Buffy's Boyfriends

[thetopher]

Might have something to do with show being called "Buffy the vampire slayer", and no spinoff plan for Spike. Honestly, you're really reaching here : the show is about Buffy, and with so much stroylines going on, it makes sense to combine Buffy's development and Spike's, hence his 'atonement ' being in her presence.

Just drop one of his many ancillory and pointless 'sub-plots' (the trigger/sleeper agent thing for one) and have him interact with somebody away from Buffy. Hell, he's staying at Xander's house for many an episode maybe have them interact?

But its only Buffy and there's a reason for that; so the writers can have the 'nobody believes in Spike but Buffy and vice-versa', but it ends up having unfortunate connotations as the season progresses.

Also not true, see Lessons and Dirty Girls

There was just 'insane mussed Spike' in 'Lessons', that's all. It was 'The First making him that way.

And when does he ruminate on his evil ways in 'Dirty Girls'? Flirty, sexual chemistry conversations don't count, as he told Faith 'I reformed way before you did', i.e before he got a soul.

Yeah but to be fair his fans would stage a riot if they made him broody or had him guilt ridden.

No, not guilt ridden. I do not want an Angel mark 2 (that would be dull and would again have Spike copying Angel), but how about him interacting in any meaningful way with another cast member about what it means to have a soul/remorse.
I mean there's Willow and Anya and Andrew and a whole bunch who have actually been to the dark side (certainly more than Buffy has) and struggling with their pain. Spike doesn't seem to struggle like that, dispite having an impressive murder count in S7 as compared to the last 3 seasons.

 

[Cheese Slices]

Just drop one of his many ancillory and pointless 'sub-plots' (the trigger/sleeper agent thing for one) and have him interact with somebody away from Buffy. Hell, he's staying at Xander's house for many an episode maybe have them interact?

But its only Buffy and there's a reason for that; so the writers can have the 'nobody believes in Spike but Buffy and vice-versa', but it ends up having unfortunate connotations as the season progresses.

.

But wouldn't have people complained even more that Spike became the central character of the show, if he spends more time interacting about characters that aren't the title character ? Also, isn't the trigger his only subplot ? (unless you count his roadtrip with Andrew and the chip thing, but that hardly takes up much space).
Also, whom else can he really talk to ? Giles hates him, Xander & Willow are on the fence about him, Anya is mad because of the events of Selfless, Dawn doesn't want to be near him... Buffy and Spike's stories are intertwined, and she knows him better than any other character present, so it's just natural that he would spend most of his time with her (as was the case with Angel in season 3).

There was just 'insane mussed Spike' in 'Lessons', that's all. It was 'The First making him that way.

And when does he ruminate on his evil ways in 'Dirty Girls'? Flirty, sexual chemistry conversations don't count, as he told Faith 'I reformed way before you did', i.e before he got a soul.

Why not ? They do touch upon past evil deeds and how they deal with it, albeit briefly.

 

[Dora]

I think JM was limited by the material he was given rather than his acting range. In Season 2, he turned a character that was meant to be a disposable villain into one of the most popular characters in the series. I think the issues with Spike start happening once Spuffy becomes a thing, essentially from Season 5 onwards. Spike's storyline becomes all about Buffy. He moons after Buffy, he pines after Buffy, he's in love with Buffy, etc. Spike ceases to exist as a character outside of Spuffy. I don't think there's many ways you can play "Buffy's lapdog". That's why Spike is at his best in Seasons 2-4, particularly Season 2 when he has both Drusilla and Angelus to play off of.

I agree Spike S2 Brilliant and the issues with Spike start when he starts stalking Buffy , but what else could they do with him apart from being with Buffy, his story line otherwise is very limited with the Chip ,
But what happened to JM acting from S2 to S7 did he just get lazy knowing he had a job for as long as the Buffy ran , that his friend ship with Whedon etc and fan pressure meant his job was secured

 

[thrasherpix]

Yeah, I don't think it was "brave" for Joss to keep Spike as a character which was against his original plan, because I see it as caving in to pressure from the fans and/or the suits (who care about how much money the show is making, and thus what the fans want). While I won't go as far to say "sell out," I'm closer to that than "brave" where Spike/JM is concerned.

