Can a vampire (without a soul) be selfless?

My thought is vampires were meant to be animals. I do not believe that animals can act in a selfish manner. Yet, Spike did act in a selfish manner so, in my mind, he was an anomaly. He wasn't a true vampire.
 
This is a great question! I think 99.9% of soulless vamps will without question. I think Spike is different, he's motivated by love, albeit a wholly selfish version of love. He was always different to the other vampire community, purely based on his ability for selfish love.

Ultimately, he is selfish because his intentions are selfish, but his motives aren't.
 
I do believe it is possible for a vampire to be selfless and put anothers needs before their own, but not to their own detriment. Spike put Drus needs before his own, but he lost nothing by doing so.
 
To me, that's a complicated question, because everything good that Spike did was for love, so is it selfless, or selfish? Such as when he let Glory torture him so she wouldn't hurt Dawn. He did it because he loves Buffy, so is it selfish, or is that taking it too far? I mean, Tara let Glory wipe her mind because she loves Dawn, and nobody calls that selfish.
 
One of the major definitions of "selfless," according to the several websites that I have consulted is "to put someone else's wishes or welfare before your own." Such being the case, then I would have to say that the possession of a soul has nothing whatsoever to do with being selfless. The prime example of selflessness that we see in the Buffyverse as applied to a vampire is, of course, Spike, who put Dru's welfare ahead of his own in Season 2 (of course, there are some who would say that he acted selfless in that example for purely selfish reasons, but that's a merry-go-round that I simply refuse to ride) If Spike was capable of those feelings for Dru, then, later, for Buffy, and even Dawn and, probably, Joyce, then vampires are capable of such things. Just about any pet owner can attest to the fact that loyalty, love, and self sacrifice are traits that a soulless animal has no problem whatsoever in feeling, so, why should not the same thing be said for vampires?
 
I think most Vampires let what happened go to their head & act like totally selfish but there ones that can behave different .
I would say Spike & Dru are examples .
 
There was a vampire in the first season who showed up at school and called Buffy out then burned up in the process. This was the Kamikaze version of selflessness, moving a cause ahead at the cost of painful self-annihilation.
 
I thought he was controlled by the Master .
 
Ethan Reigns said:
There was a vampire in the first season who showed up at school and called Buffy out then burned up in the process. This was the Kamikaze version of selflessness, moving a cause ahead at the cost of painful self-annihilation.
Click to expand...

My automatic thought when I saw that was that Angelus tortured and brainwashed that person as both a mortal and vampire, and wasn't sane enough to be either selfless or selfish.
 
Mr. Pole said:
Yet, Spike did act in a selfish manner so, in my mind, he was an anomaly. He wasn't a true vampire.
Click to expand...

I heard an interesting theory (I'll try to find it again later when I have more time) in that Spike was unusual in this way because he was such a devoted poet with deep tenderness and feelings, and that affected the demon he would become (which while a warped, nightmarish version of the mortal he had been, the demon to rise from William's corpse retained the soul of a romantic poet, one that was unusually devoted even compared to humans). In contrast, according to this same theory, Liam was such a wastrel that had almost nothing to him of significance so that there was "very little humanity to infect the demon" and thus Angelus was far more monstrous and unfeeling than even most other vampires (though Liam's rebelliousness to his father and religious beliefs transferred over to his contempt of even the Master, as well as priests and nuns).
 
Last edited:
Sternbeeere
Sternbeeere
very interesting theory
Sounds like you got a good idea there . Like to see the theory when you find it.
 
On the theory I "heard."

