Joss Whedon: An Incite into Entertainment

Dushku in Dollhouse, being imprinted

As a fan of Joss Whedon, the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, it’s counterpart Angel, as well as Dollhouse (his most recent television series), I was just musing over the reason for Buffy and Angel’s success — both series’ reached over 100 episodes in seven seasons — versus Dollhouse’s 26 episodes. Of course, their airing night was obviously a factor. Dollhouse was premiered and continued on Friday nights, a highly competitive slot. However, beyond that, I think the content of these shows is comparable but different in an essential way.

My theory, is that Buffy the Vampire Slayer succeeded where Dollhouse did not because of the theme of the plot. Both series are led by strong heroines, women who struggle against forces often stronger than themselves in order to overcome a moral issue [either physical or emotional]. However, the issues confronted in Buffy — questions of self-identity, good v. evil, and morality, were easily hidden behind the fantasy of the series: vampires, demons, witches, and warlocks are easy scapegoats for evil, and although they served a very important purpose as conduits of these moral qualms, they also helped to hide it from viewers who prefer the lighter side of television. People were capable of falling in love with the characters, becoming invested in a single episode’s conflict (a certain demon threat), without facing the overarching themes — military presence, shades of grey of evil, etc. Human flaws could be disregarded as elements of the fantastical — the evil was not human, it was not complex (as long as you chose not too look too close). One of the main characters, Xander Harris, was one of the only completely human characters. He also was the only character that did not make any evil choices, the worst thing he does in the series is leave his fiance at the altar. Whereas his best friend, Willow, murders someone — but, she is a witch and her darkness can be explained by this mystical factor.

Gellar with Master Vampire -- humanity?

However, Dollhouse did not allow this great escape from the human. Although each episode deploys the same techniques for entertainment – violence, sex, characterization — the overall theme hits too close to home. Prostitution through manipulation of human being’s minds and memories is too real. A person cannot watch Dollhouse without wondering, would I be a doll? Would I hire a doll? Would I stop the Dollhouse if it were real? The show exhibits exactly this in the episode “Man on the Street.” These questions are overt, and they are not fantastical. The science used in the show is exactly that — science. Technology. Which we are capable of developing, and can see being developed in the future. The characters, good and bad, are complex — they rationalize their behavior in real and very “gray-area” ways. No demons can hide the conflict from our reality. The average American wants to watch a show that entertains them, but does not make them think about reality.

This is where I sympathize with Whedon, as a writer. It begs the question, do we write for our audience or for ourselves? Do we write because we want people to be entertained, to be taken from reality if even for a moment? Buffy did this, for seven seasons. It allowed its viewers to enter a different existence, where questions of good and evil could be asked and then left behind when the picture box turned off its lights and hung its “no vacancy” sign.

Dollhouse, I believe, served Whedon more than its audience. Entertaining as it was, the series was Whedon’s attempt to incite certain questions he himself had entertained about humanity, about the reality he and his audience really live in. It offered him a chance to provoke thought, to cause hesitation. In a way, this series served a greater purpose for the audience than Buffy — it asked more of them, it encouraged them, it allowed them to grow. The problem is that most audiences don’t want this from their entertainment. Television, movies, and often books are sources of escape for people. They are held as a different atmosphere than study, than learning. These worlds are not the same. Even in school, when a professor or teacher brings in a film for the class, the students see this as an escape from learning — as a free day.

Why is this? Why can we not learn and be entertained at once? Of course, there are exceptions — I am entertained by my education. I indulge in the dark, deep questions that Dollhouse asks, and I am also sucked in by the violence, by the music, by the pretty people.

For the record, I love both shows equally — but, as a writer, I value Dollhouse more. It is intelligent, incisive, and entertaining. Plus, Eliza Dushku is phenomenal in both series.