# Let me explain away all your Buffy plot holes! \*Spoilers Obviously\* **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 20, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870 "2004-11-20T21:34:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/61 "2004-11-23T13:25:29Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > > [@Miller](#): > > > > Alternative: when the Slayership passed to an unknown with no formal training and no pre-established ties to the council, the Watchers decided to write her off, give her minimal aid (just one watcher to keep tabs on her), and wait for her to die so someone more controllable could be Chosen. > > That was actually something along the lines of what I was thinking when I said nobody else wanted the job of being Buffy’s watcher… she was considered too much of a loose cannon, expendable, and assigned someone expendable to ‘partner’ with her. The Council never “wrote her off,” she quit taking orders from them after they had Giles drug her and put her through that stupid test when she turned 18. What evidence is there that other Slayers recieved any more supervision than Buffy has in Giles and then Wesley? Faith only mentions “a” watcher, who is killed. Then Wesley becomes her watcher, as well as Buffy’s. Kendra had a single watcher, as well. Whenever Buffy needs information, Giles or Wesley contacts the Council and reports back to her with whatever they tell him. There’s never any mention of a Slayer with multiple Watchers. I don’t find any support for the notion that Giles is “expendable.” He seems highly respected by the Council and its members - at least until his fatal flaw is revealed: he cares too much about Buffy to discipline her in the way the Council thinks appropriate. Then he is replaced with Wesley. Although Wesley is a fop and a dweeb, he’s also an academic and attempts to be a disciplinarian, just like the Council wanted him to be. Buffy’s not biting, and Giles’ presence certainly doesn’t help their dynamic, but I don’t see how Wesley is “expendable” either. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/62 "2004-11-23T14:53:18Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > He seems highly respected by the Council and its members… Exhibit A… > [@](#): > > Faith: The vamps, though, they better get their asses to DEFCON ONE, > (points to Buffy) 'cause you and I are gonna have fun, you know, > Watcherless and fancy-free. (smiles) > > Buffy: Watcherless? > > Faith: (looks around at everyone) Didn’t yours go to England, too? > > \*\*Cut to the library. Giles stands at the end of the table with his hands > in his pockets, reminiscing about the gatherings. > > Giles: There’s a Watchers’ retreat every year in the Cotswolds. (walks > to the other end of the table) It’s a lovely spot. It’s very s-serene. > (everyone listens) There’s horse riding and hiking and punting (smiles) > and lectures and discussions. It-i-it’s… it’s a great honor to be > invited. (a tad bitter) Or so I’m told.\*\* > > Faith: Oh, it’s boring. Way too stuffy for a guy like you. > > Buffy: Um, maybe I should introduce you again. Faith, this is _Giles_. > > Willow smirks. > > Faith: I see him. If I’d’ve known they came _that_ young and cute, I > would’ve requested a transfer. > > Giles takes off his glasses. > > Buffy: (grossed out) Raise your hand if ‘ew’. (raises her hand) > > Xander raises his, but hides it by scratching his cheek. This segment was, (like a lot of other things on Buffy,) played for laughs, but I think it is very indicative that Giles was not treated with a lot of respect by the council… a fairly simple retreat, a gathering of the Watcher’s membership… and he had NEVER been invited. Even if it’s only a select few who get invited, to be consistently left out would seem to indicate that he’s not considered to be the cream of the crop. There’s also a lot of the byplay with Gwendolyn Post in ‘Revelations’ that seems to be relevant – yes, she was evil and had come to Sunnydale to steal a mystic artifact, yes, she was probably being condescending and dismissive of Giles to keep him off balance and manipulate him. But the way Giles reacts to her attitude indicates that he isn’t too surprised at some of it… he knows he’s thought of as a black sheep among watchers. That’s the way I read it, in any event. Counterpoints?? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/63 "2004-11-23T15:10:42Z")
I agree. My impression was that Giles’s father was a respected watcher, Giles was expected to follow suit, instead screwed around a lot as a young man (Ripper), and eventually came back to the Watchers in shame–shame that they never really let him live down. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/64 "2004-11-23T15:21:51Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > Exhibit A… > > This segment was, (like a lot of other things on Buffy,) played for laughs, but I think it is very indicative that Giles was not treated with a lot of respect by the council… a fairly simple retreat, a gathering of the Watcher’s membership… and he had NEVER been invited. Even if it’s only a select few who get invited, to be consistently left out would seem to indicate that he’s not considered to be the cream of the crop. > [@](#): > > There’s also a lot of the byplay with Gwendolyn Post in ‘Revelations’ that seems to be relevant – yes, she was evil and had come to Sunnydale to steal a mystic artifact, yes, she was probably being condescending and dismissive of Giles to keep him off balance and manipulate him. > > But the way Giles reacts to her attitude indicates that he isn’t too surprised at some of it… he knows he’s thought of as a black sheep among watchers. > > That’s the way I read it, in any event. Counterpoints?? 