I thought it had been a review of the episode Innocence (talking about the Judge and his reaction to vampires) by Passion of the Nerd, but it was barely touched upon. There were a couple of comments, though, such as this one by After the Battle:

I have a slightly different take on the whole 'soul' issue. I think that once humans are turned into vampires their emotions and desires are distorted by the violent nature of the demonic force now present in their bodies. Take Liam, for example. We don’t know much about him, but from the glimpses we got it seemed like he was very frustrated by living in a small village - he wanted to explore the world which, initially, was what drew him to Darla. Angel is the same. He is interested in art, for example, which implies both a curiosity about culture and a fascination with things of beauty. Cut to Angelus who is obsessed with the idea of murder and torture as an art form (“A good kill. It take pure artistry”). My theory is that, once the soul is removed, whatever Angel feels passes freely through a “demonic filter”. Liam resented his father; Angelus murdered him. Angel uses his understanding of people to help the helpless; Angelus uses his knowledge of people to break them, mentally. Angel loves Buffy; Angelus was obsessed with her. Angel’s love for Buffy was warped into something twisted and sadistic once the soul left his body. Angel still exists within Angelus, but his opinions, thoughts and desires are voiced viciously through something he has no control over. That’s part of the gypsies punishment - if Angel experiences true happiness, he will be forced to watch himself destroy everything he’s come to love.
Click to expand...

And Gonzalo Urrutia adds (just a snippet):

i think the soul "residue" as you called it is actually that human's personality. the more personality one has, the more it lingers on to the vampire, drusilla had a family, william was a writer with a ****ed up mother, they had complex lives, instead liam was a drunk useless shell, so the demon part had more "room"; aka less humanity
Click to expand...

I remember now. As I read through these, I got inspired, and formed my own understanding (as I kept reading) which I shared in my last post on this thread...that said, I might not have ever thought of it had I not seen the review and those replies.
 
That explains why Drusilla & William was different & Liam was a monster . He had nothing holding him back unlike the other two.
 
Unconditional love is the most selfless sort of love. When you do something for love you are doing it for the other person not for the love itself. In other words, Yes.
 
Sternbeeere
Sternbeeere
beautifully said
thrasherpix said:
On the theory I "heard."

I thought it had been a review of the episode Innocence (talking about the Judge and his reaction to vampires) by Passion of the Nerd, but it was barely touched upon. There were a couple of comments, though, such as this one by After the Battle:
Click to expand...

Can you please post a link to give proper credit? Thanks 🙂
 
GoSpuffy said:
Unconditional love is the most selfless sort of love. When you do something for love you are doing it for the other person not for the love itself. In other words, Yes.
Click to expand...
But when did a soulless vampire do anything from unconditional love?
 
Mr. Pole said:
But when did a soulless vampire do anything from unconditional love?
Click to expand...
Spike not giving up Dawn's identify to Glory because he knew how it would impact Buffy would be high on the list of many examples:

SPIKE
Buffy - the other… the not-as-pleasant
Buffy. Something happened to Dawn
it'd destroy her. I couldn't live, her
being in that much pain. I'd let Glory
kill me first. Nearly bloody did.

and Buffy accepted his reason for his actions and acknowldeged there were done unconditionally:

BUFFY (cont'd)
What you did for me,
and Dawn, that was real.
(turns to him)
And I'll never forget it.
 
GoSpuffy said:
Spike not giving up Dawn's identify to Glory because he knew how it would impact Buffy would be high on the list of many examples:
and Buffy accepted his reason for his actions and acknowldeged there were done unconditionally:
Click to expand...
But he knew if he did then Buffy would never forgive him, not to mention the world would turn into a hell dimension, which he's already said before he did not want to happen as he liked happy meals with feet. I don't see his not naming Dawn and a sign of unconditional love.
 
Mr. Pole said:
But he knew if he did then Buffy would never forgive him, not to mention the world would turn into a hell dimension, which he's already said before he did not want to happen as he liked happy meals with feet. I don't see his not naming Dawn and a sign of unconditional love.
Click to expand...
He clearly says he did it because he couldn't live with Buffy being in that much pain, not because he was worried about a hell dimension. Buffy accepts what he says as being true. Buffy is very honest and straight forward, she would have called bull on him if she didn't believe that was his motivation. She even rewarded him with the thing he knew he wanted more than anything in the world "a sliver of slack" ie a kiss as a reward.
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
I just see the scene differently based upon past actions and how the character(s) acted.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom