Should there had been more atonement from Spike?

[Silverspike]

Neither of which he asked for or had any control over. So your point is what exactly?

 

[white avenger]

Spike is not an innocent man, he has killing (whilst being controlled) and is, at that time, also a dangerous tool of the First.

Spike was an innocent man, and Wood, himself, acknowledged the fact. "I don't want to kill you, Spike. I want to kill the monster who took my mother away from me." The only way that that statement could make sense would be if Wood was aware of the fact that Spike and Spike(us) were two separate beings, only one of whom he had any interest in killing. Since Spike is an ensouled vampire, and therefore totally innocent of the crimes of his former soulless self by Buffyverse canon, he is totally innocent of any crimes committed prior to regaining a soul. The "monster" who Wood wanted to kill wasn't simply Spike in game face, it was an entirely different character who could only be summoned by utilizing the trigger.

Spike and the monster are two completely different beings, even though Spike retains the memories of what the monster did, just like neither Spike nor Spike(us) retain William's memories, but are totally different beings. Spike is a different being that the monster. By killing the monster, Wood would also be guilty of killing innocent Spike.

As for Spike's so called killing while under the control of the First, he, himself, is no more guilty of those killings than Angel is guilty of what he did while under the influence of Twilight in Season 8.

(I don't agree with that, either, but it's Joss' universe, he writes the rules, and that's how it has to be)

 

[bespangeled]

How do you make any kind of atonement to people you have killed? I believe the only person who can grant absolution from sin is the person you sinned against - I don't believe in the concept of a third-party priesthood that can do that for you. Spike had no soul when he killed and attacked people except in Season 7 when he was under the control of the First and not responsible for his actions. I do not believe the brooding that Angel did was useful or necessary in any sense. I could understand both Spike and Angel having post-traumatic stress disorder from the things they have seen now that they have souls but more atonement would simply be more narcissistic and would not benefit their victims, which is what atonement should be about.

A century of brooding in atonement didn't do much for anyone. Angel started to help people when he met Buffy. I agree with him when he says that there is no atonement for him and Spike. So they both do what is needed - go on and help the people they can help. 

Yes, he had no soul when he killed people, so in theory he should have nothing to be concerned about. But what we see with Angel is that even though he has a soul, Angelus is still in there, deep down; and when Angel gets his soul back he gains all the memories of what Angelus does. So I can see that if neither of them remember anything, then they wouldn't be affected by what the souless monster does. We do see Spike tell Buffy that he remembers all the bad things and feels bad about it, I just think it was too quick for him to be like, "oh that sucks, now I'm over it and Ill be a good guy now" I guess it's mostly because it was a sort of rushed story arc, whereas we see Angel's journey for like 7 seasons.

Also Angel is very different in personality from Angelus, but Spike is not that different from souless Spike, so it does seem he should have changed a bit more to draw the distinction that they are two different personas. Spike's redemption on Angel is much better than s7, I think because it's happening away from Buffy.

There is a major difference between a curse and a gift. Spike was already prepared for a soul in ways that Angel could have never accomplished.

My view - the demon is always there - it's just held in check. How else would Angel know who to kill in order to hurt Buffy. 

Soul isn't a guarantee that a person isn't capable of the bad things anymore. My guess, demon in a vampire just gives a person a resource to do that deeds. Just like William wanted to kill his opponents with no taste for awful poetry, Spike probably killed them just the way the human in him wanted just before the turning into vampire.
Although I agree with the statement about the efficiency of not wasting your time being guilty, Spike still has and always will have dark and unpleasant past - and don't forget that he is still a vampire with a soul meaning he has a demon inside of him, otherwise he would become human after gaining his soul back. Probably the dead one, guessing that demon maintains the dead body in immortal form.
"Simply being a good man" isn't enough to atone. Actually nothing is enough. Yep, you can do absolutely nothing to redeem that kind of past. That's the whole problem. Both vampires are doomed.😉

That's not exactly correct statement. Soul or no soul every vampire still has a demon part in them. Even if Spike's doesn't manifest itself for no reason whatsoever.

So, explain Clem? Lorne? Demon isn't always bad. Once the demon is under contra by the conscience/soul then that creature is a whole new creation. 

That's an interesting theory, and one that I don't believe has ever been mentioned before. Since Angel isn't Angelus, the only way that the Gypsies could punish Angelus would be to keep him trapped within the body of ensouled Angel. That would also help explain why Angel is so much more focused on trying to somehow achieve the impossible task of atoning for Angelus' crimes. Angel, and his extreme sense of guilt are both the prison and the torture that Angelus has to endure. Take that guilt away, even for an instant of perfect happiness, and Angelus escapes, reclaiming his body.

Except - that overwhelming need to atone happened a full century after he was cursed with the soul. Maybe brood-boy was created by the soul just as deranged psycho was created by the demon. Once Buffy gets into the mix, that's when we get the Angel we all know and love. But there has never been any indication that Angelus did not know the intimate details of Angel's life so they are completely aware regardless of who is up. 

Because otherwise, by his own words/admission, he's a massive hypocrite. You can't do one and then ignore the other- that's not how morality works. You don't get to pick and choose.

Okay - so Robin decides he's throwing in with the First. He arranges to make sure Buffy is distracted, and takes Spike to his sanctuary, removes any chance there is for Spike to take intelligent action, and nearly beats him to death. Yeah, I would say Robin is a massive hypocrite - doing the will of the First Evil and going against everything his mother stood for. She was a warrior of the light - he chooses to take the side of the dark. She was a straight on slayer, he concocts a scheme to make sure no one can interfere with his murder. She confronted her enemies straight on, he lied, manipulated and did everything the First wanted.

I can't see any reason why Spike should make nice and give her the coat. This is the mission - to defeat the First - and Robin Wood is a turncoat actively working for the First. 

Because otherwise, by his own words/admission, he's a massive hypocrite. You can't do one and then ignore the other- that's not how morality works. You don't get to pick and choose.

Should I assume you are not an Angel fan? 🙄 

No, you don't get to say 'I'm responsible for THAT evil thing that I did whilst soulless, but not THAT evil thing I did because I'm don't happen to be in love with that person'. Not when the same person did two very bad things, its nonsensical.
Nor do you get to say 'Well I'll take credit for all the good I did whilst soulless but won't give a crap about the bad because 'that wasn't me''.

Like I said: Hypocritical.

When does he say he should get credit for all that he did while he was good? He wasn't good - he was chipped. And not being able to rampage and kill - getting knocked to the bottom of the food chain - did make changes. Angel was still drinking human blood and killing humans 2 years after he was souled. He wanted to go back - he wanted to be with his family. Spike had been drinking animal blood for years - and helping humans.

