Spikes Lack Of A Soul

[Kana]

I must admit that I find Joss Whedon's view of a soul to be a joke. It seemed to smack of some kind of black-and-white morality that permeated shows like "CHARMED". I thought that Whedon was above such things. I guess not.

However this seems to be a large contigent of the metaphysics of the show. Luckily there is enough moral ambiguity among the soulled to keep us happy.

For me, vampires and other sentient beings have souls, regardless of what they are. Unless such beings are zombies. To me, having a soul is being aware of one's individuality, emotions and state of being. All the humans, vampires, demons and etc. on the series seemed to be aware of their individuality . . . unless any of them was a zombie.

In terms of individuality, I agree and I think this is where we can begin to reconcile the idea of how different vampires can respond to different events including their own siring.

Joss makes it clear that vampires have emotions and also retain many of the characteristics of the preceeding human. However, I cannot ignore the psychological difference between vampires and the preceeding humans.

Now just to preempt some possible rubuttals, it's not the same as saying vampires commit evil but humans don't, it's merely recognising a difference in behaviour from the preceeding human to the subsequent vampire. If you take a reasonable human being who's never commited a crime, let's call him William, turn him into a vampire, chances are, he's going to become a killer, without remorse. It doesn't mean he cannot retain many elements of his individual personality and indeed this personality, along with circumstance could have been just what was needed for Spike to cross over.

That smacks of hypocrisy to me.

I do partially agree with Kelsey. Clearly the soul is presented as having meaning, whether we like it or not. If the soul (however it works) plays a pretty large role in making a moral decision, if one is without one, then surely judging them in the same way as someone who does have one seems a little unfair.

In fact if you want to look at it another way, it's almost arrogant to think that vampires should be held by humans standards. So can actually say, honestly. "Vampire, I'm not judging you morally but I'd prefer it if you were killed because, in a very selfish way it's protects my interests." In short, we're not saying we're better, just just psychologically different enough so we shouldn't be judged in the same way.

I suppose I allow myself the seemingly impossible task of allowing myself to identify with soulless vampires and feel for them, all the while keeping a clinical eye on them and understanding that although they have much in common with their human predecessors, they have gone through an dramatic internal change that makes them a more definite threat to humans. And just before one says that a humans can alsoa threats to other humans, well...use a common sense approach. If vampires were real, knowing what we know, would you hang out with a bunch of vampires? I wouldn't, but I wouldn't assume every human I met was going to kill me.

 

[thevikingsgirl]

BillyidolwannaB agrees: Well, i find evil beings to not have a soul. It makes more sense in the Buffyverse! Evil not- good yes? No?

In the early, simplistic seasons maybe. Later? Not at all. They never really address evil humans. Warren had a soul and look at him. A sociopath if I ever saw one. What about Clem? Lorne? They're demons and therefore, by Joss mythology, do not have souls. They are clearly NOT evil. What about a half-demon like Doyle. Soul? No soul? I think in the early part of the show they wrote themselves into a corner with the whole soul thing, then just ignored it later.

I agree that a soul is related to consciousness. The only creatures who seemed truly unsouled to me in the Buffyverse were the zombies (like when Joyce had that mask thing that literally woke corpses, or A Thin Dead Line on Angel with the zombie police officers).

 

[LadyLavinia]

However this seems to be a large contigent of the metaphysics of the show. Luckily there is enough moral ambiguity among the soulled to keep us happy.

Perhaps. But considering that Spike's moral compass was still judged by a soul or lack of a soul by Season 7 only tells me that the moral ambiguity wasn't enough.

Joss makes it clear that vampires have emotions and also retain many of the characteristics of the preceeding human. However, I cannot ignore the psychological difference between vampires and the preceeding humans.

I can. Every individual has psychological differences. Every individual has his or her own moral compass. To lump one group against another seems ridiculous to me. Even on BUFFY, different vampires seemed to have their own different psychological and moral compass differences. Which only leads me to believe that judging a character based upon his/her species and possession or lack of a soul seem one-dimensional to me.

 

[Kana]

Perhaps. But considering that Spike's moral compass was still judged by a soul or lack of a soul by Season 7 only tells me that the moral ambiguity wasn't enough.

What I mean is that the show is still intersting enough for me anyway with the moral ambiguity of the soulled characters, but yes there is still a difference in judgement between soulled and soulless vampires.

I can. Every individual has psychological differences. Every individual has his or her own moral compass. To lump one group against another seems ridiculous to me. Even on BUFFY, different vampires seemed to have their own different psychological and moral compass differences. Which only leads me to believe that judging a character based upon his/her species and possession or lack of a soul seem one-dimensional to me.

Ok, if this were absolutely the case we wouldn't judge anyone by any moral standards which is, you know an option, fine. We'd then say ok let us not judge say Angel for allowing those lawyers to be killed because he has his own moral compass.

What I'm saying that although all individuals are different, when a human is turned he or she changes psychologically.

---------- Post added at 09:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 PM ----------

And too add because I was at work and in a hurry to get home (lols):
All I'm doing is taking into account the soul/no soul dichotomy rather than pretending it doesn't exist (in the Verse). It clearly does and I've used William/Spike as a prime example. It's not a coincidence he started killing people without remorse after he was turned into a vampire and all I'm doing is acknowledging this change. If there wasn't meant to be any emphasis on the soul in the show there wouldn't be any emphasis on the soul in the show.