 

[RachM]

That's a weak excuse. It is still the same Darla he was trying to save earlier, before she was turned by Dru.

No, it's not the same Darla. The Darla he was trying to save was human, she had a soul. Once she was turned she became a soulless vampire, a different person, a different creature, really. Not the same and as such, he shouldn't - and doesn't - treat her the same.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

In "The Dark Age", we see the following explanation of how Angel eliminated Eyghon:

BUFFY
You knew that if the demon was in
danger it would jump into the nearest
dead guy.

ANGEL
I put it in danger.

WILLOW
And it jumped.

ANGEL
But I've had a demon inside me for a
couple hundred years just waiting for
a good fight.

BUFFY
Winner and still champion.

I don't see a consistent pattern of hatred of his inner demon here. In fact, he seems quite pleased with himself that his demon was going to fight Eyghon in a manner that no one else was prepared to do. It may be a continuity issue more than a character point that Angel was not all that upset about having a demon inside and Buffy did not seem to be all that concerned about it either.

 

[Mrs Gordo]

Buffy did not seem to be all that concerned about it either.

Buffy hadn't met the demon yet. This was pre-Innocence. She has no clue what this demon is like.

All Angel is saying here is that his demon wanted a fight. He isn't praising his demon. It was a means to an end. And It's true. There is a demon inside him. It's a part of him. And we see him talk about how he is ashamed of it in Angel, in WML (when he doesn't want Buffy to see his face).

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

No, it's not the same Darla. The Darla he was trying to save was human, she had a soul. Once she was turned she became a soulless vampire, a different person, a different creature, really. Not the same and as such, he shouldn't - and doesn't - treat her the same.

Sure, she's different, but that shouldn't matter. She's not a plaything.

Neither is Harmony. She may be evil, but she must be the hardest working secretary I've seen and Angel uses the she's-evil-excuse to constantly yell at her.

 

[RachM]

Sure, she's different, but that shouldn't matter. She's not a plaything.

Neither is Harmony. She may be evil, but she must be the hardest working secretary I've seen and Angel uses the she's-evil-excuse to constantly yell at her.

Angel was hardly using Darla as a "plaything". It was one night of misery and despair.

And if there isn't a distinction between good and evil and the way characters are treated because of this then why bother with the soul vs non-soul distinction at all? That distinction is there for a reason.

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

Angel was hardly using Darla as a "plaything". It was one night of misery and despair.

And if there isn't a distinction between good and evil and the way characters are treated because of this then why bother with the soul vs non-soul distinction at all? That distinction is there for a reason.

He should have staked her to stop her from hurting more people. Playing with her emotions like that was selfish and the fact that her nature makes her do worse things to other people is no excuse. Darla's story is the most tragic. Angel got a chance to make a new life for herself. She didn't. You would expect him to feel some solidarity with other vampires.

It is hardly the worst thing a Buffyverse character has ever done, but I easily rank it as one of the worst thing Angel ever did with a soul.

 

[thetopher]

But wouldn't have people complained even more that Spike became the central character of the show, if he spends more time interacting about characters that aren't the title character ? Also, isn't the trigger his only subplot ?

While I am one of these people (and its not only about Spike but its about how the likes of Xander and Willow barely have anything to do) all you do is juggle screen time and get rid/combine of some of Spike's many plots.

Spike's subplots: crazy in the basement (this is fine and should be kept/extended), sleeper agent/trigger, hostage-Spike, getting his 'Big Bad' mojo back, the entire Wood revenge plot, getting his chip out and everyone's reaction, training potentials, getting closer with Buffy..the list goes on.
Drop two or three and focus on the rest; make Spike's search for his humanity less...hollow I guess.

Anyway., clearly we see all this very differenty, and that's fine but I feel kinda talked out on the subject of Spike, I prefer his demon-self. 😉

Also, whom else can he really talk to ? Giles hates him, Xander & Willow are on the fence about him, Anya is mad because of the events of Selfless

We don't know HOW Xander and Willow feel about Spike once he gets a soul, which is a huge oversight. Sure Xander doesn't want the guy staying with him but what about, like, the last half season after that, post-trigger reveal? We always knew how he felt about Spike is S4, 5 and 6.
Willow is just a wild guess at thius point; she was actually nice/sympathetic to unsouled Spike at some points, what about now?

