Should Angel and Spike be blamed for what they did without souls?

[Robb Stark]

Kind of going off a response to something I posted in another thread. I made the statement that Angel and Angelus are almost completely different people. I don't know if it's really fair to blame Angel, the guy (or well, vampire) we see throughout Buffy and Angel with Angelus. They seem vastly different to me. Likewise, I think that makes it pretty tough to blame Spike as well. The only real difference between his case and Angel's is that Spike with a soul pretty much as an identical personality to Spike without a soul, just with more of a conscious.

What does everyone else think?

 

[JCoatsworth]

Yes, actually. I think what they have done is unforgivable, it doesn't matter whether they have a soul now or not. I'm trying to look at this objectively:
Angel became a vampire in 1753 and was cursed in 1898. Assuming he killed one person a week for those 145 years, he has killed about 7540 people!!! I'd kill him right the hell now. You could say that he doesn't kill anymore, because he has a soul now, but his soul doesn't help him much now. He's unpredictable. What if he loses his soul again?

Spike never even had a soul until season 7. Sometimes I ask myself why they didn't kill him when he was disabled in season 4. But it's all for the sake of the story, so I'm glad they didn't.

 

[Jodast]

This is a really tough one. In the Whedonverse the soul is used, when it comes to supernatural beings at least, as a form of conscience, a means of altering behaviour...mostly for the better. It seems to give the host body a chance to battle against the inner demon and change the outcome of actions. If that is the case, then a soul-less body has no say over what the demon does and can not, therefore, be held responsible. On the other hand, Angel has done some particularly unpleasant things whilst ensouled for which he certainly should be blamed and held accountable.

 

[EVIL UU]

Yes.

A vampire with a soul is just a temporarily brainwashed monster, a curse spell ultimately changes nothing.
[MENTION=11975]Always Bangel[/MENTION]

Angel and Angelus are almost completely different people

First of all, they're not people. Secondly, I don't see much difference between Angel and Angelus, "both" of them almost destroyed the world and murdered a whole lot of innocent people.
[MENTION=10438]JCoatsworth[/MENTION]

Assuming he killed one person a week for those 145 years, he has killed about 7540 people!!!

Sweet maths! I never thought about it that way. Now I despise that disgusting, homicidal hero wannabe wanker even more! Thank you.

 

[SinisterPledge]

Yes, actually. I think what they have done is unforgivable, it doesn't matter whether they have a soul now or not. I'm trying to look at this objectively:
Angel became a vampire in 1753 and was cursed in 1898. Assuming he killed one person a week for those 145 years, he has killed about 7540 people!!! I'd kill him right the hell now. You could say that he doesn't kill anymore, because he has a soul now, but his soul doesn't help him much now. He's unpredictable. What if he loses his soul again?

Spike never even had a soul until season 7. Sometimes I ask myself why they didn't kill him when he was disabled in season 4. But it's all for the sake of the story, so I'm glad they didn't.

Killing him because he's a danger to everyone isn't the same as killing him for what he's done. I don't think you can blame them for what they've done since they were not in control of their bodies or mind. Killing them just to be sure they don't go bad again, well that's a valid decision.

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=11961]Frooley[/MENTION]

I don't think you can blame them for what they've done since they were not in control of their bodies or mind.

Actually, they were. Vampires do have free will as of recent, it's canon.

 

[JCoatsworth]

Killing him because he's a danger to everyone isn't the same as killing him for what he's done. I don't think you can blame them for what they've done since they were not in control of their bodies or mind. Killing them just to be sure they don't go bad again, well that's a valid decision.

Well, okay, it's not the same. But both of them slaughtered thousands of people. I think that's reason enough for blaming them. Maybe now they're not in control of what they once did, but that doesn't change that they did it.
Let me say it like this: I'd lock Norman Bates up, although it wasn't him but his mother who committed the murders. It's the same guy even though he doesn't realize it.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Actually, they were. Vampires do have free will as of recent, it's canon.

(Some spoilers for comics, marked.)
I made a thread a while back about a huge issue I"m having with the new comics, and this, in a nutshell, is it. If it turns out that vampires

Spoiler

really can control their actions--meaning that they can all choose to do good just as they can choose to be evil, instead of the previously accepted knowledge that being vampires makes them compelled to kill--then Buffy is a murderer and not just a "slayer."

