amazon for a sale price) nearly achieving total immersion (if only I hadn't strayed so much with Lost, 30 Rock, and The Office).
Popular culture studies have a bit of a reputation for taking silly things far too seriously. The final essay of this book delves into that subject quite frankly (a sobering, self-realizing finish to the collection by the way). And yeah well it pretty much does take too long of a scalpel to shallow flesh, but philosophy itself has much in common with the fantasy genre: it's die-hard followers feel they can justify the guilty pleasure of it.
The book provides several different lenses with which to watch Buffy: feminism, religion, irony, politics, morality, fascism (one of my favorite essays), and punishment (to name a few). A lot of the essays chose similar scenes and plot devices from the series, and I was rather disappointed to note that the seventh season seemed to be neglected altogether as it appears to have occurred after the book's canonization.
If you're mentally prepared to get into a very deep conversation about a very geeky (yet poignant) favorite show then you might like this book. Otherwise, be prepared to slay yourself through a much heavier hellmouth than the one under the school library.
I read this mostly in the bathtub with a glass of wine and a lot of bubbles. At the same time i was working through my second viewing of the series in its entirety (after getting the special boxed set off Amazon for a sale price) nearly achieving total immersion (if only I hadn't strayed so much with Lost, 30 Rock, and The Office).
Popular culture studies have a bit of a reputation for taking silly things far too seriously. The final essay of this book delves into that subject quite frankly (a sobering, self-realizing finish to the collection by the way). And yeah well it pretty much does take too long of a scalpel to shallow flesh, but philosophy itself has much in common with the fantasy genre: it's die-hard followers feel they can justify the guilty pleasure of it.
The book provides several different lenses with which to watch Buffy: feminism, religion, irony, politics, morality, fascism (one of my favorite essays), and punishment (to name a few). A lot of the essays chose similar scenes and plot devices from the series, and I was rather disappointed to note that the seventh season seemed to be neglected altogether as it appears to have occurred after the book's canonization.
If you're mentally prepared to get into a very deep conversation about a very geeky (yet poignant) favorite show then you might like this book. Otherwise, be prepared to slay yourself through a much heavier hellmouth than the one under the school library.
July 16, 2013
From 1997 to 2003, a tv show about a blonde high school girl fighting the forces of darkness gripped a nation. Week after week, teenagers and adults alike found themselves glued to the television, riveted by one girl’s neverending struggle to keep evil at bay. It was one swell ride.
Philosophy isn’t for everybody. Even though these essays revolve around one of the most popular television shows ever to emerge from the 20th century on into the 21st, the text can get a little dense at times. Referencing Kant, Aristotle, Plato, Freud, et al., these various writers try to use philosophy to explain the intense attraction many people had to a certain blonde petite Slayer. You really have to think to grasp some of these concepts so it’s definitely not for the lazy minded.
The essays give us a peek into the minds of those who wrote them as well as the show itself. Ranging from those who see deep insight into the teenage mind to those who dismiss such ramblings as missing the point (it’s a great fantasy not a treatise on what goes on in the lives of adolescents), from BtVS being about feminist power to upholding fascist values, the show clearly polarized people in their viewpoints. That makes these entries as absorbing as BtVS itself. Whether you agree or disagree with the essayist’s conclusions, these make for engrossing perusals. Share it, discuss it and argue with your friends. (Be advised, however, that the book only deals with the first six seasons of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and the first three seasons of “Angel”. If you want to learn about what people think of the last seasons, you’ll have to look elsewhere.)
Philosophy isn’t for everybody. Even though these essays revolve around one of the most popular television shows ever to emerge from the 20th century on into the 21st, the text can get a little dense at times. Referencing Kant, Aristotle, Plato, Freud, et al., these various writers try to use philosophy to explain the intense attraction many people had to a certain blonde petite Slayer. You really have to think to grasp some of these concepts so it’s definitely not for the lazy minded.
The essays give us a peek into the minds of those who wrote them as well as the show itself. Ranging from those who see deep insight into the teenage mind to those who dismiss such ramblings as missing the point (it’s a great fantasy not a treatise on what goes on in the lives of adolescents), from BtVS being about feminist power to upholding fascist values, the show clearly polarized people in their viewpoints. That makes these entries as absorbing as BtVS itself. Whether you agree or disagree with the essayist’s conclusions, these make for engrossing perusals. Share it, discuss it and argue with your friends. (Be advised, however, that the book only deals with the first six seasons of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and the first three seasons of “Angel”. If you want to learn about what people think of the last seasons, you’ll have to look elsewhere.)
April 10, 2016
Ok, I'm sorry but I couldn't do it. I've attempted to wade my way through this book several times in the past 3-4 years and the book itself has been reduced to a dust catcher. I loved Buffy and I became a even bigger fan of Angel; I've read so much material pertaining to either/or that it is almost sad as I devoured magazine articles, comics, novelizations, unofficial guides, official guides etc etc etc. I barely made it through Seven Seasons of Buffy and I just can't bring myself to finish this. I've read, skimmed, and skipped enough, so I simply need to pass this on so that someone else might get some joy out of it.
I thought that I would love the fact that something finally touched on Faith as she was my second favorite thing about "Buffy" as well as "Angel" but I just wasn't feeling it. I think I've at least started to read each essay but nothing was holding my attention. I got restless and put it down before finishing a single contribution. Perhaps because I have to do so much "serious" reading for school, I just can't handle such in-depth reading when I am seeking purely mindless entertainment.