Angel has two evolutionary events - getting turned and getting cursed.

Spike has three evolutionary events - getting turned, getting chipped, and then fighting for and getting his soul. So I see no reason to not give Spike credit for the good he did when he was 'muzzled' because he did it by choice. That's not to say that if the chip had been removed before the soul wasn't in place he wouldn't have turned into a monstrous killer. But given the in-between state of being he chose to throw in with the humans and help them out. Maybe it was for Buffy - much of what Angel did was for her as well - so kudos to her for her! 

We don't know that - it's just speculation about the things William was or was not capable of.

Isn't everything we do here speculation? We swap different opinions, different fanons and head canons, and try not to take it too seriously. 

Wait.. suddenly you went from saying guilt to responsibility. They are two different arguments and you just changed halfway through. Spike should not, and does not, have to feel guilt (unless he opts to), but of course he should feel responsible. To say he doesnt have to feel responsible is asinine. He was the one doing it, of course he should feel responsible.

To say you can pick and choose which act you feel guilty for is morality, not hypocrisy.

It also seems to me that crazy!basement Spike did a lot of regretting and atoning and feeling guilty until Buffy decided she needed his help. He didn't have the luxury of a quiet century - he had an apocalypse on the door step.

 

[Fuffy]

Should I assume you are not an Angel fan? 🙄

If anything, he is not a Spike fan 😛

As for Spike's so called killing while under the control of the First, he, himself, is no more guilty of those killings than Angel is guilty of what he did while under the influence of Twilight in Season 8.

Or for any of the killings Angel did as Angelus…

Angel was still drinking human blood and killing humans 2 years after he was souled. He wanted to go back - he wanted to be with his family. Spike had been drinking animal blood for years - and helping humans.

This post describes spot on how far the Buffyverse is from being black and white, there are thousands of shades of gray in there.

 

[bespangeled]

But it's different here because Spike (soul) didn't commit those crimes. The reason he feels bad about Buffy is because he loves her, therefore he feels bad that something bad happened to her. Even more so that his unsouled counterpart is the one to hurt her. He doesn't feel bad that Robin lost his mom because Robin literally comes after him and tries to kill him. Circumstantially , there's a big difference there.

I think he completely accepts what he did to Buffy was heinous - I see no reason to believe he Don't feel responsible.

Wood, OTH, is now working for the other side, rewarding Buffy's trust with outward obedience while plotting to make sure he is occupied so he can do the job the First set him. The kicker is that he knew from the First that this is what was wanted from him - he never told anyone that the First had contacted him and this is what the First wanted - so who is the real hypocrite here? 

But he doesn't say 'I'm sorry that happened to you' he says 'I can' say I'm sorry' because HE feels responsible, not because it was something bad that happened to the woman he loves.



But he doesn't just NOT apologize to Wood (that I could understand I suppose), he goes out of his way to say 'I don't care' and pisses on the man's memory of his Mom/the relationship he had with his Mom.

Plus he continues to feel pride (he wears the coat, he tells Angel and co that he's killed a couple of slayers in his time) in his actions. He also takes great 'pride' in telling Angel about all the times he 'put it to' Buffy when they square off- a stark contrast to how he treats Buffy in the previous year.

You're taking a few lines and choices out of context and saying this is all of Spike. It's a fun game - we can all play it. I vote we do Faith next - plenty of material there, or we could do Angel. How about, clearly Angel is a racists because he made comments about Gunn and Fred, her white breasts and his black smooth head. Angel must have thought plenty about that got Angelus to know. No reparation or apology there so I guess he is an unrepentant racist with a kinky streak and a lot of interest in the sex lives his people have

No - I don't believe this - just showing how taking a few lines and a scene or two and you can pretty much make any character completely evil.

Wood is the one who pissed on his own mother's memory for going against everything she believed in, and allying himself with pure Evil in order to get his personal vendetta settled. If anyone had died, I suspect Wood would be whining that it wasn't his fault - Spike made him do it. He takes no responsibility for his choices.

 

[Fuffy]

I vote we do Faith next - plenty of material there

The discussion here certainly helped me understand Spike's character and his actions better 🙂
So, you are free to do this with Faith, she has many layers that could be discussed…might give me a better understanding of her actions…

 

[bespangeled]

And yet Spike feels true guilt for what he did to Buffy- he's torn up over it. He feels that HE is responsible. And he also feels 'responsible' for killing Nikki Woods and yet feels nothing (some pride perhaps).



And he tried to rape Buffy out of his 'love' for her. Rather than a cold, sadistic want to stalk and kill a powerful young woman for no real reason.



And?
You can dislike somebody for exhibiting human attributes that you find less than admirable. Jealousy. Revenge. Betrayal. Anything really.
Hypocrisy is one of the worst though because its not an honest reaction to things.

Yeah - he was a vampire - she was a slayer. Natural enemies. Personally I would say that the innocents Spike killed are far more deplorable victims than the pentient he had for finding the best fighters and putting his own life on line - just fists and fangs.

Yeah - attacking Buffy was his wake up call - his realization that vampire love possessive, controlling, wild, and passionate - is not really love in the human sense of the word. It's incredibly unhealthy and abusive - and no matter how much he swore to himself that he wouldn't hurt Buffy, the choice to attack her proved she could never be safe for her. So he want an got his soul to make him into a different man, one who would never hurt her. Not sure why getting a soul out of love, getting a soul to protect someone you love, is wrong. I mean, if that's selfish then what is a selfless reason to get a soul?

 

[Firstina]

So, explain Clem? Lorne? Demon isn't always bad. Once the demon is under contra by the conscience/soul then that creature is a whole new creation.

Different type of demons. Demons are not all bad, but vampire type of them are bloodsucking creatures - it's just their nature.

Isn't everything we do here speculation? We swap different opinions, different fanons and head canons, and try not to take it too seriously.

Agreed. But we also have some facts we can't change - like Angel breaking up with Buffy or Spike getting his soul back. Although we can speculate about the reasons why they did what they did.

 

[bespangeled]

Because every other main character on the show feels/shows remorse for the evils they have committed. By the morality of the show Spike is certainly lacking. That's not my morality- its the shows.



How is brutally murdering somebody in cold blood not worse than trying to rape somebody? It doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter if you like somebody or not to feel bad about what you did to them- not if you are a moral person.

And again, its not the lack of apology, its the lack of anything approaching remorse..