Obviously, this is deeply troubling and morally icky territory to explore, and quite frankly I'd rather not for the sake of enjoying the show.

While I have no problem believing the premise that Spike could choose to do good without a soul because of the unique circumstances to which he was exposed and his underlying character,

Spoiler

the thought that every single vampire could do the same as long as he/she underwent some sort of behavior therapy is just too much to accept and changes the entire foundation of the show.

(By the way, I'll be the first to admit that there should have been an arc in which Buffy is compelled to reexamine what it means to kill vampires as soon as Spike demonstrated that even while soulless he could actually go in quest of his soul of his own, "souless," will.)

Sorry for the rant, but here's my point: if we now accept that ALL vampires aren't actually driven to be pure evil and that there is any bit of a choice for them along the way, I really don't know how to enjoy any episode, ever.

So going back to [MENTION=11961]Frooley[/MENTION]'s statement that in a sense, vampires are victims too as they are sired into becoming murderers and that their inherent nature is to either relish the kill or to find no more wrong with it than a lion does at dinnertime--if that's the case--killing them becomes more about protecting others than it does about "punishing" them for past deeds. And that's Buffy's MO: kill Angelus when he's about to destroy the world, don't kill Spike when he's harmless. She can blame them all she wants for what they did in the past, (which makes sense to me), but she'll judge them going forward on what they do today.

 

[SinisterPledge]

[MENTION=11961]Frooley[/MENTION]

Actually, they were. Vampires do have free will as of recent, it's canon.

I haven't read the comics nor will I. I'm talking about the series, which I regard as the REAL canon. 😉

Well, okay, it's not the same. But both of them slaughtered thousands of people. I think that's reason enough for blaming them. Maybe now they're not in control of what they once did, but that doesn't change that they did it.

No, that's my whole point dude, if they're not in control, you can't possible blame them. Not in control = not the same person = not responsible.

The demon did it, not them. Whatever crimes they did with their souls, now that's something else entirely, but when possessed by the demon they hold no responsibility whatsoever.

Sorry for the rant, but here's my point: if we now accept that ALL vampires aren't actually driven to be pure evil and that there is any bit of a choice for them along the way, I really don't know how to enjoy any episode, ever.

Yep, totally agree. They're turning it into Twilight or something I dunno. Haven't seen that one but I dislike when anyone makes vampires into pussies. They take away the mystique, the bestiality and the monster in them... It sucks.

So going back to [MENTION=11961]Frooley[/MENTION]'s statement that in a sense, vampires are victims too as they are sired into becoming murderers and that their inherent nature is to either relish the kill or to find no more wrong with it than a lion does at dinnertime--if that's the case--killing them becomes more about protecting others than it does about "punishing" them for past deeds. And that's Buffy's MO: kill Angelus when he's about to destroy the world, don't kill Spike when he's harmless. She can blame them all she wants for what they did in the past, (which makes sense to me), but she'll judge them going forward on what they do today.

Exactly.

 

[Robb Stark]

I'll start by saying that I'm not that far into the comics yet, so I can only really go by what I've seen in the series (there were too many people to "@", so I'm kind of making this a blanket statement). I know that Spike made the decision to get his soul back. But I think he did that to impress Buffy, not because it was the "right" thing to do (although, there has always been something...different about Spike which seems to separate him from other vampires. He seems to be able to feel much more, without a soul, than others).

I don't know if we have any comic fans in the house, but a major story a few years ago was the return of Hal Jordan, Green Lantern. Years ago, he was infected by the entity of fear, Parallax, and almost destroyed the world. He "went evil", murdered a number of people, crippled others and just about put out the freaking sun. At the time, no one knew that he was possessed. When they brought the character back years later, it was revealed that Jordan had indeed been taken over by Parallax, and that it was Parallax, not Hal, who did those deeds. A big part of the storyline was Hal interacting with other superheroes, former partners, and whether or not they were able to forgive him (he'd been purged of Parallax in the return story). The story concludes with Batman, the ultimate suspicious hero, recognizing that Hal wasn't in charge of what Parallax did, even though all that evil was done in Hal's body.