Oh, well. I tried. And tried again.
I thought that I would love the fact that something finally touched on Faith as she was my second favorite thing about "Buffy" as well as "Angel" but I just wasn't feeling it. I think I've at least started to read each essay but nothing was holding my attention. I got restless and put it down before finishing a single contribution. Perhaps because I have to do so much "serious" reading for school, I just can't handle such in-depth reading when I am seeking purely mindless entertainment.
Oh, well. I tried. And tried again.
October 9, 2009
Hugely informative book that uses Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a tool to examine various schools of philosophical thought. Other than knowing the names of famous philosophers I was largely ignorant of what their various theories entailed, so found this volume of essays incredibly useful in getting the gist.
Some of the essays and points within I agreed with, others not so much, but most were entertaining nonetheless - particular favourites included a look at Nietzschean morality through the character of Faith, Willow as a study of irrationality and Buffy as fascist icon, and if you think that thinking seriously about a show like this is silly (and many of the claims about it overblown), then there's also an essay just for you waiting to wrap it all up.
I think that it says a lot about the show that it can be looked at and enjoyed in so many different ways (not that I needed any more justification as to why my favourite TV show rocks), and this volume has sharpened my appetite for yet another Buffy marathon which I may well be watching with a slightly different eye this time around.
Some of the essays and points within I agreed with, others not so much, but most were entertaining nonetheless - particular favourites included a look at Nietzschean morality through the character of Faith, Willow as a study of irrationality and Buffy as fascist icon, and if you think that thinking seriously about a show like this is silly (and many of the claims about it overblown), then there's also an essay just for you waiting to wrap it all up.
I think that it says a lot about the show that it can be looked at and enjoyed in so many different ways (not that I needed any more justification as to why my favourite TV show rocks), and this volume has sharpened my appetite for yet another Buffy marathon which I may well be watching with a slightly different eye this time around.
April 20, 2010
The essays in this collection can seem a bit repetitive, but their riffs on similar topics serves the purpose of academic debate and, taken together, they form a solid collection of Buffy scholarship that raises important and intriguing philosophical issues. Most interesting are essays concerning Buffy as moral guide ("Should We Do What Buffy Would Do?" by Jason Kawal and "Justifying the Means: Punishment in the Buffyverse" by Jacob M. Held), religion and rationality ("Prophecy Girl and the Powers That Be: The Philosophy of Religion in the Buffyverse" by Wendy Love Anderson and "'My God, It's Like a Greek Tragedy': Willow Rosenberg and Human Irrationality" by James B. South, Buffy as a potential fascist leader ("Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, and the Eternal Demon" by Neal King), and philosophy in general ("Faith and Plato: 'You're Nothing! Disgusting, Murderous Bitch!'" by Greg Forster and "Also Sprach Faith: The Problem of the Happy Rogue Vampire Slayer").
June 15, 2010
When you think philosophy, you normally don't think Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but clearly someone did, because this volume of essays exists. What it purports to do is look at Joss Whedon's creation, looking at its philosophical underpinnings.
What really happens is that various academic writers use Buffy to explore their favourite philosophical strand. Or a specific element of the series is twisted and contorted to fit the particular philosophical world view of the papers author. And then there are the papers that are so dense, that you really can't make heads or tails of then.
This does not mean that the book is garbage. There are several essays that are quite well written. Some of them also make you uncomfortable with the ideas they put forward, because although you don't agree with the ideas, they are very persuasive.
A worthy read for those that like to think heavy about their favourite TV series.
What really happens is that various academic writers use Buffy to explore their favourite philosophical strand. Or a specific element of the series is twisted and contorted to fit the particular philosophical world view of the papers author. And then there are the papers that are so dense, that you really can't make heads or tails of then.
This does not mean that the book is garbage. There are several essays that are quite well written. Some of them also make you uncomfortable with the ideas they put forward, because although you don't agree with the ideas, they are very persuasive.
A worthy read for those that like to think heavy about their favourite TV series.
June 17, 2011
IMPRESSION
This book turns out to be a nice "primer" on philosophy-stuff for me because it was really helpful to relate concepts to specific things from Buffy, like how I can easily comprehend retributive punishment by thinking of vengeance/justice demons, and utilitarian punishment by thinking of Giles when he had to kill Ben/Glory. I like that a lot, makes it easier to consider myself in these positions. A lot of things in here to think about: eudaimonism in Faith's pleasure-seeking tendencies that lead her to evil activities but feeling unhappy, Buffy's relationship with Angel as a solution to Aristotle's love paradox, getting an idea of what Kant is about I guess, and morality in general. Did not like the essay on how Buffy is fascist (?) but anyway—I wasn't sure what to expect of this book but I feel excited about it in the same way when I was reading Fighting the Forces.
This book turns out to be a nice "primer" on philosophy-stuff for me because it was really helpful to relate concepts to specific things from Buffy, like how I can easily comprehend retributive punishment by thinking of vengeance/justice demons, and utilitarian punishment by thinking of Giles when he had to kill Ben/Glory. I like that a lot, makes it easier to consider myself in these positions. A lot of things in here to think about: eudaimonism in Faith's pleasure-seeking tendencies that lead her to evil activities but feeling unhappy, Buffy's relationship with Angel as a solution to Aristotle's love paradox, getting an idea of what Kant is about I guess, and morality in general. Did not like the essay on how Buffy is fascist (?) but anyway—I wasn't sure what to expect of this book but I feel excited about it in the same way when I was reading Fighting the Forces.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 102 reviews