Anya and Spike went out drinking together ALONE in 'Get It Done' so I doubt she's that mad about him really, As I remember she was just looking to hook-up with him again.
#characterdevelopment

Dawn doesn't want to be near him

Pre-soul reveal you're correct. Do we know what she thinks about him after? No because its never brought up. Fail.

Buffy and Spike's stories are intertwined, and she knows him better than any other character present,

This is just...Spike with a soul and without are two different people surely? It's like saying that Buffy knows Angelus because she knows Angel but she doesn't know Angelus. Soul alters somebody profoundly, as it should.

It's the same with Spike- he doesn't know Buffy because he didn't have a soul then.

And their character journeys are not intertwined, Buffy actually has a lot more going on in S7 than just Spike, he's mostly a burden in many respects- at least until he gets de-triggered and is no longer a liability.

Why not ? They do touch upon past evil deeds and how they deal with it, albeit briefly.

Because it is meaningless exposition as two characters get to know each other, it helps the not-seeing-Angel audience catch up with Faith mainly. There are clearly just relaxing and shooting the s***. I mean, BFD.

 

[RachM]

He should have staked her to stop her from hurting more people. Playing with her emotions like that was selfish and the fact that her nature makes her do worse things to other people is no excuse. Darla's story is the most tragic. Angel got a chance to make a new life for herself. She didn't. You would expect him to feel some solidarity with other vampires.

I've seen you make this argument before but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Why would Angel - a souled vampire with a conscience - feel solidarity with a soulless vampire? Why should he show a soulless evil monster solidarity? Would you expect Buffy to show Faith solidarity just because they are both Slayers and despite Faith going evil?

When Darla is human, when she has a soul, Angel does everything in his power - including giving up his own life - to help/save her. He tried to help her "make a new life". He absolutely showed her "solidarity" when they were on equal ground ie both had souls. Once she becomes a soulless monster, why would he show her solidarity unless he himself was also soulless? By your logic, Angel should show every vampire solidarity just because they are the same creatures.

I don't think sleeping with Darla was right. But I'd hardly rank it as "one of the worst things Angel ever did without a soul", especially remembering that Darla raped him earlier in the season. Having consensual, albeit rough sex with someone soulless in order to give in to darkness and despair kinda pales in comparison.

 

[Cheese Slices]

While I am one of these people (and its not only about Spike but its about how the likes of Xander and Willow barely have anything to do) all you do is juggle screen time and get rid/combine of some of Spike's many plots.

Spike's subplots: crazy in the basement (this is fine and should be kept/extended), sleeper agent/trigger, hostage-Spike, getting his 'Big Bad' mojo back, the entire Wood revenge plot, getting his chip out and everyone's reaction, training potentials, getting closer with Buffy..the list goes on.
Drop two or three and focus on the rest; make Spike's search for his humanity less...hollow I guess.

Anyway., clearly we see all this very differenty, and that's fine but I feel kinda talked out on the subject of Spike, I prefer his demon-self. 😉



We don't know HOW Xander and Willow feel about Spike once he gets a soul, which is a huge oversight. Sure Xander doesn't want the guy staying with him but what about, like, the last half season after that, post-trigger reveal? We always knew how he felt about Spike is S4, 5 and 6.
Willow is just a wild guess at thius point; she was actually nice/sympathetic to unsouled Spike at some points, what about now?

Anya and Spike went out drinking together ALONE in 'Get It Done' so I doubt she's that mad about him really, As I remember she was just looking to hook-up with him again.
#characterdevelopment



Pre-soul reveal you're correct. Do we know what she thinks about him after? No because its never brought up. Fail.



This is just...Spike with a soul and without are two different people surely? It's like saying that Buffy knows Angelus because she knows Angel but she doesn't know Angelus. Soul alters somebody profoundly, as it should.

It's the same with Spike- he doesn't know Buffy because he didn't have a soul then.

And their character journeys are not intertwined, Buffy actually has a lot more going on in S7 than just Spike, he's mostly a burden in many respects- at least until he gets de-triggered and is no longer a liability.

.

1) I actually agree that the season lacked interaction between the main characters, and it's a real shame. I just don't put the blame on Spike's character arc, but rather on the potential and the awkward momentum they were trying to build around the First.

