Random Quote about Random Ship in Random Journal

[dlgood]

I came across this line - a sentiment I've seen many times relating to many different characters in many different relationships, and on many different shows. And it always gets me thinking:

"Character X" accepted "Character Y" for exactly who they was, warts and all. And it made "Y" feel less guilty/wrong/bad about having this very very very dark and twisted side.

And invariably, I'm always left with a question. Why is this such a Good Thing? Shouldn't we feel guilty for having a dark/twisted/evil side?

I recognize that dark/twisted/evil frequently equals "TEH HOT" and "TEH DRAMA", but isn't this the sort of thing we should be working on? Aren't these the traits and aspects that a person is supposed to be trying to improve? Isn't this part and parcel of healthy relationships?

I'm not talking about denying or hiding from the darkness within - I'm talking about working to overcome the darkness within. Granted, one shouldn't be unnecessarily dwelling upon and wallowing in one's inner darkness. But if the lessening of that condition isn't accompanied by sincere attempts at growth beyond the darkness, is it really all that good for those involved?

And frequently, I think, this is why these relationships end up falling apart. Character Y is drawn to Character X, who appreciates the darkness within. Character "Y" ends the relationship because Character "X" cannot actually (and often doesn't care to) help "Y" overcome that darkness. Fans of X/Y gnash teeth at the demise of the relationship, frequently blaming "Y" for being judgemental/snobby/mean (sometimes justifably, sometimes not) in leaving the wonderful "X" behind.

Comments

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

In Jossverse and elsewhere, though, there's a Jungian aspect to all of this--when X accepts Y, X is really accepting X's own inner potential for darkness. Which is no doubt what you're objecting to

Actually, it wasn't what I was talking about at all. It's not about X accepting X's dark side. It's about "X" (who is alread "dark") accepting Y's dark side -- to the point that this is touted as a virtue of the continuing relationship. When in fact, it is no virtue if "X" prioritizes "Y" remaining dark as a means to prolong the relationship

Indeed, we aren't whole without our inner darkness - it is a part of who we are. But it is something we are supposed to accept as a means of overcoming it - not so that we might dwell upon it.

Buffy accepts Faith - but my fundamental point the "Faith" that Buffy does accept - and that the Faith of S7 is very different than the Faith of S3.

[mamculuna.livejournal.com]

No, I maybe misread you, but also wasn't clear. I see things like Buffy-Spike (and don't know the Wes-Lilah story that well) as being in some ways about the different parts of one person.

I'm not quite sure I agree that we accept the dark in order to overcome it. Sticking with the Buffy-Faith analogy, Faith had come some ways toward Buffy (accepting her light side, one might say) but Buffy had moved in the Faith direction. I think the darkness is not to be destroyed, but maybe channeled.

But again, remember I don't know the Wes-Lilah story very well. So probably shouldn't have commented.

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

Buffy had moved in the Faith direction. I think the darkness is not to be destroyed, but maybe channeled.

If the "darkness" is a fundamental part of who we are, we can't destroy it without destroying ourselves. But we can still overcome it. For example - an alcoholic feels the urge to take a drink. But the alcoholic overcomes that urge by becoming aware of that urge, accepting that they have the urge, but not giving in to that urge.

We struggle to do that with our own inner darkness every day. By S7,
Buffy may have gained a better acceptance of her darkness, but she hasn't become it. She's using her awareness to avoid falling fully prey to the darker aspects of her nature. That's the overcoming part.

But again, remember I don't know the Wes-Lilah story very well. So probably shouldn't have commented.

No! Your comment is perfectly valid, as the discussion was meant to be more general than specific.

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

Ah right. That's what I think was confusing in your original post - it's a bit of a different situation if X is accepting Y's "darkness" out of love for them, or because they're pretty "dark" themselves.

Although, i always have a problem with the word "dark" itself - it tends to be used so interchangeably from "having some socially questionable tendencies but being able to control them" to being a less judgemental euphemism for "murderous bastard".