la_libreria_chula's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
2.0
While I didn't finish it, I still found interesting to read. I am a big fan of Buffy and love reading works like this about shows, movies, other books, fandoms, etc. I would read again later.
cassimiranda's review
I just found most of the essays to be uninteresting, even though I wanted to learn more!
greatlibraryofalexandra's review
4.0
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.
ubalstecha's review
4.0
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.
veleda_k's review
3.0
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.
beals's review
4.0
I loved it apart from the last essay which was actually awful in comparison with all the other great stuff in there. The good essays were really well-written but I didn't feel talked down to - really glad that I actually watched all of BtVS before reading the book though, because I hadn't finished the series when I put it on my list, and it's (rightly) a sea of spoilers (also for Angel, which I haven't finished.
vi__'s review
3.0
I really enjoyed this book and I had a lot of fun readying the essays. There is a lot that got repetitive and that got a little boring. But overall I learnt a lot about philosophy and others opinions about Buffy. I disagreed with a lot but I also agreed with a lot, which in it of itself was fun.
lanikei's review
2.0
The idea behind these 'pop culture and philosophy' books is so cool, and then I remember that I HATED philosophy classes. I think what I really want is more like 'literary analysis and discussion of pop culture' books. Of course with any sort of anthology it's a mixed bag. Some essays were more interesting than others, and I'm sure if I remembered more about my philosophy 101 I would have been able to follow some better.
If you're a big nerdy Buffy fan and are willing to skim the stuff you don't care about and enjoy the good ones, this wasn't bad. And I'm sure if you're a philosophy nerd or philosophy student this is more entertaining than a lot of the stuff you read.
If you're a big nerdy Buffy fan and are willing to skim the stuff you don't care about and enjoy the good ones, this wasn't bad. And I'm sure if you're a philosophy nerd or philosophy student this is more entertaining than a lot of the stuff you read.
pussreboots's review
2.0
These essays illustrate just how disjointed and inconsistent Buffy as a series became over the course of its run. Many of the essays in this book try to follow the behaviors of a character or two throughout the seven years of the show and rationalize through a philosophical theory these actions. It doesn't work except to create a rather dull book. For a better primer to philosophy that also uses a television series as its central theme, read Philosophy and the Simpsons: The D'Oh of Homer.