2) The show has long passed the black and white soul/no soul dichotomy (starting around S2 actually), so it's not as clear cut as this. The lines have been blurred with Angel/Angelus as well at this point (though to a much lesser extent than Spike). Whether the exception is Angel or Spike, we'll never really know for sure, but the show has gone out of its way to explore the many gray areas surrounding the soul issue.. Spike is not the same as say the guy who killed Nikki, but he isn't an entirely different being either.

3) Of course Buffy has a lot more going on, she always has. Intertwined doesn't mean exclusive (unless it does and I apologise for my poor grasp of the English language). Buffy's path is entertwined with Spike's just like it is/was with Angel and Faith, for example.

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

Would you expect Buffy to show Faith solidarity just because they are both Slayers and despite Faith going evil?

Buffy does feel solidarity with Faith. If Buffy went to Faith's fancy apartment, flung her on the bed, had wild sex with her and then broke her heart the next morning by telling Faith she was going back to the white hats, that would upset me greatly.

By your logic, Angel should show every vampire solidarity just because they are the same creatures.

I don't understand why he doesn't. They carry the same affliction he did. If it hadn't been for the curse, he would be just like them. I am not saying he shouldn't kill them, but he knows that they were made the way they are.

I don't think sleeping with Darla was right. But I'd hardly rank it as "one of the worst things Angel ever did without a soul", especially remembering that Darla raped him earlier in the season. Having consensual, albeit rough sex with someone soulless in order to give in to darkness and despair kinda pales in comparison.

I don't think Darla's crime's are relevant. What he is doing is still wrong. Also, I said it was one of the worst thing Angel did, not the worst thing Darla did. However, it feels very bitter to see Angel take advantage of soulless Darla after he had helped human Darla come to terms with her death.

If we are kind only to the people who are will return our kindness, then that hardly makes us moral. If we see every act perform against an evil creature as permissible, then we can no longer claim any moral superiority.

I think this is even more interesting in relation to vampire Harmony. Cordelia and Fred are the only ones who shows her any kind of empathy.

 

[Mrs Gordo]

Spike is not the same as say the guy who killed Nikki, but he isn't an entirely different being either.

So by this logic, Buffy actually is in a relationship with the person who sexually assaulted her? I’d prefer the soul/unsouled distinction where there is a difference between the two beings.

 

[EarthLogic]

So by this logic, Buffy actually is in a relationship with the person who sexually assaulted her? I’d prefer the soul/unsouled distinction where there is a difference between the two beings.

Not really. I think that the continuity between the souled and unsouled selves of vampires is shown as early as S2 with Angel. Angelus isn't Angel, but aspects of Angel's personality and human life shape his soulless behaviour. Same with Spike. It's Buffy (and the Fang Gang to a certain extent) who make a more absolute distinction, and as we see in S3 even she has difficulty maintaining that viewpoint sometimes.

 

[Cheese Slices]

So by this logic, Buffy actually is in a relationship with the person who sexually assaulted her? I’d prefer the soul/unsouled distinction where there is a difference between the two beings.

See @EarthLogic post. There IS a difference, but not to the point that we can talk about two entirely separate beings. It's true for Spike, and it's true for Angel.
Back in S3, getting back with Angel meant accepting (or overlooking, depending on how you look at it) to be with an altered/radically different but not completely distinct version of the guy who killed Jenny and wanted to torture her.

 

[EarthLogic]

SPIKE Meaning I have come to redefine the words pain and suffering since I fell in love with you.

It's not enough for Spike to tell her that he got his soul he has to paint the picture for her too. And why else would he do that if not to make her understand the magnitude of this "big thing" he did for her. What other motivation could he have than to hope that this would lead her to forgive him or accept him? Also, he is - sorda blaming her here. He is saying that he is suffering because of "her" love.

I understand that many people read this to mean that now that Spike has a soul, he knows pain and suffering. But the problem is he doesn't need to place the weight of that pain and suffering on Buffy. He is in this position because of the actions of his own demon - NOT BUFFY. She has her own problems and once again - she never asked him for this. She owes him nothing and yet it's implied that she does because he is in this situation "because of her." I think Spike actually has this realization in the comics at some point and I commend them for going there.