🙂 I read both of those as Academic Banter. I see it all the time (my husband’s a college prof) and it has nothing to do with whether or not a person is respected in his field. In fact, the more highly regarded one is, the more likely other academics are to try to tear you down. Plus the Council is huge, by all appearances, and “a great honor” may only be open to the top 10%. Giles may not be in the top 10% (especially since he’s not living in England and kissing the right ass on a daily basis) but that doesn’t mean he’s in the bottom 10%, either. But, I do admit that’s reading outside the text, and I’m willing to succeed your first point. Gwendolyn I can’t give you, though. Her entire modus opperandus was to attempt to tear down Buffy and Faith’s faith in Giles so they would accept her as Faith’s watcher. Of course she was a bitch to Giles - she wanted to undermine his authority with the Slayers. As far as his reactions go, he was certainly in full Giles-fluster mode, so I’m not sure “he isn’t too surprised” is accurate. She was not a representative of the Council. She was an evil bitch who betrayed the Council, so of course would be extra scornful of those still connected with it. > [@toadspittle](#): > > I agree. My impression was that Giles’s father was a respected watcher, Giles was expected to follow suit, instead screwed around a lot as a young man (Ripper), Are you sure you’re not thinking of Wesley? I don’t remember ever hearing anything about Giles’ father. There’s lots I don’t remember though. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/65 "2004-11-23T15:31:12Z")
Here’s one for the OP (or anyone else who wants to take a stab at it): Why is it that some potentials have Watchers and others don’t? Kendra had a Watcher from a very young age - before Buffy died and Kendra became a Slayer. Some of the other potentials talked about their Watchers, but some seemed clueless of their potential status until the Scooby-Gang picked them up. Buffy wasn’t “called” (I suppose that means became a Slayer) until her freshman year of high school, which is also when her Watcher showed up, right? Given that at least one potential had a Watcher (Kendra), it would seem that the Council has some way of determining who the potentials are. So why doesn’t every potential get a Watcher, just in case she becomes the Slayer? ---
**Author:** ![merrily](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@merrily](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/merrily)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/66 "2004-11-23T15:54:05Z")
I thought Faith mentioned her mother several times, in passing–you are left with a wrong-side-of-the-tracks feeling about her upbringing. Was there something about her mother drinking, perhaps? My question is not new, but how about your take on it: How come the First tortures Spike by drowning him, and it works? Yes, he can’t kill him, but if vampires don’t breathe (and that is well established), how can he all but drown? There is a similar moment when Spike strangles Drusilla, but maybe that was blood to the brain that made her pass out? ---
**Author:** ![ThatGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e5b9ba/32.png) [@ThatGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThatGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/67 "2004-11-23T16:19:37Z")
It is obvious that the watcher’s council can identify potentials (as can willow via a spell), it’s possible that only some of the potentials can be reached with the WC’s methods and those are the ones assigned a watcher. More likely however i believe that it is possible to see who has the “strongest” potential status, therefore the most likely to become the next slayer…they surely get watchers (kendra, faith). A lot of people point out the since vamps don’t need to breathe it is inconsistant that they can smoke or we see them panting after a fight. I believe that the breathing thing is like the eating thing, they don’t need to do it to live…but they do it anyway. They can’t die from being drowned but there’s no indication that it doesn’t hurt like hell. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/68 "2004-11-23T16:23:35Z")