That's how I look at Angel and Spike. Yes, without souls they've done incredible evil, and killed countless people. And yes, that evil was done in their bodies. I'm not disputing that. But if a soul in the Buffyverse acts as a form of conscious, then how can they, with souls, be at fault? Since getting their souls back, the two of them have been nothing but heroes. It's pretty clear that there is zero trace of Angelus in the way that Angel acts.

[MENTION=10438]JCoatsworth[/MENTION]: If they're too be killed for what transpired when they didn't have souls, well that's just vengeance, not justice.

I'm not saying that it's "easy" for the other characters to forgive them. No matter if it's Angel or Angelus, it was still the same body that snapped Jenny Calender's neck, and it would be completely unrealistic for someone like Giles, who cared about her, to just erase that when he sees Angel. I get that. But if a soul is portrayed as the ability to have a conscious, then I don't see how you can blame Angel and Spike now for what they did when they were soulless psychopaths.

---------- Post added at 06:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:48 PM ----------
[MENTION=11853]Jodast[/MENTION], [MENTION=11194]EVIL UU[/MENTION]: What exactly has Angel done since he became re-souled that could be considered evil or bad? If it's something from the comics, just say "comics". But from the series, both series, I can't think of anything that Angel has done.

He got talked into giving up his soul by the rest of his team in S4, but that was only after they assured him they'd take every precaution to make sure Angelus didn't come loose. They were pretty incompetent, and well, he got loose. He didn't know that sex with Buffy would cause him to lose his soul in S2. When he took down the Circle of the Black Thorn, it was W&H that threw L.A. into hell. Angel was pretty shortsighted I suppose, but I don't think he knew that W&H would react the way they did. I think he believed they would come after him. It's a bit murky on that one.

Can you guys provide any examples other than those ones?

 

[white avenger]

Okay, here we go again...

I would be perfectly happy to consider all of the good and evil that either Angel or Spike have done, soul or no soul, with no dual personalities considered, either from the moment that they were turned, or from the moment that little Liam and William first opened their eyes, No Angelus, and no "Spikeus" as monsters while Angel and Spike are total heroes. Of course, doing so makes Spike the better man and greater hero, because, regardless of motives, he, unlike Angel, sincerely fought for the Good against the Darkness even without having someone shove an unwanted soul up his... Well, you get the picture.

On the other hand, I would be just as happy to judge our two favorite vampires as being total new men, all their past sins brushed away and forgotten, beginning at the instant that their souls were each restored. Of course, doing so once more makes Spike the greater hero, because within just a few months of regaining his soul, he was fighting by his Slayer's side against the forces of Darkness. Angel regained his soul and still lived with his evil vampire pack, still continued feeding on humans (who was he to judge whether a murderer or rapist should die for their crimes? That's the duty of our legal authorities) and in general avoided involving himself in the affairs of Good vs Evil, unless literally forced to do so, for over a hundred years, until he sees and falls blindly in love with a 15 year old girl who he first saw through a painted car window.

What I do object to is the tendency of some fans to forgive Angel for anything that Angelus (or Twilight) might have done while continuing to condemn Spike for trying to rape Buffy before he had a soul. All that I ask is that the playing field be leveled. Hold both vampires to the same exact standards. If killing, torturing, raping, and scaring little kiddies and old ladies get forgotten upon attaining a soul, then Angel is only held responsible for everything that he did from the moment that the Gypsies cursed him, both his actions and his INactions, and the same goes for Spike from the moment that the demon awarded him his soul in that cave in Africa. Nothing before those two defining moments can be used either for or against them., but they are totally responsible for their actions from then on.

For example Spike with a soul killed about a half a dozen people while under the First Evil's influence, while Angel killed several thousand and tried to destroy the universe while under the influence of Twilight. Take the First Evil and Twilight both out of the equation, and hold both men totally responsible for their own actions.

 

[Evil Angelus 95]

That's how I look at Angel and Spike. Yes, without souls they've done incredible evil, and killed countless people. And yes, that evil was done in their bodies. I'm not disputing that. But if a soul in the Buffyverse acts as a form of conscious, then how can they, with souls, be at fault? Since getting their souls back, the two of them have been nothing but heroes. It's pretty clear that there is zero trace of Angelus in the way that Angel acts.

Which would be exactly my point. Angelus and Angel act completely different from each other, considering that Angel would most likely never take a human life on purprose (Granted, I'm still at the beginning of Angel S4, so if I'm wrong with that statement, feel free to call me out on it.), while Angelus would most likely have no problem whatsoever with doing that.