As I said in the S7 thread, I take that line to refer to the act of falling in love with her, rather than meaning because of her i.e. he's come to redefine suffering since he himself fell in love. I think he's also, consciously or not, channelling the poet again and casting himself in the role of 'suffering lover', which I think suggests that he hasn't yet let go of that tendency and doesn't fully understand how much he is to blame.

It's the same with Spike- he doesn't know Buffy because he didn't have a soul then.

Buffy does point this out explicitly in Never Leave Me: 'You think you have insight now because your soul is drenched in blood? You don't know me. You don't even know yourself.'

I would say that JM is fantastic as Spike...but I agree that Season 7 shows the limits to his range. He could've played soulled Spike a myriad of different ways and he chose one of the dullest/safest, just with a bit of added scenery chewing. It was disappointing.

Exactly, that's the thing; in Season 2 he took the material he was given and gave it a brilliant unique twist. And he should've done the same thing in S7.

I'm not sure I'd say that JM's acting was limited - or at least that the way he cam across was entirely the fault of his acting. After all it is the writing which would primarily dictate how he is supposed to behave and what he's supposed to be feeling and he can only say the lines that are given to him. I do think his souled acting may have had something to do with the fact that James had been playing Spike as if he had a soul from the very beginning, which may have made it more tricky to portray a souled Spike once his character had actually been given one.

 

[Mrs Gordo]

Angelus isn't Angel, but aspects of Angel's personality and human life shape his soulless behaviour.

There is, to me, a distinction between being “shaped by” the memories of Angel’s personality or Angel’s human life and being the same being. The soul is not around for acts committed by the demon. Conversely, the demon is present for the acts committed by the souled being. I find a distinction between the two. I think there is basis in canon for this in both Angel and Darla’s story.

And Angelus sees it that way too. He tells Buffy - “your boyfriend is dead”.

As I said in the S7 thread, I take that line to refer to the act of falling in love with her, rather than meaning because of her i.e. he's come to redefine suffering since he himself fell in love. I think he's also, consciously or not, channelling the poet again and casting himself in the role of 'suffering lover', which I think suggests that he hasn't yet let go of that tendency and doesn't fully understand how much he is to blame.

I’m not sure how your interpretation undercuts my argument . The sentiment is the same, even if the intent is poetic or romantic. “I suffer because of you.”/ “I suffer for you.” In either case Buffy didn’t ask for it. And the implication is that Buffy should sympathize with that suffering and forgive him/accept him.

Back in S3, getting back with Angel meant accepting (or overlooking, depending on how you look at it) to be with an altered/radically different but not completely distinct version of the guy who killed Jenny and wanted to torture her.

The soul is the difference both times. And that distinction is important. Angel (his soul) was not present when Angelus’ reign of terror was going on same as Spike’s soul was not present when he tried to rape Buffy. In both cases Buffy needs to decide if she can accept the ensouled versions back into her life. The differences are:

- Buffy had previously fallen in love with Angel with a soul whereas she has never known Spike with a soul. She had a previous love and attachment with Angel that she didn’t have with Angelus. In fact, despite rampant fan fiction to the contrary, she has no interest in Angelus. And when Angel’s soul is returned there is a clear indication that this is the being she loves not the demon. (And yes Angel has that demon inside him... but the demon does not define him).
- Angel spent 100 years in hell paying for the crimes of his demon. He never blames Buffy for this. He never tells her about his pain and torture for the implied intent of hoping she will forgive him.
- In s3, we spend a significant amount of time with Buffy’s journey regarding the fall out of s2 including her walking way from Angel multiple times. We see her dealing in a real way with the trauma.

The soul either is or is not the distinction. You can’t have it both ways. I choose to believe that the soul does provide a distinction in the person. I don’t blame ensouled Spike for his demon’s actions and similarly I assign no credit to his ensouled counterpart for his demon’s decision to go and get a soul.

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

The soul either is or is not the distinction. You can’t have it both ways. I choose to believe that the soul does provide a distinction in the person. I don’t blame ensouled Spike for his demon’s actions and similarly I assign no credit to his ensouled counterpart for his demon’s decision to go and get a soul.

You can have it both ways. The soul does not take away any of Spike's good qualities. It gives him the power to temper the bad ones.