> [@ThatGuy](#): > > It is obvious that the watcher’s council can identify potentials (as can willow via a spell), it’s possible that only some of the potentials can be reached with the WC’s methods and those are the ones assigned a watcher. I actually always thought it was a little hit or miss to find potentials… the Council probably doesn’t have a sorceress as powerful as Willow in every town all over the world, and even Willow’s spell wasn’t interpreted correctly until Amanda settled the issue in combat. Probably, in a lot of the cultures where the watchers can operate more freely without attracting undue attention, they follow the traces as well as they can and normally find the potentials. In other cultures… probably they knew that there was a potential somewhere in such-and-such neighborhood of a particular LA suburb, but didn’t identify Buffy personally until she was Called. ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/69 "2004-11-23T16:51:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Are you sure you’re not thinking of Wesley? I don’t remember ever hearing anything about Giles’ father. There’s lots I don’t remember though. > Reply With Quote They both came from a family of Watchers. Giles’ father and grandmother were both watchers. I also got the impression that Giles wasn’t the most respected member of the CoW. Remember when he “didn’t get the memo” about Post? Again, played for laughs, but jesus, there’s a psycho roque watcher out there trying to kill somebody and he doesn’t get the memo? > [@](#): > > Why did they lose, why did they die, why did they seek destruction? From that point on, the season becomes about the death drive. It becomes about Buffy seeking death, not creating a life. I agree, and Dawn in the equation complicates things further, since in a way, Buffy _did_ create life when the monks used her blood to make Dawn. ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/70 "2004-11-23T16:53:55Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Are you sure you’re not thinking of Wesley? I don’t remember ever hearing anything about Giles’ father. There’s lots I don’t remember though. Some support for my recollections, but not 100%: > [@](#): > > Canon > Giles first mentions his father in “Never Kill A Boy On The First Date” when he tells Buffy “I was ten years old when my father told me I was destined to be a Watcher.” He was a Watcher. And “My father gave me a very tiresome speech about, uh, responsibility and sacrifice.” Young Rupert certainly didn’t like to learn of his new destiny, but it’s not uncommon that a 10-year-old would find a speech about responsibility and sacrifice tiresome. It’s almost to be expected. At the very least his father wanted to explain to him what it meant to be a Watcher instead of simply informing his son of his fate. The second (and so far last) mention was in in “The Dark Age”. Giles says “That edition was my father’s” of a book he lent Jenny. He has read it several times and is shocked when Jenny teases him about ruining it. Apart from being a first edition it seems to have some sentimental value to him. These two short mentions don’t prove anything either way. But it is just as possible that Giles’ father was very encouraging and trying to help Rupert adjust as best as he could. They could have been very close. Maybe the reason he ran away was not just the overwhelming pressure but his father’s death and that he had nobody to share the pressure with any longer. Maybe his father is still alive and they call each other once a week. [http://www.buffygiles.com/complex/fanon.htm](http://www.buffygiles.com/complex/fanon.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Death](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ecccb3/32.png) [@Evil\_Death](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Death)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/71 "2004-11-23T17:04:24Z")
> [@merrily](#): > > How come the First tortures Spike by drowning him, and it works? Yes, he can’t kill him, but if vampires don’t breathe (and that is well established), how can he all but drown? I imagine that having your lungs flood with water is pretty painful no matter what you do or don’t use them for. ---
**Author:** ![shy\_guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@shy\_guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shy_guy)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/72 "2004-11-23T19:20:26Z")
> [@pepperlandgirl](#): > > The whole point of Fool For Love was that Slayers _are_ powerful, but they choose when to die. They may not do it consciously, but that’s how they die. The whole fifth season supports this. It’s the only way **The Gift** makes any sense. She was powerful enough to beat a God, to knock Doc off the tower, to swing the troll hammer like it was a toy. The Scooby Gang had never been more powerful in any of the previous seasons–Willow was coming into her magic, Xander “the heart” had finally fallen in love, Giles showed that his ruthless streak was close to the surface, Anya despite her fears went in swinging, and Buffy had the very powerful love for Dawn. Everything that made Buffy a _great_ Slayer was in **The Gift**. > > And she died. Well, I actually don’t think _The Gift_ does make much sense. And I suppose it’s precicely because I don’t buy the “Slayers choose to die” line. > [@](#): > > Because she chose to. Just like Spike said she would. You may not like Spike personally as a character, but remember he is, and always has been, a plot device. Like The Fool in Shakespeare, he points out the rather obvious and he’s the mouthpiece for the writers at times. If you want to think