Not to mention that Angel regrets all the lives that Angelus took over the years before he was cursed with his soul. Not saying that him feeling guilty means that everything would be ok and everyone should forgive him, but still, add in the fact that he tries to save lives while he has his soul, and I think that's at least worth some forgiveness.

 

[ladydorotea]

while Angel killed several thousand and tried to destroy the universe while under the influence of Twilight.

Physically - with his own hands - Angel did not kill a single person under influence of Twilight ( unlike Spike who did all his killings in person). Moreover, Angel stepped into Twilight leader shoes when the organization itself was already in existence - see Allie's interviews for these many times repeated facts. Also, you make it sound like Angel was deliberately trying to destroy the universe - while it was stated in the text again - many times - that he was not trying to destroy the old universe - it was doomed by virtue of Twilight prophecy prerequisite conditions being fulfilled. When you make statements like this please be very precise. What Angel done under Twilight's influence in S8 was bad enough without trying to misinterpret the plot to make it sound even worse.

 

[white avenger]

Physically - with his own hands - Angel did not kill a single person under influence of Twilight ( unlike Spike who did all his killings in person). Moreover, Angel stepped into Twilight leader shoes when the organization itself was already in existence - see Allie's interviews for these many times repeated facts. Also, you make it sound like Angel was deliberately trying to destroy the universe - while it was stated in the text again - many times - that he was not trying to destroy the old universe - it was doomed by virtue of Twilight prophecy prerequisite conditions being fulfilled. When you make statements like this please be very precise. What Angel done under Twilight's influence in S8 was bad enough without trying to misinterpret the plot to make it sound even worse.

I was using the First Evil/Twilight analogy as an example, not an accusation, but as far as the "Physically-with his own hands" qualifier, I seem to recall him using his own hands to kill someone very close to Buffy, and that was supposedly AFTER Twilight's influence had been broken. Also, if memory serve me correctly. quite a few Nazi war criminals never personally killed anyone, either, but they were murderers, all the same, and had to stand trial and face punishment for their crimes.

As for Angel's actual plans concerning the fate of the universe and all of its inhabitants, despite Joss and everyone else's efforts to reboot Season 8. I just can't seem to suspend my disbelief enough to envision any possible scenario in which Angel and Twilight would possibly transfer the entire population of the universe, including all of their various cultures, technologies, customs, and historical records, not to mention livestock, pets, food vegetation and the rest of a virtually endless list of things necessary to maintain civilization and not plunge the whole thing into total chaos. Joss just plain screwed up when he made Angel the Big Bad of Season 8. If he had made it Angelus instead, he could have used the old soulless monster defense and gotten Angel off the hook. Instead, he had Angel, soul intact and conscience fully functional, giving the order to kill literally thousands of people, using the excuse that he was killing all of them to save countless trillions of others. That kind of logic, he must have picked up during his stay with Wolfram & Hart. They probably slipped it in with his fresh otter blood every morning.

 

[Robb Stark]

Okay, here we go again...

I would be perfectly happy to consider all of the good and evil that either Angel or Spike have done, soul or no soul, with no dual personalities considered, either from the moment that they were turned, or from the moment that little Liam and William first opened their eyes, No Angelus, and no "Spikeus" as monsters while Angel and Spike are total heroes. Of course, doing so makes Spike the better man and greater hero, because, regardless of motives, he, unlike Angel, sincerely fought for the Good against the Darkness even without having someone shove an unwanted soul up his... Well, you get the picture.

On the other hand, I would be just as happy to judge our two favorite vampires as being total new men, all their past sins brushed away and forgotten, beginning at the instant that their souls were each restored. Of course, doing so once more makes Spike the greater hero, because within just a few months of regaining his soul, he was fighting by his Slayer's side against the forces of Darkness. Angel regained his soul and still lived with his evil vampire pack, still continued feeding on humans (who was he to judge whether a murderer or rapist should die for their crimes? That's the duty of our legal authorities) and in general avoided involving himself in the affairs of Good vs Evil, unless literally forced to do so, for over a hundred years, until he sees and falls blindly in love with a 15 year old girl who he first saw through a painted car window.

What I do object to is the tendency of some fans to forgive Angel for anything that Angelus (or Twilight) might have done while continuing to condemn Spike for trying to rape Buffy before he had a soul. All that I ask is that the playing field be leveled. Hold both vampires to the same exact standards. If killing, torturing, raping, and scaring little kiddies and old ladies get forgotten upon attaining a soul, then Angel is only held responsible for everything that he did from the moment that the Gypsies cursed him, both his actions and his INactions, and the same goes for Spike from the moment that the demon awarded him his soul in that cave in Africa. Nothing before those two defining moments can be used either for or against them., but they are totally responsible for their actions from then on.

For example Spike with a soul killed about a half a dozen people while under the First Evil's influence, while Angel killed several thousand and tried to destroy the universe while under the influence of Twilight. Take the First Evil and Twilight both out of the equation, and hold both men totally responsible for their own actions.

Okay, I can't help myself.

I wasn't really asking a "who's better" question. It was more about Angel, Spike and vampires in general.

As for who's the better man, that's tough, and I don't really think your observations are fair. Spike, without a soul, only "fought for good" for two reasons: 1) He was in love with Buffy, and wanted to be around her 2) He had that chip in his head which wouldn't let him harm humans. Demons were the only things he could hit. He even says as much. I'm not discounting what he did, clearly Spike is the man, but he hardly did the right thing because it was the right thing. Buffy and a lust for violence were the only reasons he did that. Likewise, he didn't regain his soul because he felt bad about the acts he'd committed. He did it to give Buffy "what she deserves". I'm not saying it's not impressive, because it is, but he wasn't exactly altruistic either.

As for Spike getting his soul back and fighting alongside Buffy shortly after, I see what you mean, but remember that he got his soul back for Buffy. It wasn't exactly surprising that he went back to her. And, unlike Angel when he regained his soul the first time, Spike had Buffy to go to. Angel had, literally, no one. Maybe it makes Spike more mature and self-aware, at that time, but I don't think it makes him a greater hero. And also, Spike said very plainly in Angel S5 that he had "nothing to atone for". He made the distinction between himself with a soul and without one. And, you didn't mention when Angel regained his soul in S4. He got right back on the horse fighting evil, largely because he had his team to go back to. Very different than the first time.

**Deep breath**

As for the last paragraph, about Spike and the rape scene, totally agree. It isn't fair to condemn Spike for that (or whatever else he did without a soul) and separate it from Angel. Very good point. I think the only real reason why people DO harp on Spike for that is because he still acts the same, personality wise, after regaining his soul, while the personalities of Angel and Angelus are totally different.

 

[Jodast]

[MENTION=11853]Jodast[/MENTION], What exactly has Angel done since he became re-souled that could be considered evil or bad? If it's something from the comics, just say "comics". But from the series, both series, I can't think of anything that Angel has done.

My examples come from AtS

Spoiler

he left Darla and Dru in a room full of lawyers and locked the door for them all to be massacred and he left the residents of the Hyperion to all be killed by the demon.

He may have felt justified in doing so, but they were both reprehensible acts.

 

[Robb Stark]

[MENTION=11853]Jodast[/MENTION]: Okay, good call on the Darla/Dru stuff. To be honest, I'd forgotten about that. Very good point. I don't remember the Hyperion stuff though...Was that in S4, with Jasmine? I don't really recall how that all went down (or at least, not him doing anything to the people at the Hyperion).

 

[white avenger]

Spike, without a soul, only "fought for good" for two reasons: 1) He was in love with Buffy, and wanted to be around her 2) He had that chip in his head which wouldn't let him harm humans. Demons were the only things he could hit. He even says as much. I'm not discounting what he did, clearly Spike is the man, but he hardly did the right thing because it was the right thing. Buffy and a lust for violence were the only reasons he did that. Likewise, he didn't regain his soul because he felt bad about the acts he'd committed. He did it to give Buffy "what she deserves". I'm not saying it's not impressive, because it is, but he wasn't exactly altruistic either.

But couldn't the same thing really be said for Angel? From what we saw in flashbacks, he never bothered to go out of his way to help anyone of his own free will until he first laid eyes on Buffy, and I got the feeling that even then, his idea of "helping the Slayer" involved more in the line of delivering information that any real fighting. Fighting was never Angelus' style, and it really wasn't Angel's at first, either. That's not to say that he COULDN'T fight, it just wasn't something, and I never saw this change over the years, that he really wanted to do. Spike reveled in the chase, the fight, and, yes, the kill. He said so himself. He was most "alive" with his back to the wall, fists and fangs in action.

