No it ain't; its actually just kinda contrived storytelling imo. Confused shouldn't be mistaken for subtle.
The Spuffy writing couldn't be subtle if its life depended on it. The writers literally had Spike wake up and realise he was in love with Buffy despite his previous attempts to kill her. They retconned the Lovers Walk Sprusilla break up to be all about Spuffy when it originally wasn't (Dru was pissed that Spike made a truce with Buffy, not that he was in love with her), they also brought Drusilla back just so that Spike could reject her in favour of Spuffy. Essentially the writers tried to take down Sprusilla because Spuffy couldn't stand independently on its own two feet, hence why they tried to diminish the previous (far superior IMO) relationship in an attempt to make Spuffy "work".
Either vampires are irredeemable or their not; Buffy should kill them because of this or not. Watchers didn't make up the fact that vampires kill and slaughter and spread like a plague. We are shown time and again that vampires are soulless, evil things that are- like many monsters on the show- a metaphor for something.
The opening monologue basically defines Buffy's role as controlling the vampire and demon population:
"Into every generation a slayer is born: one girl in all the world, a chosen one. She alone will wield the strength and skill to fight the vampires, demons, and the forces of darkness; to stop the spread of their evil and the swell of their number. She is the Slayer."
There are never not going to be demons or vampires, Buffy's role is to keep the balance between good and evil, hence why the First targeted the potentials and slayers because it wanted to tip the balance in evil's favour (and massively screwed up by helpfully digging up the one weapon that Buffy needed to win).
We are told by the writers that Spike-one of the worst vampires on record- is different; he has 'soul-residue' and therefore more 'capacity for good' and ability to make moral choices. This clearly makes him MORE responsible than any other vampire for the crimes he commited against his victimes, especially Buffy, and yet it can be argues that he cares the least out of all the 'souled' vampires we see.
In other words, the writers needed an excuse for why Spike was Buffy's lapdog even though it creates other issues.
But he does good things for Joyce and Dawn as well. And helps the gang out when there isn't much in it for him. The writers had said that they wanted to illustrate that 'Spike was different'- that was their intent in S7. See how he's portrayed in flashback in 'LMPTM' and how tender he is with him Mum compared with his attitude in S5 'FFL' (parts of which are set right after) and we see that Spike killing his Mummy really messed him up because he was, y'know, so special.
He was special for all those hundred and twenty plus years and murder and such (but that wasn't really his fault, that was Angel's fault...)
The writers did a disservice to Spike by making his sole storyline Spuffy. I think Spike should've been kept somewhat evil or at the very least soulless.
He's the only soulless vampire that gets a lot of screen time, I just kind of thought that if we saw more vampires for a longer period of time that way they would seem different too.
I agree. There is a difference between the characterisation of the whirlwind and the general redshirt vamps that Buffy stakes on a regular basis.
But Buffy had a big family, as of S5; she had Willow and Xander and Giles. Spike wasn't particularly nice to them. Maybe it was just 'blood' family but still Spike seems to have made a choice to be nice to some and not to others. Hmn.
Joyce and Dawn treated Spike respectfully, the scoobies didn't. They don't have to like him, but there was no reason why they couldn't at least be civil to him since he was a member of team scooby.
What made Spike 'remarkable' (apparently) is that he wanted to save him Mum and was upset that she wasn't grateful.
I think he was more upset that she tried to sexually assault him.
Given that we've seen Spike uphold his end of bargains even when he doesn't need to eg Ford, my theory is that as a kid he made a promise to his dying father to always take care of his mother. Spike took that promise seriously even as a vampire hence why he thought siring his mother would make her well. He had no idea how nasty she would turn out. He always knew his mother as one thing (loving, kind, etc) and now he was being presented with the complete opposite. It's also possible that he never really confronted what happened and just tried to avoid it.
What I took away from the series was much simpler; Spike is a fairly fun and sociable (though still very evil and vicious) vampire that got too many shocks to the brain and snapped, 'fell in love' with the source of most of his troubles (Buffy the slayer), and then the rest can be explained away by his own warped and romantic view of himself and the world. The fact that that the view doesn't shift that much after Spike gets a soul is kinda well, pathetic, but all in all its a better explaination that the narrative the writers tried on us; which was basically 'cuz special'
I think the monks spell did a number on all the scoobies including Spike.
In my view, Angelus is the anomaly amongst vampires, not Spike.