he’s a letch trying to get into Buffy’s pants as a character, well, fine whatever, but if you look at the show thematically, his speech and actions in **Fool For Love** support this completely. I agree that he functions in this way (just as Cordelia and Anya did at times), but I disagree that there’s any substance to his statements in this instance (as opposed to, say, “Lover’s Walk” or even much of season 6). > [@](#): > > Pointing out that he was “lucky” in the first time is exactly the point. He _was_ lucky. And remember, before he bit into the girl, she spoke to him in Chinese (IIRC she said “Tell my mother I’m sorry”.) It was as though she gave up completely in her fight. He may have bested Nikki more fair and square–she definitely had a reason to live–but he was older then with more experience. Either way, like he said in **Lies My Parents Told Me** , she knew what she signed up for and by not choosing to walk away for her son (she has the strength doesn’t mean she has the obligation) she did choose death. But how is that “choosing death” any more than anyone else who fights demons chooses death? How is Xander not choosing death by knowingly getting himself into situations that will likely lead to him dying? I don’t see how this specifically means that the Slayer chooses death more than anyone who fights evil does in her world, let alone compared to other heroes. > [@](#): > > If you’re going to discount everything Spike said, you’re going to have to ignore all the heavy-foreshadowing in that episode for **The Gift** and you’re going to have to come up with a completely different thematic reason (not the plot reason!) for the fact that the only person who can kill Buffy is Buffy. You’re also going to have to deal with the fact that the whole reason the pitiful vamp nearly killed her was because she was distracted and worried about her role as the Slayer, which started in **Buffy vs Dracula** when she was shown hunting the vampires and implied heavily that it was more satisfying than sex. That scared her, and it began the long theme of her fear of losing her humanity, her emotions, her ability to love. But Buffy’s strongest asset, as Spike pointed out, was always her humanity and her ties to the world. The vampire nearly got her because she wasn’t at the top of her game, and this lose end was tied up in **Intervention** when her guide assured her she was full of love. Which launched us into the five episode arc that culiminated in her choosing death on her terms. Either way though, off the tower or in the cemetery, it was her choices and her (non physical) weaknesses (or the flip in The Gift her strenghts) that put her life in danger. Not the relative strength of the vampires or demons around her. Even granted that the end of “The Gift” has a lot to do with Buffy being in control of her choices (which I think it is, to an extent, although I think it’s incredibly flawed), I don’t see either reason or ample evidence to extend this to a greater theme of “slayers choose to die.” Indeed, I think your argument is very compelling as it applies to Buffy… but in that case, it seems to me that all it would mean is that Spike knows what Buffy is going through, not necessarily that he has any greater insight into the nature of Slayers, or even that there’s a common factor that exists among them that doesn’t exist among everyone else who regularly risks their life. > [@](#): > > The same went for the Chinese slayer and Nikki and I think it’s pretty clear that Spike understood that…even if it’s just so the writers could make the audience understand that. Then how does Kendra fit into any of this (or even some of the former-potentials who died at the end of “Chosen”)? How did she choose her own death? If it’s just because she put herself into harm’s way, then again I have to question how potent of a theme it is, because everyone on the show does that. It seems to me as though all of this fits better to a more nihilistic theme. Slayers really _aren’t_ that powerful, it’s just that the higher powers in the Buffyverse aren’t that powerful either. Nobody really has control over that much. Agents in the Buffyverse may try to ascribe higher purposes or subconscious motivations to everything, but in the end what kills the Slayer ends up being something totally random, not the fact that she’s ready to die. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Death](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ecccb3/32.png) [@Evil\_Death](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Death)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/73 "2004-11-23T22:31:39Z")
> [@shy guy](#): > > Then how does Kendra fit into any of this (or even some of the former-potentials who died at the end of “Chosen”)? Better than anyone else mentioned, seeing as how she fell under Dru’s hypnotic spell so easily. ---