Well, Buffy seems to have few problems with the fact that a slayers tried to kill a vampire, so she went to kill the slayer and feed her to her vampire. Her only regrets seems to be that Faith escaped - never saw any remorse there. Xander tried to rape Buffy, but then denied he had nay memory, let alone responsibility - which is pretty much what he did when h summoned a demon! He Summoned A Demon - if that's not evil it sure creates a new high for idiocy. Giles has no regret for killing Ben, nor does he have any for keeping Buffy occupied so Robin can murder the person she considers her strongest warrior. I kinda doubt that Willow looked up Warren's parents and explained why she tortured him and flayed him alive. Her concern was losing her friends because she tried to end the world. Hell, I don't even recall her apologizing to dawn for trying to kill her.

As for Nikki and Spike - she wan an experienced a slayer - not some sweet thing in pigtails. That was definitely not cold-blooded murder - it was a battle between two natural enemies. This is also the entire concept of the show! 

The point is that as a human being, Spike should feel bad for the things that he'd done. Because supposedly that's what makes him human and not a demon.

Whether he's at fault or not doesn't really come into it - if I'm brainwashed and kill someone in a trance state I had no control over, I'm still going to feel bad that it happened.

Now, how good of a person Spike is, will determine how much guilt he's actually going to feel. But he technically "should" feel guilty. Whether it's in his character to is another question altogether.

Is feeling bad what makes you a human? There are all sorts of humans who are really demons in this show. I'd say it's the opposite. You can't go back and un-kill, but you can go forward and save others. It's not for salvation - it's because it's the right thing to do.

The more Spike is paralyzed with guilt, the more completely useless he will be? But I guess Angel is really a better man because he really spent a century intermittently paralyzed with guilt (between time spent in Vegas, and hanging out with famous people).

Being paralyzed by guilt means you are in great need of therapy - not that you are better than other people who can deal. 

But he has a soul, which for all intents and purposes - and the way it is interpreted by the show - makes him human and not a demon.

No - if that were true then what Angel did for a century was evil. Hell, he had a soul and he let a hotel full of people that he could have saved die. A vampire with a soul is not a human. I judge Angel by different standards than I do about a human who did that. Part of why I like my Spangel is the fact that they are not, and probably never will be humans. They are 'other' 

That's fine and everything, but then what is the point of Spike having a soul? What does that actually mean? Either he has humanity or he doesn't.

He has eaten the fruit from the tree of knowledge - a decent metaphor for the change from pure innocent bathed in blood.

The real questi0n is 'what is a soul'. Most people seem t see it as sort of a clicker downloading all the choices you made so that you can get weighed on the scales of Osiris and see if your soul is lighter than a feather. I think more that the soul is an active participant in all that we do. A soul means weighing the consequences of your choices. And, no - not all souls are perfect. Probably none of them are. 

So it makes him a "good" person?



Well, for the purposes of this discussion, it does make a difference. Because it informs what the difference is between Spike without a soul and Spike with a soul. If it doesn't give him humanity then what does it do?

If the soul doesn't matter, then Spike definitely should atone more for what he did before he got a soul, because then he is definitely at fault.

So, what does atonement look like in this scenario? Just curious. 

My take in it is that every vamp is different, that and the fact Spike asked for his soul and so his demon adjusted differently to Angel who had his foisted on him.

If I can expand - Spike had a sire with a soul
Angel didn't know such a thing was possible.
Spike had a chip for a few years - he couldn't attack humans.
Angel could and did attack humans and found this made things worse.
Spike's demon went out a fought to get a soul in order to reign his demon in and to know he could trust himself.
Angel's curse came at the worst possible time and he had no support system, no goals, no hope.
Spike had an apocalypse to fight - this was his atonement, making sure Buffy survived - so no century of brooding.
Angel had nothing, until he had Buffy. Neither did Spike (and by that I just mean as a force in their lives).

The two are so different to start with - to have them both respond the same ways to being souled seems like a soul is almost a mechanical aperture. 

Just my POV, but you can't in this case win over your demon once and for all - it's a constant everyday fight - like in the picture with the devil on your left and angel on your right.
Today Spike's soul is having a better score, but tommorow it can change.
So why are we assuming that only soul but not the demon can win back it's place?

The demon can and has - Angel has reverted to soulless on more than one occasion. Most relevant to me is the entire Darla arc when he fired his friends, locked Dru and Darla in the all night lawyer pig out, and then lured them into a trap and set them on fire.

I kinda see that as sort of a corollary to Spike keeping the coat - except that Spike did not cross nearly the line that Angel did.

Just for explanation, I'm talking about Angel because he's what we measure a souled vampire against. I am not saying either Spike or Angel is better or worse - their actions and choices made the who they are. 

My 'belief' as you put it is what we've been shown on the show. And I never said 'amends' or atone but maybe, like everybody else, show some guilt/remorse/ signs of grown/humanity change at getting a soul.
Saying that Spike could feel bad but could also not be guilty is utterly irrelevant since he feels neither.



Well you said that it's right that Spike felt bad for trying to rape Buffy but not for stalking and murdering somebody (a champion of good no less). You claimed that he was 'doing his job' (he wasn't at all but there we are) so it's okay for him to act this way.
Even after the fact you think it's okay for him to rub the son's nose in his grief.

Personally I think that reflects on Spike's character as a whole and leaves me puzzled as to what morality he adheres to.



Show we where I said that everybody should react exactly the same?

On the other hand I do expect to see some signs of remorse from the guy who 'thinks' he did those evil things.
Either he feels nothing for all his past actions or he feels 'something' for all the bad he did- yet he feels nothing for what he did to Nikki Wood.

But no, he feels bad for Buffy and only Buffy in the end which is my whole point. Spike doesn't do atonement, he's a romantic- its all about the girl.



It's never as simple as that. Humanity/morality is infinitely complex and has been debated for thousands of years. Shrugging and saying 'well, everybody's different' is honestly just plain lazy arguing. But we're talking in circles- you'll never get my POV and I'll certainly never understand yours.



Truly I'm honoured that you agree.

Why is burning to death in order to save the world, and the woman that you love, a selfish, self centered act? Ws it selfish and self centered when Angel began to follow Buffy and help her - that was also about romance.

Yeah, Spike can be puzzling. Ido see plenty of remorse, but really don't see that Robin Wood got anything he didn't ask for. 

I think that it makes him a demon with a soul - a soul doesn't make one a human. There are humans without a soul ( like Ryan Anderson for example ) in Buffyverse.



Humanity =/= morality. In my opinion Spike's blatant disregard for Wood's mother certainly fits into the spectrum of human behaviour.