Angel fought for the good at first because he wanted to be with Buffy, exactly the same as Spike, and Spike's unwanted chip has been compared many times with Angel's unwanted soul, conscience and sense of guilt. The bottom line is, despite the soul, the conscience, or the chip, the one single blazing and undeniable fact remains that Both Angel AND Spike initially took their stand, not out of any desire to do anything good or noble, or even to make any sort of restitution for past sins, but because they were in love with Buffy, and she was the Slayer. If she had been a short order cook, they would have been learning how to flip burgers and make chili cheese fries.

(And please accept my apologies for once more dragging a thread off subject into a Spike/Angel debate. I swear, I AM trying to do better. I've even considered professional help, but the local shrink is a {shudder} DEMOCRAT. How can you expect to get sound advice from someone like that?)

 

[janas]

..but as far as the "Physically-with his own hands" qualifier, I seem to recall him using his own hands to kill someone very close to Buffy, and that was supposedly AFTER Twilight's influence had been broken..

Spoiler

You mean when Angel was totally possessed by the Big Bad of the season?

..Joss just plain screwed up when he made Angel the Big Bad of Season 8. If he had made it Angelus instead, he could have used the old soulless monster defense and gotten Angel off the hook..

Spoiler

The Big Bad of Season 8 was Twilight

 

[dexeded]

A thread I made on this last December: Should Angel and Spike be held accountable for their soulless actions?

Yes.

A vampire with a soul is just a temporarily brainwashed monster, a curse spell ultimately changes nothing.

'Ultimately changes nothing'? Angel has saved lives, averted apocalypses... I'd say that changes a lot. I know I've argued with you about this before, but I'll repeat what I said back then: After losing his soul in S2, he killed only as much as a normal vamp plus Jenny Calendar. Compared to the lives he's saved? I say pragmatically speaking, Angel being alive--well, not alive, but you know what I mean--is a good thing.

[MENTION=11853]Jodast[/MENTION]: Okay, good call on the Darla/Dru stuff. To be honest, I'd forgotten about that. Very good point. I don't remember the Hyperion stuff though...Was that in S4, with Jasmine? I don't really recall how that all went down (or at least, not him doing anything to the people at the Hyperion).

That was in 'Are You Now or Have You Ever Been' S2 Ep 2 of AtS. It was in a flashback sequence of his earlier days as Angel.

---------- Post added at 04:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------

The Buffyverse soul is an undefined thing. It's not very consistent. But I think the Buffyverse soul is basically a conscience. Vamps know right from wrong, but they don't care; a soul makes them care. I wrote these two equation in the aforementioned thread:

Angelus=Liam+vampiric tendency to mayhem+bloodlust+lack of conscience. Angel=Liam+conscience+bloodlust+whole lotta guilt.

So... yeah.

I believe they should be held responsible. My arguments are all in the other thread...

---------- Post added at 04:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:45 PM ----------

I know that Spike made the decision to get his soul back. But I think he did that to impress Buffy, not because it was the "right" thing to do (although, there has always been something...different about Spike which seems to separate him from other vampires. He seems to be able to feel much more, without a soul, than others).

Disagree. It's true that he didn't get it back because it was the "right" thing to do, nor for selfless reasons; but he didn't get it to impress Buffy. He got it because he had a choice to make: man or monster? He'd been stuck in the grey area all that time. Already unusual vamp with a chip in his head. The AR happened, and he asks two very important questions: Why did I do it? Why didn't I do it? As it happens, he chooses 'man'. He did it because he had to choose, because he couldn't stay in the limbo--because he broke his one rule: "I don't hurt you." He did it so he could be someone Buffy deserved, but it wasn't to impress. It was also to get Buffy to forgive him, based on the fact that Buffy forgave Angel for Angelus' deeds, which is, of course, also a selfish motivation. 'Course, he didn't know the full ramifications of the soul, but it wasn't to, as Angel later said in Destiny, "get into a girl's pants".

---------- Post added at 05:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:49 PM ----------

Also, Angel's and Spike's journeys would make zero sense if they cannot be blamed for their actions.