Now some of the arugments I'm going to make are going to be new and some of them you may have heard before, but for the benefit of some of the newbies, here we go...
Before I go any further what I going to say may sound a little controversial and stir things up a little but hey if we didn't have that, where's the fun? In all seriousness I'm attempting to understand, both the characters and also where both shippers are coming from.
For it's about trying to look at certain aspects logically and fairly but also regarding my own emotional response to what I see, which I believe is just as important.
I see many Spuffy fans being hard on Angel and many Bangels saying they don't see how Buffy loved Spike etc, so I'm going to look at why this maybe the case.
Spike/Spuffy
I've said many a time I don't judge Spike for his unsoulled actions, but what I'm by that is that I don't judge Spike for his unsoulled actions. We can't have it both ways. I judge anything he does before he gets a soul by humans standards, which in my eyes, looking at it dispassionately, is fair. Now your spuffies will say "why so hard on Spike, look at all the wonderful things he did etc" or "He's a work in progress, give him time etc."
Hey, I'm not getting at the guy, but as I say, if take a reasonable moral human and turn them, they are playing by a different set of internal impulses that may lead them any which way, generally their actions are from a human perspective generally worse than their human counterparts. William was a gentle, person who wouldn't harm a fly but when turned he was turned, he wasn't just any old vampire, he was one of the most violent, with a reputation second only to Angelus. He didn't just kill for food, he killed for sport, akin to the way Angelus evil was about art. He saw the Slayers, saw the burdens and weaknesses, exploited them and used it against them to kill them.
This proof to me at least of a shift in his psychological disposition. Yes vampires have humanity in them but their general behaviour and perspective, is relatively removed from our own.
Vampires have free will within their disposition but what's motivating or inhibiting a vampire isn't the same as that of a human. This is why I refuse to judge any of his actions in the same way as I would a human. I'm reluctant to say "Well done soullessSpike" for some things and "I don't blame because of the lack of soul" for other things.
You may say about Angel(us)? I'd say a resounding "yes" to that lol. I don't judge him for his soulless actions, but I'll go into more detail with that in a minute. In any case though, you have to admit I'm still treating both vampires the same at this point. So in the case of the Spike this includes everything from the AR, to getting soul. I can see Spuffy fans not liking this, but with all this said, it doesn't mean these actions, seemingly positive or negative, have no meaning or didn't mean anything to Buffy because they did. We can also judge the reactions to Spike's actions. Here though I'm being more or less clinical about the whole thing.
Do I still hear the cries of "Cut the guy some slack". If anything, I'm actually dispelling the idea that human behaviour is the default for the vampire, it isn't, vampire behaviour is the default for a vampire. Now this may have traits of humanity mixed in but generally it's different from our own. Humans tend to view serial killers and rapists as bad, however most vampires would consider someone like Angelus a legend. So it becomes a matter of perspective. Spike on the other hand in the latter Btvs years would be considered a vampire abomination. So staying on this scale, it's not about Spike being a better person per se, but choosing the behaviour more akin to a moral human or even hero. So it's more about him decerning his personal and moral identity. This is why I see season 6 as the existential season. It's the classic, where do we go from here, making choices and being responsible for those choices. For Spike and Buffy it's about finding themselves and attempting to find their moral identity. If Spike actually got his chip out at the end of Season 6, then I still would judge him anyway because it's about finding his purpose. If he then decided his purpose was to kill Buffy, then at least his solving his moral identity crisis.
Looking at it from a metaphoric perspective, in Season 6 it really underscores the existential them. Spike is not inherently one thing or the other, but his actions make him into the person he becomes in Grave and Season 7 onwards. As a thought experiment, imagine a human who are doing more and more acts evil from a human perspective and eventually won the respect of an evil but incredibly picky vampire and eventually was turned.
The other perspective here is the emotional element. So we have to talk about the horrid AR. I've seen a lot of Bangels get upset by it as do Spuffies and my initial reaction was shock as well.
Some fans say "It was a mistake" or something along those lines. Whereas others would "A mistake???!!!"" "Are you mad?!" and see it as making excuses for something so heinous. I suppose it's partly because it seemed as though Spike was good or becoming a better man. If someone says they love and then do something to betray you, it almost seems more hurtful, more intrusive.
With Angelus, it's almost like "Well at least you know where you stand". He was monster, pure and simple and he never claimed to love Buffy.
So some Bangels are saying, "If Spike is saying treat me more like a man, we'll judge as as harshly, Angelus never asked for that."
When we talk about Spike, although I don't think it's fair to judge him like a human, it doesn't mean I can't be touched by his positive actions or shocked by his mistakes.
I think it may have been Zoe who talked about the gangs reactions to Spike's feelings. Now while I totally understand their reactions, I still identify with him. I don't agree with his actions in Crush, I do know what it's like to feel rejection and care about someone who does feel the same. One of the most frightening things is the sympathise or understand a 'monster' but I can. I don't understand all their actions but certainly some of their feelings and reactions. I mean who didn't get teary when he got rejected in FFL and was touched when he put down the gun and offered her comfort on the Back Steps.
Angel(us) Bangel
Now here I'm not so much comparing but this is something I just wanted to get out there. I did actually posit in one of my theories on Angel that he's suffering from a form of Dissociative Identity Disorder. Many people think it's cop out or the Spike never had a Spikelus to blame his past crimes on but as I said above, who's blaming? I'd say that perhaps either the restoration or indeed the losing of his soul may have, against his will fragmented his persona. Although they have things in the common they are so different in their behaviour. Maybe this isn't only exlcusive to Angel. Dru was very chaste in human life, she hated her 'gift' and seem loving and caring. When became a vampire, although she was able to love Spike, she's very sexual, revels in her psychic abilities and is quite the sadist. She was a willing participant in Angelus game of immorality with Spike both in the 1800s an the 1990s. People simply say she insane but she knew what she was doing as far as I'm concerned.
But going on Angel's psychological ailment here, I don't like people saying that it makes him weak somehow. In same way if you had two soldiers fighting in a war and one comes back with Post Traumatic Syndrome and the other doesn't, I wouldn't call the one who has it weak. Some people don't have the coping resources to deal with certain events. Even if argue that evil is, as evil is or weak is as weak is then I'll say if anything Angel has a more a handicap in that respect, but I wouldn't argue that anyway...
Going to the emotional aspect, this is why I empathise with Angel. Depsite his weaknesses he keeps on trying. StarSlayer and I were talking about Amends and my defense of Angel was more or less emotional. When he was going to kill himself, he wasn't intentionally being a vicious bastard or anything, he felt nihilistic and truly hated himself for what he had done. I don't even think he's being necessarily selfish. If you're feeling that low, even if someone says they love you, you can't hear it, trust me. Angel is so afraid of even the remote possibility of messing up,( and people do fail and mess up it's a part of life) he'd rather die than have the remote chance of being a monster again. If you're wondering about it hurting Buffy, I would say he could reason in the long run Buffy would simply move on and would be better off without him anyway along with the reast of the world.
Where does this leave us?
This isn't about excuses or moral superiority but about giving insight into why I relate more to Angel. I mean, I'm not even a Bangel or a Spuffy, but hey...I can still relate to their triumphs and failures.
Any on the point about purity and non purity. Maybe purity is the wrong word but certainly with Bangel there are aspects that are more black and white.
Angel was evil when he didn't have a soul and Bangel also finished when he didn't have a soul, but Spuffy is more 'messy'. Buffy and Spike became sexually intimate when he didn't have a soul and there was mutual abuse there and when he got a soul, they were sort of...what? They certainly WERE NOT a 'holding hands' couple and Buffy has canonically stated that more than once. I can sort of see why Bangel fans who needs things to be 'more defined' can't see the romantic love. My mother detested both Bangel and Spuffy and any relationship with a vampire (although she had a soft spot for Cangel) but even she said, she didn't think Buffy loved Spike romantically. Now hay, Spuffers, I agree with you that Buffy loved Spike, at least in Season 7 but you have to admit, it's a little more ambiguous, but that's what I love about it. The reason I believe they loved each other is because I don't believe after everything, Buffy would lie to Spike, even if it were a beautiful lie, but to defnd Bangels for a bit I think there are a great many of them who simply don't see it as clear cut enough to say that she did love him based what they saw. In their eyes the actions could be construed as a beautiful friendship. They may have felt this way even if Bangel never existed, am I wrong Bangels? THIS is what they mean when she say that Buffy didn't love Spike in the same way. It's almost patronizing to say no two loves are the same but what they are saying is, because of the lack of holding hands, its more ambigious than "I love you, you love me, lets go steady"
Although the truth is, Buffy didn't want a relationship at all at that time anyway. It had nothing to do with Spike per se, as someone already said.
I'm obviously more invested in Buffy, Spike and Angel moving on. If they happen to catch up in the future and Angel shanshu's and they have babies, fine or if Spike finds Buffy ready to commit to him, then also great, but I don't see Buffy as Angel or Spike's girl, she's her own girl, just like, now, Angel and Spike are their own men.