If humanity equals morality - take a look at all the other Buffy characters who killed someone and showed no remorse. I made a list of them earlier. 

The discussion here certainly helped me understand Spike's character and his actions better 🙂
So, you are free to do this with Faith, she has many layers that could be discussed…might give me a better understanding of her actions…

Faith rocks! She is one amazing woman, and slayer! 😎

 

[thetopher]

Spike was an innocent man, and Wood, himself, acknowledged the fact. "I don't want to kill you, Spike. I want to kill the monster who took my mother away from me."

But Wood doesn't ever say he considers Spike innocent, just not the same monster who killed his Mom.

Spike has already killed innocent people and put himself in a position where he could allow himself to be controlled (all the times he was walking about triggered), those are not 'innocent' actions, nor are they evil actions.

Spike and the monster are two completely different beings, even though Spike retains the memories of what the monster did, just like neither Spike nor Spike(us) retain William's memories, but are totally different beings. Spike is a different being that the monster. By killing the monster, Wood would also be guilty of killing innocent Spike.

You and I clearly have a different definition of what constitutes 'innocent'. Wood killing Spike is morally wrong, but not because Spike is innocnet, it's because Wood knows he's doing the First's bidding and does it anyway. He's actively helping evil.

Okay - so Robin decides he's throwing in with the First. He arranges to make sure Buffy is distracted, and takes Spike to his sanctuary, removes any chance there is for Spike to take intelligent action, and nearly beats him to death. Yeah, I would say Robin is a massive hypocrite - doing the will of the First Evil and going against everything his mother stood for. She was a warrior of the light - he chooses to take the side of the dark.

See above. I already said that what Wood did was wrong. Doesn't mean that what Spike did/said in return was right or true or just. He came very close to killing Wood when he was battered and helpless, he shat all over his memories of his Mother. He then criticized Wood's mother (the woman he murdered) and went on about how he had a good relationship with his Mom- because she loved him back. Tell me what part of that is not utterly odious.

Should I assume you are not an Angel fan? 🙄

I don't claim nor have ever claimed that Angel doesn't have flaws or hasn't acted like a hypocrite. But he does do atonement which is what this thread is about.

Spike-fan tactic no. 2: Bring up Angel. Check. 😛

When does he say he should get credit for all that he did while he was good?

'I reformed way before you did.' He says that to Faith the first time they meet. He considers his 'chipped' state being reformed even though he did truly disgusting things to people and put lives in danger.
All part of his 'good' phase according to Spike.

You're taking a few lines and choices out of context and saying this is all of Spike. It's a fun game - we can all play it.

So you're saying that Spike doesn't really feel bad about what he did to Buffy? Well, he does lie to her A LOT during this episode (nearly everything that comes out of 'sane' Spike's mouth is a lie in this episode) but even I, who am not a fan of soulled-Spike at all, would say that he genuinely feels bad about the attempted rape. He felt before he went and got his soul.
If not then he's lying to Buffy about something very important.

I vote we do Faith next - plenty of material there, or we could do Angel.

Spike-fan tactic no. 10: Attack other character whose redemption arc actually exists/works. 😛 Check and check.

How about, clearly Angel is a racists because he made comments about Gunn and Fred, her white breasts and his black smooth head. Angel must have thought plenty about that got Angelus to know

Angelus said all those things not Angel. If Angel and Angelus are the same person then its probable that Spike is a massive homophobe- the number of times he calls somebody (usually Angel) a poof, a nancy boy, gay, etc. would indicate that.

I take it you DON'T think that?

Soul means different person, at least to me it does.

No - I don't believe this - just showing how taking a few lines and a scene or two and you can pretty much make any character completely evil.

Not evil. I never called soulled Spike evil. Just guilty of hypocrisy because he picks and chooses what 'he' feels bad for to suit himself.

Yeah - he was a vampire - she was a slayer. Natural enemies.

No. Just no. One is a 'good guy', the other is a 'bad guy'.
Unless people would truly not have minded if Spike had won and killed Buffy in 'School Hard' they needed to stop making this ridiculous moral equivalency argument. Spike killed a slayer, who is a champion of good and presumably saved tons of innocent lives (just like Buffy has done countless times).

That is an evil act.

Well, Buffy seems to have few problems with the fact that a slayers tried to kill a vampire, so she went to kill the slayer and feed her to her vampire. Her only regrets seems to be that Faith escaped - never saw any remorse there. Xander tried to rape Buffy, but then denied he had nay memory, let alone responsibility - which is pretty much what he did when h summoned a demon!

I do think I earlier called Buffy and Xander out for being massive hypocrites as well in certain circumstances. For the exact reasons that you said. Xander is all for killing 'grey area' people unless he's dating them and Buffy has loads of double standards when it comes to use of lethal force (Anya/Spike) and forgiving those who have wronged her.
There are whole threads about it I'm sure, or at the very least its been brought up previously.

Giles has no regret for killing Ben,

And why should he? One, Ben is a mass murderer by way of demon (although to be fair Giles probably didn't know this) and secondly Giles was prepared to kill Dawn to stop Glory's scheme and save the world.
Giles is a Watcher whose duty is to do what 'some people shouldn't have to', so I think it's safe to say that he considers killing Ben an evil act, if also a necessary one.

He says to ben before he kills him: 'Buffy's a hero you see. She isn't like us.' Ergo- Giles isn't a hero because he must do evil things.

Spike does not consider what 'he' did to Nikki Woods as anything evil, just 'the way the game is played'.

nor does he have any for keeping Buffy occupied so Robin can murder the person she considers her strongest warrior.

Giles saw Spike as a threat/tool for the First, not her 'strongest warrior' (which at this time is a laughable assertion) so he did what he did. Giles again considered it something necessary- because its consistent with his past actions so he's not a hypocrite.

I kinda doubt that Willow looked up Warren's parents and explained why she tortured him and flayed him alive.

*cough* The Killer In Me *cough*.
Willow does not feel good about her previous actions in S6. She tells Anya to 'have at it' and lay into her and acts very much like a unsure wallflower for a lot of S7. Should we have gotten more atonement/grief from her? Absolutely. You wanna talk about that then start a thread.

As for Nikki and Spike - she wan an experienced a slayer - not some sweet thing in pigtails. That was definitely not cold-blooded murder - it was a battle between two natural enemies. This is also the entire concept of the show!