**Author:** ![shy\_guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@shy\_guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shy_guy)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2004, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/74 "2004-11-24T06:10:57Z")
> [@Evil Death](#): > > Better than anyone else mentioned, seeing as how she fell under Dru’s hypnotic spell so easily. Okay, I’m clearly confused. I mean, by that logic, what kind of death _wouldn’t_ fit in to the whole “Slayers want to die” thing? I guess that’s pretty much the same problem as I raised in my previous post: by the logic we’re applying to that theme, I’m having a hard time seeing who it wouldn’t apply to, which sort of renders it meaningless to me. Of course, it’s entirely possible I just don’t get it. I definitely defer to pepperlandgirl in all things Buffy related. ---
**Author:** ![threeorange](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@threeorange](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threeorange)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2004, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/75 "2004-12-01T02:26:35Z")
New topic- Why was it deemed necessary by those in the know to keep the truth about the Hellmouth a secret from the local citizenry? How were people made safer by \*\*not \*\* knowing of the existence of vampires and other demons? It seems to me that dozens of Sunnydale citizens perished needlessly because they were kept ignorant of the the undead menace, when an informed public could have taken the necessary precautions. I’m pretty good at overlooking plot holes, but this is the one thing about the show that always sorta bugged me. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2004, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/76 "2004-12-01T02:54:48Z")
> [@threeorange](#): > > New topic- > > Why was it deemed necessary by those in the know to keep the truth about the Hellmouth a secret from the local citizenry? How were people made safer by \*\*not \*\* knowing of the existence of vampires and other demons? It seems to me that dozens of Sunnydale citizens perished needlessly because they were kept ignorant of the the undead menace, when an informed public could have taken the necessary precautions. > > I’m pretty good at overlooking plot holes, but this is the one thing about the show that always sorta bugged me. Ummm… who exactly are you referring to as ‘those in the know’?? Those authorities who seemed to be clearly aware of the realities of life in sunnydale, such as the police chief?? Buffy and the schooby gang? Everyday citizens who managed to survive an encounter with the forces of darkness and weren’t able to rationalize it away?? The answers will be different for each of those groups, or others. A few relevant points. Early in the show, it was explained to Xander and Willow that they couldn’t explain to anyone about vampires because they wouldn’t be believed. More and more through the show, the existence of the supernatural seemed to be something of a ‘wink wink’ open secret – something you still didn’t talk about too publicly, in case someone who hadn’t come to terms with it was listening. If you knew you were talking to someone who knew the real deal, you might pass along a few helpful survival tips. The rarely-seen police chief of seasons 2 and 3, of course, was not really motivated in the direction of keeping the populace of sunnydale safe. He was a crony of Mayor Wilkins, who needed to have a sizable community of ‘victims’ in the vicinity for several reasons. ---
**Author:** ![threeorange](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@threeorange](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threeorange)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2004, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870/77 "2004-12-01T11:04:38Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > Ummm… who exactly are you referring to as ‘those in the know’?? Those authorities who seemed to be clearly aware of the realities of life in sunnydale, such as the police chief?? Buffy and the schooby gang? Everyday citizens who managed to survive an encounter with the forces of darkness and weren’t able to rationalize it away?? > > The answers will be different for each of those groups, or others. A few relevant points. > > Early in the show, it was explained to Xander and Willow that they couldn’t explain to anyone about vampires because they wouldn’t be believed. More and more through the show, the existence of the supernatural seemed to be something of a ‘wink wink’ open secret – something you still didn’t talk about too publicly, in case someone who hadn’t come to terms with it was listening. If you knew you were talking to someone who knew the real deal, you might pass along a few helpful survival tips. > > The rarely-seen police chief of seasons 2 and 3, of course, was not really motivated in the direction of keeping the populace of sunnydale safe. He was a crony of Mayor Wilkins, who needed to have a sizable community of ‘victims’ in the vicinity for several reasons. I’m mainly concerned with the good guys; for starters, why couldn’t Buffy tell her mother? Being the mother of the Slayer put Joyce in harm’s way constantly; for example, had she been more wary of who she invited into her home, she could have avoided being nearly eaten by Darla. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-explain-away-all-your-buffy-plot-holes-spoilers-obviously/275870.md?page=3)