Just depends on how you view it; I see it as his wanting to escape, as would be par with his character, and you (and others) see it as wanting to be a hero. His actions during one season of Angel proved to be more 'heroic' than his actions on Buffy.
The ONLY bit of intelligence Buffy and Co. have is that the Amulet MIGHT help in the fight and it MUST be worn by a Champion.
At what stage does that make Spike think 'ahoy hoy, heres me chance to run and hide like a good lil chimney sweep'?
This is his ultimate moment of redemption. He is fighting the fight, no idea what he has to do but when it becomes clear he doesn't think 'Ohh, right, heres my out' no, he realises that he has to do this to save the world.
If you see anything less than heroism, I feel sad for you because obviously you've missed the point entirely and there is no way any decent argument will convince you otherwise.
This was Spikes ultimate heroic sacrifice, one that is brutally taken away from him by a silly initial storyline in Angel.
So? what does that matter to me? I dont need to be spoon-fed (no offense to the member of the same name!) what I am supposed to see and feel. I asked how YOU can explain it as being heroic, not how Drew explained it. I just fail to see heroism in his actions.
While you 'obviously' don't need things to be spoon-fed to you, you cannot so easily dismiss the 'artists' interpretations because they conflict with your own.
On the contrary, you may see something else BUT that does not negate the message that was meant to be there. To totally dismiss that devalues the point being made and makes the whole thing pointless.
mmm.. and I am sure news reporters understand the news the best.
This is absolutely THE most absurd comparison I have ever seen on these boards.
There is no similarity between News Reporters taking a piece of news and writing an article on it while a writer takes a work of fiction and evolves that piece of fiction to create a story.
When there is a piece of News there are generally ways to verify the authenticity of the piece which gives us the power to form a proper opinion.
When we are talking about a work of FICTION, all we have is the writers versions and the intent.
You cannot equate the 2 as the same because they are different.
Had you used your artists and artwork metaphor you MIGHT have had a leg to stand on, but this comment is completely pointless.