And yet, ultimately, he winds up being he one in charge. As I said, Angel is the classic alpha male.
Nope, classic alpha males- in the strictest sense- are ALWAYS trying to assert their dominance in social situations, even if they're already in charge- think unsouled Spike leading a gang of vamps.
So if Angel were such a person, he wouldn't want Gunn anywhere near his gang- (too threatening being a leader of men himself), he would ignore Wesley instead of trying to build confidence in the guy and he would NEVER let Cordelia talk to him the way she's allowed to.
He would shout, throw he weight around and possibly threaten. Look at any Wall Street exec and you'll see typical alpha male behavior. It is not Angel's defining trait as you suggest.
Natural leader? Charismatic? Sure, but that doesn't mean the same thing.
He doesn't assert his will over others just to be dominant, he does it because, right or wrong, he truly believes that his way is the best way. it's that self assurance that defines his character.
You basically said that it is- its all about Angel feeling important and knowing what's best and the helping people is entirely secondary.
With all due respect we're watching different shows. I can give numerous examples of Angel helping people help themselves. If you want to disregard that go right ahead, but it is not controlling behavior, not at all.
Also Angel is not always self-assured. He can be, but he can also be full of self-doubt. It makes him an interesting, layered character in my view.
And, how many episodes later was it that he was, once again, the one giving the orders?
How about when Connor was born- so, well into the next season?
In the Pylea arc, although Angel was in charge for a little while, Wesley was also allowed to flex his leadership muscles plenty (Angel goofed about an awful lot).
In S3 Wesley is still regarded as leader firmly in charge of investigations- he's the one who makes Angel apologize to Merle in 'That Old Gang Of Mine' when Angel clearly doesn't want to (strange alpha male behavior I must say).
And then in S4 I can't remember Wesley being firmly under Angel's thumb or anything- and an alpha male type would
insist on. Nope, he works with Wesley, asks for his help not demand it, etc.
Really, there are too many examples to mention.
In S5 Angel is the boss so yeah, I guess he is firmly reestablished as leader by then. So effectively that's about 2 and a half seasons until he's THE BOSS again.
Visualize Angel and his team in the same situation that Buffy and her team were in in "Empty Places." Would Angel have meekly walked out of the Hyperion rather than force a confrontation with his friends?
Maybe. Angel can. Angel can be humble, he can doubt himself.
Also you just picked one of Buffy's classic 'alpha male' moments, where she tries to bully everybody into backing her plan and then is shocked when they refuse.
That Buffy, if she doesn't get her own way she always runs off in a huff. Unless she doesn't run off in a huff and even then she secretly fumes because she's so arrogant. You can see it if you look closely enough...
And later in that same episode, he decides to turn back time so he could go back to being a vampire - without even CONSULTING with Buffy first. That's a really big action, which affects Buffy too, and Angel didn't even talk with her first.
Ah, the old classic. Angel wanted to be a vampire again. Nothing to do with the knowledge that Buffy was going to die, armies of darkness of the rise, the Oracles seeing the future et all, Nothing to do with the fact that perhaps he didn't feel he hadn't earned his redemption/forgiveness (the very theme that runs through S1!), nope, Angel just likes being a superhero, nothing more to it.
Putting motivation to one side:
Angel's body, Angel is the one who is affected most by his humanity, Angel is the one who gets to make the call. It's strange to insist otherwise.
He had minutes to decide, he had an audience with the Oracles- who are prickly about having demands made of them- so he made a call. The shame of it.
And in the middle of season 2, Angel goes on his crusade against W&H, in ways that affect his friends, but he never listens to his friends in the matter ("Let them fight the good fight. Someone has to fight the war").
Angel fired them, as bosses sometimes do, because Angel was feeling weak- as he later tells them. He could feel the darkness coming out of him and wanted to send them away so they wouldn't see it or be hurt by it.
They, as is their right, kept right on doing what they were doing- helping the helpless. Angel eventually comes back and humbles himself and apologies- he was wrong.
In 3x21, Angel goes to kill Holtz while hiding it from Connor, who sees Holtz as an adoptive father.
Yep still, he tells Cordelia what he's going to do though and she tells him not to. I mean, he ignores her and goes anyway.
Perhaps he shouldn't have lied to Connor, that's a valid point, but its nothing to do with being some know-it-all, its about VENGEANCE. Angel wanted to confront Holtz, it can be argued that he had the right to confront him alone after all that.
And is keeping secrets suddenly the same as making arrogant, unilateral decisions? Well Buffy's got Angel beat there- there are countless times where she flat out lies to her friends (by ommision but still), Giles, Riley, about things that affect them or her relationship with them. Guess she's more arrogant that Angel then.
And in 4x22, he brainwashes his entire group of friends to make them forget Connor, and he essentially "reboots" Connor's entire personality (Adelle DeWitt would approve).
Yup, this was a straight-up unilateral decision that affected his friends and Angel had no right to do it.
That's one.
Angel has no problem manipulating his entire group of friends so he could hatch a plot to attack W&H
Really? I thought he was manipulating W&H to get close to them? He had to convince his friends to sell it but he tells the truth when the time is right.
Then gives them the option- walk away or we use this
one chance to cut the head off the snake.
He later asks the group's consent to join in the main attack, but he did a LOT without their permission first.
Because it was necessary, as he explains. He had to be convincing to get close. But he DOES ask their permission when it matters. They join the fight of their own free will.
Btw- free will that Buffy never gave to thousands of girls. Never gave to poor Dana. We can all give examples but that will always be the biggest, and it had nothing to do with Angel.
But it was necessary- you want to condemn a character for acting unilaterally then condemn ALL characters that do it unilaterally.
Buffy, on the other hand, often tries to run away from her purpose ("I don't care. Giles, I'm 16 years old. I don't wanna die". "I would love to be upstairs watching TV or gossiping about boys or... God, even studying! But I have to save the world... again!" "If Dawn dies,
then I'm done with it. I'm quitting"). She does what's right because it is necessary, but she doesn't want it to define her life. She doesn't get addicted to it the way Angel does.
Maybe. You could also say that Buffy keeps secrets because she thinks she's better than her friends- she does it constantly and admits that she has a superiority complex, she's always making unilateral decisions that affect them.
Not telling them about Angel's return, not telling her friends about the Key, saying that anybody who goes near Dawn will be killed by her even though whole worlds hang in the balance, keeping triggered and dangerous Spike in the house and not heeding anyone's cautions. These are just a few examples.
It's easy to cherry pick and lambast a character as this or that, and sum them up as 'they are
always like this' when they're not. There were situations, they made a choice, in a different situation maybe they make a different choice. It's easy to make sweeping statements about a character and their judgements.
Clearly I do not see Angel the same way you do.
The thing is leaders like Buffy and Angel often have to make tough choices that affect more than just themselves. That is their lot- BOTH of them, and they get crap thrown at them, but other characters- who are not leaders, make worse choices, and have the luxury of doing what please themselves and only them, they get away with a whole lot more.
I tend to take that into consideration as well.
