#even though i disagreed somewhat it's 100% not a knock on you or the question

[impalementation]

Hey I wanted to get your opinion on something I've been thinking about for a little while: For me, I see Buffy's jump from the tower in "The Gift" as (partially) an act of suicide as a result of years of trauma but also IMO guilt that she "lives with every day"(courtesy of "Phases") from all of that trauma that she feels like she should've been able to control: Angel's loss of his soul, Jenny Calendar's death etc. but I wish we could've gotten to see more of how that guilt has affected her (1/2)

(2/2) And by that I mean if we had more references to Dr. Gregory and how she liked him or saw Buffy grappling with her complicated grief for Ford, or if season 3 showed her grief for Kendra and how that might've affected her relationship to Faith. All of that just to ask: do you think the show did a good job of portraying Buffy's guilt and trauma from the losses and tragedies she's faced?

i’ll be honest, i don’t actually subscribe to the read of buffy’s sacrifice in “the gift” as suicide. so that’s going to color how i reply. she is, obviously, killing herself. and i know that there’s the context of spike’s death wish speech and buffy saying “i don’t know how to live in the world if these are the choices.” but personally, i think that buffy’s sacrifice is clearly meant to be heroic. i talked in a recent post about how the white light signals that, as well as the fact that it’s contrasted with ben’s cowardly decision to choose himself over dawn when faced with buffy’s same choice. there’s also the fact that dawn is life, or buffy’s youth, or any number of positive things, and her request that dawn “be brave” and “live” is about wanting that life to go on. most importantly, the show as a whole is so hard-line anti-suicide, that it just doesn’t really make sense to me that this scene that is clearly meant to be a positive, heroic (even if tragic for the audience) moment for buffy would be intended to be read as an act of suicide. like i mention in that post i linked, we even have the contrasting example of buffy in “dead things” for what it looks like when buffy is trying to figuratively sacrifice herself out of guilt. and the show doesn’t frame her actions in that episode as positive at all. (sympathetic, absolutely. but not really the “right” thing to do either.)

keep in mind that when spike says that “sooner or later” buffy’s “going to want” death, he has been unreliably narrating all evening. when buffy jumps, i don’t see her as fulfilling spike’s prediction straight. i see her as fulfilling it ironically, like a prophecy that comes to pass in the letter but not the spirit. in that moment, buffy does technically want kill herself, but not to die, or for any of the reasons spike gave. she wants to do it because it means that her sister gets to live. and she has been terrified all season that this would not be possible. similarly, when buffy says “she doesn’t know how to live in this world” i don’t see it as much about buffy not wanting to live but about buffy not wanting to live in this world. as in, the problem is the world. but when she jumps from the tower, she’s figured out a choice that she is finally content with (“tell giles i’ve figured it out”). a choice that allows dawn, and all of her friends, to keep (a) living, and (b) in this world. in other words, it’s a moment decidedly in favor of life.

symbolically, there’s also the fact that buffy’s leap into the portal is (in my read) about her leaping into the portal of adulthood. and then season six about the rude awakening of realizing that adulthood isn’t just about a single easy leap. which means that her death isn’t really about literal death. it’s about leaving childhood behind. which is sad and painful in its way, but still ultimately something that the show thinks is good and important and even heroic to do.

however. that said. i do think the show addresses some of what you’re talking about. if you’re looking for a season that’s about buffy’s accumulated guilt over her inability to save people, i think the season you’re actually looking for is season seven. season seven puts buffy in a pressure cooker where over and over she’s confronted with the fact that she can’t save everyone. “lessons” has dead spirits come to life who taunt her for not saving them:

BUFFY: Dawn? I'm close by.

DEAD JANITOR: Too late. But then, you're always too late, aren't you? Sure as hell didn't save me.

“help” has buffy trying to save cassie, who dies no matter how much buffy tries to fight it. “selfless” revisits buffy’s history of having to kill angel, and any other friend who becomes evil. “conversations with dead people” forces buffy to kill a former classmate/temporary confidant (shades of having to kill ford in “lie to me”). “sleeper” puts buffy in the position of potentially having to kill spike too, and when he gets kidnapped she may or may not be able to save him. when the ubervamp shows up, buffy’s ability to protect the potentials gets thrown into question. and that uncertainly only becomes more intense as the season goes on. obviously, season seven doesn’t really address much in the way of specific past trauma or guilt for buffy. it doesn’t reference those people you reference. but it does absolutely address the way that being the slayer has put buffy in this awful position where people are always dying, and it feels like her fault—sometimes because she literally has to kill them. which the season does because it’s trying to show that the solitary slayer mantle is a messed up, unjust system. it’s messed up that buffy should have to shoulder this guilt, especially alone.

so i mean, on the whole, yeah. i think the show does gloss over a lot of specific traumas. but in other ways it really doesn’t. "when she was bad” and “anne” and early season three clearly address how the end of the previous season affected buffy. and i don’t think it can be understated how insane it is that the show had buffy be depressed for literally an entire season. and even before that, buffy’s grief over joyce informs the back half of season five. i think it’s also clearly established that buffy represses like crazy, so it’s actually quite in-character to me that most of the time she glosses over the things that are hard for her--except those times when it cracks open. could the show have shown more? yeah, probably. and probably some of what it decided to show was affected by biases about what the writers thought of as important, or them just not wanting to be doom and gloom all the time. but on the whole what the show did show mostly worked for me.

this is all me though, of course! if you feel differently, that’s completely understandable, and definitely don’t let me stop you.

[junker-town]

The NBA MVP debate has no clear winner

Russ, or Harden? It comes down to what you value.

Time is running out to pick a 2017 NBA MVP. Which amazing candidate will win? Who should win? Who will get that coveted No. 5 slot on the most ballots? Only time will tell. Or us, we’ll tell you in this week’s FLANNS & ZILLZ.

ZILLER: We have previously insisted that everyone calm down and wait to make NBA MVP decisions until the end of the season. Well ... we're here. Teams have a handful of games left. Little will change in the contours of the MVP race at this point.

There are said to be four candidates: James Harden, Russell Westbrook, LeBron James, and Kawhi Leonard. The sense I get is that neither LeBron or Kawhi will win -- they will affect this by taking first-place votes from the other two. That's where I want to take the discussions before we get into our opinions about the candidates.

Westbrook is going to be No. 3 or No. 4 on a bunch of ballots. I don't see Harden falling below No. 2 anywhere for this reason: if you're a Westbrook voter, you would be a Harden vote if not for Westbrook.

They have deadly similar cases: mainly incredible, dominant box scores on good teams. (Harden's team is somewhat better, though not the best team in the league by any stretch.) If you're a Harden voter, you might not be a Westbrook voter because you might appreciate shooting efficiency or team quality too much. In these cases, you might have Kawhi and/or LeBron at No. 2 and Westbrook lower.

So I think Westbrook may end up with the most No. 1 votes but still lose to Harden.

FLANNERY: That's an interesting theory. That unless Russ scores an overwhelming number of first-place votes, he won't win. I do think there's more of a case to be made against Russ than Harden. The efficiency numbers, the W-L record, etc. This is the crux of the MVP argument because you're right: LeBron and Kawhi have been lapped.

Before we get too far into the weeds I want to make one point.

I've been on the MVP fence this season, but at various moments I've stumped for LeBron. I had two reasons for this. 1. He's the best player in the world (We're not going to argue about this, right?) 2. He’s having a phenomenal season.

I mean, come on: 26-8-8 with a .617 True Shooting Percentage? That's not Miami Heat LeBron, but that's the best season he's put up since his return to Cleveland.

The Cavs March swoon undercut his argument. I still think he's the Most Valuable Player in the league, but not the MVP of the season. That make sense?

ZILLER: That makes sense. I even think it's absolutely, 100 percent crystal clear correct. Everyone would pick LeBron if they could choose one player for a season, a game, a play right now. He is the best player in the world, and I'm not sure there's even a debate. But those two guys and probably also Kawhi have had better seasons. LeBron is still the most reliable.

You're right about the Westbrook-Harden debate. There is no case against Harden, and while the visceral case for Westbrook may be somewhat stronger -- he's going to average a triple-double, and set the record for most triple-doubles in a season -- the shooting efficiency numbers and win-loss record are going to give stat-oriented voters a permission structure with which to vote against Westbrook. I don't think a plurality of voters are stats-oriented, but as I said, so long as Westbrook voters have Harden No. 2, the stats-oriented voters who put Westbrook No. 3 or 4 will decide this race.

Houston is almost 10 games better than Oklahoma City. How much of that reflects on Harden vs. Westbrook and how much is simply that the Rockets have more weapons and an elite wing defender to cover The Beard? I'm not sure win-loss record should matter here, in other words. It's not like the Thunder are noncompetitive.

Ken Blaze-USA TODAY Sports

FLANNERY: Right, by any objective measure the Rockets' supporting cast is deeper and stronger than OKC's. That's not a knock against Westbrook or a chip against Harden. It's just the way of the world. The question should be: Have both players helped their teams reach the fullest extent of their potential and the answer there is an unequivocal yes.

I want to get back to something you said about the stats-based arguments. This will be framed as new metrics versus old school counting numbers in much the same way baseball had Mike Trout versus Miguel Cabrera when Miggy won the triple crown. I want to caution folks on that one because it doesn't really hold up.

The thing about basketball metrics is that they don't point to an all-in-one number that tells you who's best. I don't know enough about WAR or how it's calculated but I know that smart baseball people think it's pretty good and that's fine with me. If you really dig in deep on the NBA metrics -- VORP, Win Shares, PER, RPM -- they all tell a slightly different story. Harden may be more efficient, but that doesn't mean he's more metrically dominant.

I think this is a case that comes down to personal preference.

ZILLER: I agree. There's an interesting conversation being had about who the numbers really favor, especially the hardcore advanced stats. But I'm speaking in shorthand a bit. The biggest difference in basketball analysis now vs. before Dean Oliver is in how we judge scoring efficiency. Harden is well ahead there.

But you're right that this comes down to personal preference, and in a toss-up, narrative matters. That's why I'm going Westbrook. His incredible season is coming in the wake of Kevin Durant leaving for a team they almost beat together. Harden's came in the wake of a wasted year thrown off track by our potential MVP coming in out of shape due to a summer of partying, a feud with a co-star, and a war with the coach.

You hate to ascribe moral arcs to sports arguments because we don't know these people at all. But the surface level narrative here favors Russ in my book.

Mark D. Smith-USA TODAY Sports

FLANNERY: And that's fine. I haven't made my mind up yet to be honest.

To me the narrative component comes down a different question: What do you like? Do you prefer a brilliantly conducted Philharmonic or are you into an avant-garde exploration into the vortex? I can appreciate them both but what moved me the most this season? I can't answer that yet.

How do you see the rest of this race playing out? The rules say voters must rank five players, which leaves a robust field of contenders for that fifth spot. This is the 'deserves consideration' portion of the program. I had Kevin Durant and Kyle Lowry up here before they got hurt, so now I'm down to three guards for that fifth spot: Isaiah Thomas, John Wall, and Steph Curry in some order.

Care to make the case for anyone else?

ZILLER: I would love to give Anthony Davis the nod there because of his outrageous production, but that team ... yikes. Jimmy Butler is the deserving perimeter player you didn't mention -- I think he's right there with Isaiah and Wall in the honorable mention category. If this were a 10-deep ballot Giannis Antetokounmpo would belong in there.

But it's gotta be Curry. His deferral to Durant is hugely commendable -- he was the two-time defending MVP! -- and since KD got hurt he's reminded us how incredible he remains. He's on his way to a Finals MVP, though.

FLANNERY: Let's not get ahead of ourselves!

You're right about Butler. He absolutely deserves to be in that fifth-place conversation. As with AD, his team's overall performance keeps him just outside those others, in my opinion. Wall, Thomas, and Curry have all been vital components on some of the best teams in the league. All things considered, that has to be part of this.

This vote is going to be brutal. Just like to point that out one more time.

ZILLER: Don't worry: no matter which way you go in the end, a chorus of those who disagree will be ready to call you an idiot. You can't lose.

FLANNERY: Or win.