No, Nikki was a slayer- a force for good in the world no different from Buffy. She had people who cared about her- her Watcher and her son- who felt grief at her passing. The fact that Spike doesn't even acknowledge that is very telling.
Basically Spike doesn't feel the need for atonement because of how/why he got his soul. It was about Buffy so Buffy is all that matters.

And no, love is not a selfless motivation. Spike even says that he went and got a soul so he could 'be what she deserves'. A selfish act so he could be with the woman he loves (the fact that he did it at all is the remarkable thing, not the reasoning behind it).
This is not an act of atonement but of self-interest.

Oh, and because somebody will no doubt bring up Angel I also consider Angel staying in Sunnydale in S3 as entirely born of self-interest. The difference is that he left. Angel went where he was needed, not where he wanted to be. 

Why is burning to death in order to save the world, and the woman that you love, a selfish, self centered act?

I said the opposite in fact. But ONE act does not equeal 'enough' atonement in my view. Atonement is never over. Spike starts to realise that over on Angel but...sadly it doesn't take (see comics).

Yeah, Spike can be puzzling. Ido see plenty of remorse, but really don't see that Robin Wood got anything he didn't ask for.

And Spike spat on Nikki's grave. Point of the thread is showing atonement and he showed her memory nothing but contempt.

 

[Silverspike]

"Spike has already killed innocent people and put himself in a position where he could allow himself to be controlled"

I know you don't see my posts (or are just plain ignoring them) but come on. "allow himself" I mean seriously wtf??

"Spike-fan tactic no. 2: Bring up Angel. Check."

Oh how predictable....

 

[bespangeled]

But Wood doesn't ever say he considers Spike innocent, just not the same monster who killed his Mom.

Spike has already killed innocent people and put himself in a position where he could allow himself to be controlled (all the times he was walking about triggered), those are not 'innocent' actions, nor are they evil actions.



You and I clearly have a different definition of what constitutes 'innocent'. Wood killing Spike is morally wrong, but not because Spike is innocnet, it's because Wood knows he's doing the First's bidding and does it anyway. He's actively helping evil.



See above. I already said that what Wood did was wrong. Doesn't mean that what Spike did/said in return was right or true or just. He came very close to killing Wood when he was battered and helpless, he shat all over his memories of his Mother. He then criticized Wood's mother (the woman he murdered) and went on about how he had a good relationship with his Mom- because she loved him back. Tell me what part of that is not utterly odious.



I don't claim nor have ever claimed that Angel doesn't have flaws or hasn't acted like a hypocrite. But he does do atonement which is what this thread is about.

Spike-fan tactic no. 2: Bring up Angel. Check. 😛



'I reformed way before you did.' He says that to Faith the first time they meet. He considers his 'chipped' state being reformed even though he did truly disgusting things to people and put lives in danger.
All part of his 'good' phase according to Spike.



So you're saying that Spike doesn't really feel bad about what he did to Buffy? Well, he does lie to her A LOT during this episode (nearly everything that comes out of 'sane' Spike's mouth is a lie in this episode) but even I, who am not a fan of soulled-Spike at all, would say that he genuinely feels bad about the attempted rape. He felt before he went and got his soul.
If not then he's lying to Buffy about something very important.



Spike-fan tactic no. 10: Attack other character whose redemption arc actually exists/works. 😛 Check and check.



Angelus said all those things not Angel. If Angel and Angelus are the same person then its probable that Spike is a massive homophobe- the number of times he calls somebody (usually Angel) a poof, a nancy boy, gay, etc. would indicate that.

I take it you DON'T think that?

Soul means different person, at least to me it does.



Not evil. I never called soulled Spike evil. Just guilty of hypocrisy because he picks and chooses what 'he' feels bad for to suit himself.



No. Just no. One is a 'good guy', the other is a 'bad guy'.
Unless people would truly not have minded if Spike had won and killed Buffy in 'School Hard' they needed to stop making this ridiculous moral equivalency argument. Spike killed a slayer, who is a champion of good and presumably saved tons of innocent lives (just like Buffy has done countless times).

That is an evil act.



I do think I earlier called Buffy and Xander out for being massive hypocrites as well in certain circumstances. For the exact reasons that you said. Xander is all for killing 'grey area' people unless he's dating them and Buffy has loads of double standards when it comes to use of lethal force (Anya/Spike) and forgiving those who have wronged her.
There are whole threads about it I'm sure, or at the very least its been brought up previously.



And why should he? One, Ben is a mass murderer by way of demon (although to be fair Giles probably didn't know this) and secondly Giles was prepared to kill Dawn to stop Glory's scheme and save the world.
Giles is a Watcher whose duty is to do what 'some people shouldn't have to', so I think it's safe to say that he considers killing Ben an evil act, if also a necessary one.

He says to ben before he kills him: 'Buffy's a hero you see. She isn't like us.' Ergo- Giles isn't a hero because he must do evil things.

Spike does not consider what 'he' did to Nikki Woods as anything evil, just 'the way the game is played'.



Giles saw Spike as a threat/tool for the First, not her 'strongest warrior' (which at this time is a laughable assertion) so he did what he did. Giles again considered it something necessary- because its consistent with his past actions so he's not a hypocrite.



*cough* The Killer In Me *cough*.
Willow does not feel good about her previous actions in S6. She tells Anya to 'have at it' and lay into her and acts very much like a unsure wallflower for a lot of S7. Should we have gotten more atonement/grief from her? Absolutely. You wanna talk about that then start a thread.



No, Nikki was a slayer- a force for good in the world no different from Buffy. She had people who cared about her- her Watcher and her son- who felt grief at her passing. The fact that Spike doesn't even acknowledge that is very telling.
Basically Spike doesn't feel the need for atonement because of how/why he got his soul. It was about Buffy so Buffy is all that matters.

And no, love is not a selfless motivation. Spike even says that he went and got a soul so he could 'be what she deserves'. A selfish act so he could be with the woman he loves (the fact that he did it at all is the remarkable thing, not the reasoning behind it).
This is not an act of atonement but of self-interest.

Oh, and because somebody will no doubt bring up Angel I also consider Angel staying in Sunnydale in S3 as entirely born of self-interest. The difference is that he left. Angel went where he was needed, not where he wanted to be. 


I said the opposite in fact. But ONE act does not equeal 'enough' atonement in my view. Atonement is never over. Spike starts to realise that over on Angel but...sadly it doesn't take (see comics).



And Spike spat on Nikki's grave. Point of the thread is showing atonement and he showed her memory nothing but contempt.

Spike did far less damage to Nikki's grave than Robin did by using the illusions the First sent to fuel his own vendetta, turning to the dark willingly for personal gain, and actively doing the job that the First evil wanted him to do. Would Nikki have been proud of her son, ignoring the fact that she trained him to know that the mission is what matters? The damn apocalypse is not about outer wear- it's about defeating evil rather than choosing to be seduced by it

Give me a break - can we lose the knee jerk 'Spike fan's are always meanies' whine?! Yes, I brought in Angel - who i love, and who is the measurement of what a vampire can do with a soul. I also mentioned, Faith, Giles, Buffy, Willow, Robin Wood, and several other characters. And this offends you how?😛

Angel - Angelus. I'm just using what he said:
Jenny: He's not Angel anymore. Are you?

Angelus: Wrong. I *am* Angel. (tightens his grip on Willow) At last!

So, yeah, it was Angel who did it all, everything in season 2, at least in his eyes. And yeah - Spike does call Angel a poofter - he also mentions having had sex with him. Mystery solved.😀

Your thesis is that, since you don't see some proper form of atonement that Spike is lying, a hypocrite and hiding something from Buffy - kind of a large leap. Yes, Spike was an evil vampire when he killed Nikki, just as he was when he tried to kill Buffy. I actually don't recall him ever expressing atonement to Buffy for that. But he killed Nikki 30 year before - not much he can do about it now - except maybe patting Wood on the head and telling him how very proud his mother would be that he son pissed on everything his mother ever believed in, and that he was coward enough that he made arrangement to do this behind the back of the slayer he pretended to be working under. Yeah - hypocrite. The more I argue you about this, the happier I am that Spike kept the coat. To give it to Robin would have been rewarding him for being a hypocrite and a traitor.

You said the show was based on the idea that anyone who killed expressed regret and atoned - I gave a list that proved you wrong. You gave me rationalizations as to why this murder or that one doesn't count. My point is that I don't see a whole lot of atonement going on, so I don't understand why Spike is expected to be even better than the humans. And I really don't see why Nikki, of all his victims, is someone who needs special concern. Back then he was a vampire and she was the slayer - it was a game. Now he is a souled vampire and Robin is a traitor to everything his mother ever believed in.

The Killer in Me - so very not what you were asking for. If crying and going nuts is all you need then crazy!basement Spike does all that. No, since that isn't enough, I think Willow needs to talk to Warren's family and explain how she tortured him to death, and why she made that choice. It's clearly what you want Spike to do. I'll make it easy - let's say that Warren's family is not working for evil and attempting to kill her.😉

Yes, yes, yes - Buffy is all that matters. To some degree this is right - about both Angel and Spike. But it's also kind of funny when I realize that Spike is considered to be evil for watching Dawn because all he wants to do is get into Buffy's decaying pants. Oh, and burning to death to save the world and keep the person you love alive is hardly a great way to ensure a future with her. Some of this stuff gets repeated so often it's just silly, IMO. Getting a soul to be with the woman he loves, and never once touching her without her permission, never stalking her, just doing what she needed, including die. Wow, what a selfish bastard he turns out to be. 🙄

Now, when Angel does things for Buffy, is that being selfish? Because the standard you set here means that helping Buffy is a selfish motivation at all times. You know, one of them doesn't need to be knocked down for the other to be raised higher. I also think that doing things for someone you love is...well, loving.

Angel went where he wanted to go, with no idea what he was doing or why he was there. Doyle convinced him to stay and work to help the helpless

And while Spike may have spit on Nikki's grave - after Robin arranged to murder him, then Robin shat on her grave for consciously doing what the First evil wanted, for betraying everyone who fought the First, and for putting his own need for a personal vendetta above everything that his mother actually stood for.

 

[Fuffy]

Spike-fan tactic no. 10: Attack other character whose redemption arc actually exists/works. 😛 Check and check.

I still don't see how Spikes redemption arc didn't work, I actually think that it was better than Angel's 😛…(my favorite Buffyverse redemption arc is still Faith's 🙂)

Faith rocks! She is one amazing woman, and slayer! 😎

Which is why I'd like to see a thread talking about the quality of her redemption (I loved it more than Spike's, but I'm sure that others wouldn't nessasary agree with me…)

 

[Kana]

I actually believe the problem of dealing with Spike or any other potential soulled vampire is one of complexity. We have many different philosophical problems to overcome before we can correctly pass judgement of his behaviour. This of course assumes that we can pass judgement!!!

Dualism: The Problem With "I"

Pushing asside the ontological problems of dualism, we cannot ignore that BTVS and AtS contain narrative that is heavily steeped in dualism. This allows for body swap episodes or the fact the Buffy was heaven when her body was decaying in the ground. This mind/body distinction is important when we regard Spike (or indeed Angel) when they talk about what they did in the past.

Spike (perhaps more consistently than Angel) argues that he, did what he did without a soul. He rarely if at all argued that a separate entity did those things. Now Spike is either mistaken or he's right. The point however is, that he believes that he is the same Carthesian "I" who killed Nikki. So during Spike's self assessment, he wouldn't be using the argument that "It's not my fault because I didn't do it". So if he were to lack remorse, he would need to use some other justification to remain logically consistent with his ontological position.

Killing Nikki? Evil? Or Simply A Game?

Spike dismisses Nikki's death as a game she simply lost. Is he right? Some people talk about the fact that Nikki had a sporting chance of defending herself but this isn't really the point. We need to further scrutinize Spike's intentions when it came to killing the Slayers. First of all, Spike didn't kill Nikki out of self defence. He sought her out like he did with the Chinese Slayer.

SPIKE:


After that, I was obsessed. I mean, to most vampires, the Slayer was the subject of cold sweat and frightened whispers. But I never hid. Hell, I sought her out. I mean, if you're looking for fun, there's death, there's glory and sod all else, right? (shrugs) I was young.

It had nothing to do with a moral stance or standing up for victimized vampires all over the world. He killed Slayers for the same reason Angelus tortured his victims: for fun. Their difference in evil was akin the moral distinction between liking the opera and liking baseball. The reason why Spike didn't do what Angelus did, wasn't because of it's moral depravity, but because he found it boring!

SPIKE:Sod off! (laughs) Come on. When was the last time you unleashed it? All out fight in a mob, back against the wall, nothing but fists and fangs? Don't you ever get tired of fights you know you're going to win?


ANGELUS:No. A real kill. A good kill. It takes pure artistry. Without that, we're just animals.


SPIKE😛oofter!

While Spike didn't focus on his victims misery, he certainly understood. He understood, even without a soul, the burden and emotional pain, that Nikki wasn't going through and his killing of her wasn't a kill of mercy. In the way that Angelus loved to oty with his victims before he killed them, Spike wanted to get as much pleasure and fun out of his Slayers before he killed them.

SPIKE
(exhilarated) Well, all right. Got the moves, don't you? I'm gonna ride you hard before I put you away, luv.

SPIKE
(grinning) I spent a long time trying to track you down. Don't want the dance to end so soon, do you, Nikki? The music's just starting, isn't it? (tosses the stake back toward her; it lands on the pavement; Spike starts to walk away, but swings around on a lamp post, staring at her) By the way...love the coat. (walks away)

So was it a game? Yes it was, to Spike, but not to Nikki. It was her mission. A deadly, unfair mission. A burden of which Spike understood and used against her. However, at the end of LMPTM, something happens that most Spike detractors miss. He at least understands that Nikki's life was worth more than a game.

SPIKE
I gave him a pass. Let him live. On account of the fact I killed his mother.

Should Spike Feel Guilty?

This question is actually pretty difficult to answer. I've often argued the complexity of the moral responsibility we assign to soulless vampires. While we may struggle to call vampires amoral, we cannot ignore the psychological changes that take place upon siring.

When it came to Angel vs Angelus, there appeared to be a sort essentialism that made me wonder why he would feel guilty. Angel even told Faith that he didn't have choice in being a killer. While strickly speaking this isn't true, what is called into question is whether or not a soulless vampire has a moral choice. This calls into question Spike's behaviour when he was chipped, but more specifically, when he got a soul. The "purists" as I call them argue that even his quest for a soul, must be out of self interest in order for the importance of the soul to remain intact. So in their eyes, the motivation to get a soul was to be with Buffy, but after he got a soul, it's only then his motivations can begin to change. However others argue that this is too restrictive when talking about moral reasoning. Simply saying that Spike can only be good with a soul, is a circular argument in itself. It also means we have to intepret events in a certain way to make it fit.

If his moral identity is so difficult to discern, then our task of assigning the appropriate degree of blame becomes a monumental task. However, I've always said, we should be consistent. If Spike can be blamed for Buffy's attempted rape, he can also be blamed for killing Nikki (certainly based upon my above analysis). Spike's either wrong in his attitude in LMPTM and right in Damage or vice versa. However, with the soul being a mysterious component in this game of morality, said component being absent makes us wonder...

So this being said, as people have already said, is it more important for Spike to focus a past in which his culpability is difficult to analyze, or is it more fruitful for him to focus on a present whereby he is actively fighting the good fight.

 

[gite63]

Ultimately, they all feel bad about what they did and are atoning by doing good.

Vampires were evil, so their crimes don't count. But the humans are ruled by human Law. Did they pay for their crimes, or do they want to pay for them? Willow (although her crime was undone), Giles? Faith killed a truly innocent, good man; she feels really bad about it, she knows that the old man had a daughter and that she always visits his grave.

She stayed a couple of years in prison, escaped, and didn't come back. The world is now full of Slayers, there are two vampire Champions, many vampires are following Harmony's rules, the Police have tasks forces that deal with the supernatural; she wouldn't be missed as much as before. But she won't go back to prison.

What good it would do if she visited the daughter of her victim, said “I'm so sorry, I feel really bad” and give her a pat on the back? Would the daughter be satisfied? Knowing that the murderer of her father is walking free?

 

[thetopher]

Spike did far less damage to Nikki's grave than Robin did by using the illusions the First sent to fuel his own vendetta, turning to the dark willingly for personal gain, and actively doing the job that the First evil wanted him to do. Would Nikki have been proud of her son, ignoring the fact that she trained him to know that the mission is what matters?

Not really. Wood killed quite a few vampires in his time growing up, honoring his mother. One mistake at the end doesn't undo all that. And I still don't see why Wood's behavior has anything to do with what Spike says about Nikki.
He said it, he meant it, he only belatedly seems to change his mind later on on Angel. It was still repulsive and he's still a hypocrite

Give me a break - can we lose the knee jerk 'Spike fan's are always meanies' whine?!

I'll just breeze right past this rudeness.

Angel - Angelus. I'm just using what he said:
Jenny: He's not Angel anymore. Are you?

Angelus: Wrong. I *am* Angel. (tightens his grip on Willow) At last!

And Spike calls Angel ANGELUS the first time he sees him in 'School Hard'. He calls him Buffy-whipped Angelus later on. We can quote each other all we want but morally speaking souled counterparts are not responsible for what their past selves did- we are shown this through the stories of Holtz and Wood- and how their vengeance led them down dark paths.

And yeah - Spike does call Angel a poofter - he also mentions having had sex with him. Mystery solved.😀

Nope. 'Intimate' doesn't mean shag. Nice try though.

Your thesis is that, since you don't see some proper form of atonement that Spike is lying, a hypocrite and hiding something from Buffy

No I said either he was lying to Buffy about being sorry for the rape attempt (which I highly doubt) OR he's a hypocrite. He can't be both. I still haven't heard a good explanation about why any of the sh*tty things souled Spike has done are okay.

But he killed Nikki 30 year before - not much he can do about it now

Show her memory some goddamn respect for one. But this is too much bother for him. He has his pride after all, and his style (and yes, that does reference the coat).

except maybe patting Wood on the head and telling him how very proud his mother would be that he son pissed on everything his mother ever believed in, and that he was coward enough that he made arrangement to do this behind the back of the slayer he pretended to be working under.

We all get it. Wood= BAD!!
Doesn't make Spike any less of a douche for doing/saying what he did. It goes to the core of how he sees himself. Victim not victimizer. Bullied not bully. More sinned against that sinned- that's Spike's view.

Yeah - hypocrite. The more I argue you about this, the happier I am that Spike kept the coat.

Good for you. Apparently you'd also be okay with Spike killing Buffy because that's 'the way the game was played'. Good and evil morality doesn't enter into it. 🙄

You said the show was based on the idea that anyone who killed expressed regret and atoned - I gave a list that proved you wrong.

No you didn't. I already said that Buffy and Xander had been hypocrites in the past (go check my past postings) and they get called out for it quite often. Giles not so much for the reasons I gave- his actions are entirely consistent.

You gave me rationalizations as to why this murder or that one doesn't count.

Or I gave you moral context. You're the master of rationalizations. At least when it comes to Spike. 😛

'He's not so bad and anyway Wood is WAY worse.' Please.

My point is that I don't see a whole lot of atonement going on, so I don't understand why Spike is expected to be even better than the humans.

Not better just the same as. Show some humanity for a life that he cut short, not pride in doing it (see 'Damage')

And I really don't see why Nikki, of all his victims, is someone who needs special concern. Back then he was a vampire and she was the slayer - it was a game.

Because she was the one the writers brought up. She was an example, just like Holtz was to Angel- a haunting face from the past, illustrative of how thevampires feel about themselves then and now.

The Killer in Me - so very not what you were asking for. If crying and going nuts is all you need then crazy!basement Spike does all that.

The ONLY reason Amy's spell worked was because of Willow's immense grief/guilt over the specific events of S6. Go and watch the episode.

Crazy Spike is long-gone by the time of 'LMPTM', He's over it already, pretty much unchanged from his 'humanity-getting' experience.

I think Willow needs to talk to Warren's family and explain how she tortured him to death, and why she made that choice.

Well, for the comparison to be accurate Willow would have to go to Warren's parents and say that she didn't give a shit about the way she brutally tortured Warren because he had it coming. She would have to rub their noses in it and also maybe carry around some memento of his to remind herself of what she did to Warren. Like his face. 😛

That would be an apt comparison. 😉

Yes, yes, yes - Buffy is all that matters. To some degree this is right - about both Angel and Spike.

No, Angel LEFT and stayed gone mostly. Spike is all about Buffy- it is why he does almost everything in S7. Soulled Spike is a plot-device, it's that simple. Whatever Buffy needs he's it.

But it's also kind of funny when I realize that Spike is considered to be evil for watching Dawn because all he wants to do is get into Buffy's decaying pants.

Geez, now who's whining. 😛

Btw- I have never, ever said this. Could be you're just in crazy rant mode though so I'll let it pass.

Oh, and burning to death to save the world and keep the person you love alive is hardly a great way to ensure a future with her.

*sigh* Yeah, Spike burned to a crisp to save the world. I have said time and again that this was a good, noble, heroic thing, but it doesn't undo his behavior before or after. One event does not give somebody to act any way they want.

Getting a soul to be with the woman he loves, and never once touching her without her permission, never stalking her, just doing what she needed, including die. Wow, what a selfish bastard he turns out to be. 🙄

I never said that it was selfish per se, just far from utterly noble or selfless. Beforehand Spike got the soul to be with Buffy (or to 'make' Buffy love him as he saw it) but afterwards yeah, he's guilt-ridden for a little while at least.

Oh, and he did touch her a couple of times without her permission. And also threatened her with violence (when she was being a bitch in 'Get It Done')- but other than that he was a saint. To her.

And while Spike may have spit on Nikki's grave - after Robin arranged to murder him, then Robin shat on her grave for consciously doing what the First evil wanted, for betraying everyone who fought the First, and for putting his own need for a personal vendetta above everything that his mother actually stood for.

So when Wood does it and its HORRIBLE and wrong. But when Spike does it its actually okay because Wood is just worse and he's a horrible traitor?

I say that what Wood did was wrong but it doesn't excuse what Spike said/believes about Nikki and his past actions. You think what Wood did was wrong and therefore Spike gets a huge pass?

I'll think I'll leave it there. 😉

I still don't see how Spikes redemption arc didn't work

Because it was never about righting his past wrongs. Everything from S5 through S7 was all about Buffy and his love for her. Spike undoubtedly became 'better' (but in my opinion a lot less likable) but it was never separate from what HE wanted, which was Buffy.

He does have a better redemptive factor on Angel but ultimately it goes nowhere because in the comics he just ends up going back to Buffy to be whatever she needs.

And I appreciate you not getting hysterical in defense of Spike, actually trying to converse respectfully. Very refreshing. 🙂

 

[Silverspike]

Nope. 'Intimate' doesn't mean shag. Nice try though.

"I just want to say Angel and Spike they were hanging out for years and years and years, they were all kinds of deviant, they're are vampires,
are we thinking they never? Come on people I'm just saying. I'm just saying.They're opened minded guys. They were evil, but they aren't bigoted or close minded."

From the mouth of Joss Whedon.

Anybody want to repost the above quote so you know who can actually see it? 😀

 

[gite63]

Anybody want to repost the above quote so you know who can actually see it?

I kind of agree that "intimate" doesn't mean "shag", but...

As Silverspike said, from the mouth of Joss Whedon:

A Hole in the World
DVD commentary
Angel and Spike holding hands (at the entrance of the Deeper Well)

Spike and Angel...they were hanging out for years and years and years. They were all kinds of deviant. Are people thinking they never...? Come on, people! They're opened-minded guys! 

As for Spike's so called killing while under the control of the First, he, himself, is no more guilty of those killings than Angel is guilty of what he did while under the influence of Twilight in Season 8.

Spike was controlled by the First, Angel was sweet talked by Whistler. Only at the very end (when he killed Giles), Angel was under of influence of Twilight.

Angel & Faith - Live Through This

Faith: Like when you killed Giles. B said when it was over, you didn't know what happened. so it wasn't you.

Angel: I wish I could say that. I really do. But there were too many times I was in my right mind. Times I could've turned back... asked more questions... really thought about what I was doing. But I didn't. And now I have more death on my conscience than Angelus ever did.

So, the original question was "Should there had been more atonement from Spike?"

It seems that people who answered yes, it should, think Spike should have more respect for the people he killed (mainly Nikki), and address that out loud many times, and give a coat back. The irony is that of all people, soul and all - Angel, Faith, Buffy, Giles, Xander, Wood, Willow - Spike is the only one who has never committed any crime.

 

[Firstina]

As for Nikki and Spike - she wan an experienced a slayer - not some sweet thing in pigtails. That was definitely not cold-blooded murder - it was a battle between two natural enemies. This is also the entire concept of the show!

Also don't get the statement "that's the way the game plays".
So why bother with the rape attempt with such argument - "that's the way the game plays" - Buffy was a Slayer, Spike was a vampire - they were natural enemies, so his attack was only natural thing. Nope, doesn't work even for Spike-haters, I guess.
And again for this "natural enemies" argument - Wood was a vampire-hunter, Spike was a vampire (soul or no soul - still vampire) - the "natural" thing to do for a vampire-hunter is to kill a vampire.
So why exactly the first case with Spike and Nikki is more "natural" than the other two?

 

[The Bronze]

He does have a better redemptive factor on Angel but ultimately it goes nowhere because in the comics he just ends up going back to Buffy to be whatever she needs.

Isn't that a little bit of a narrow view though? Buffy is front and centre for trying to save the world. Spike loves Buffy and wants to do good and save the world. Surely the only sensible place for someone like that would be with Buffy trying to save the world?