However none of this nullifies the emotions and individuality of the soulless vampire.

 

[Kelsey]

\

That smacks of hypocrisy to me.

Hypocrisy? What a silly thing to say. I don't quite see how I'm being hypocritical. Spike became a character, and as such he's always held to higher standards than the big bads. He had demension and depth, which means writing him off as "he's evil because he has no soul" is about as unfair to his character as pretending the evil inside him didn't affect him. Just like vampires can't be held on the same moral plane as humans, Spike can't quite be held on the same moral plane as vampires. He did grow, he did love, he did feel. He did have humanity inside of him that other vampires did not. Yet he was not human, and had to contend with something inside him that was very much evil.

Spike is unique, and therefore there's really no one to compare him to.

 

[JudyLovesBuffy]

Yes, I think that was part of it. After Spike was made into a vampire, for some reason a little bit of his humanity remained. This little bit of humanity still left in him allowed him to have the capacity to have the desire to be the only vampire to seek out a soul willingly.

Spike went in search of a soul because of exactly what he said - to give Buffy "what she deserved", i.e. a "real" man with a soul. Spike was different. He was an anomaly in the 'verse. He had the capacity to love without a soul, hence the guilt he felt over the attempted rape.

Joan, I SO agree with you!! I've always felt that in comparison to all the other vampires depicted on this show, Spike had the most humanity even in his evil form. He was able to love, to care for others, and yes, even do the right thing.

Even the attempted rape proves this. Spike was able to stop before he went too far. That in itsself proves that he knew the difference between right and wrong, and in this case, the good in him was able to outweigh the bad. I don't think any other vamp on the show would have stopped.

---------- Post added at 06:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:29 AM ----------

Kelsey and Kana, GREAT DEBATE you two. I enjoyed reading your viewpoints.


IMHO, perhaps we are confusing having a soul with having a conscience. I've always felt that JW's definition of having a soul was someone who could feel remorse for horrible things they've done, in simpler terms, their conscience was bothering them. Angel, for example, couldn't function once his soul was restored because of the remorse he felt while being Angelus. We see Spike in the basement tormented by what he has done, and telling Buffy, he "tried to cut it out."

Now, I've always defined having a soul as those things too, but I also feel having a soul is not just feeling remorse and having a conscience, but the ability to love, show compassion for others, being a good person etc. Your heart pumps your blood, but your soul makes you human. Spike did exhibited those things before his soul was restored.

William was a timid man, perhaps a man with too much soul. He was content caring for his mother, writing his poetry and loving from afar. Even when he was made a vampire by Dru, he still had compassion and love for his mother. So much so that he tried to save her from her illness by making her a vampire also. He felt every barb she delt him when she became one. He carried that guilt with him always, otherwise The First couldn't have used that song as a trigger for him.

Angelus, OTOH, when given the opportunity to become a better person, to have his soul restored, killed Jenny instead. No love for Buffy, no compasion for anyone he killed, nothing but evil. We cannot say that about Spike.

Yes, the chip (pre-soul) had a lot to do with him not killing humans, but it was his CHOICE to fight along side the Scoobies. It was his CHOICE to care for Dawn after Buffy's death. It was his CHOICE to seek out "a man about a girl" and regain his soul. We cannot say that about any other vampire on this show.

 

[King of Hell]

during Btvs & Ats, its been proven time & time again that vampires retain no humanity, feel no remorse (& Spike being different than most vampires, I don't buy it, we've seen innocent children turned into vampires, more innocent than William was, yet the retain no humanity), we did see a couple of vampires who could love, even one vampire took his heart out because he lost his loved one.

so its either:
-Spike loved Buffy, & did whatever he could to have her, which ended with getting his soul & regaining his humanity.
-or it was a plot hole, & he felt guilt for what he did.

I side with the first option, which is the only one that makes sense according to the Buffyverse.
& Spike is my second favorite character, so no, I don't hate him.

 

[Kelsey]

during Btvs & Ats, its been proven time & time again that vampires retain no humanity, feel no remorse (& Spike being different than most vampires, I don't buy it, we've seen innocent children turned into vampires, more innocent than William was, yet the retain no humanity), we did see a couple of vampires who could love, even one vampire took his heart out because he lost his loved one.

so its either:
-Spike loved Buffy, & did whatever he could to have her, which ended with getting his soul & regaining his humanity.
-or it was a plot hole, & he felt guilt for what he did.

I side with the first option, which is the only one that makes sense according to the Buffyverse.
& Spike is my second favorite character, so no, I don't hate him.

Plothole, and I'll tell you why. Spike was there because the fans loved him. He had come in as a dispensible big bad, and he was popular enough that the writers decided to keep him around. Problem is, they kind of have to do something with him once he's there, right?

I think they got ahead of themselves and starting planning all of these things--being obsessed with/loving Buffy, getting chipped and being unable to commit murder--and their canon got pushed to the background. Spike was an inherently likable character despite his obvious shortcomings, and I'm sure the writers knew that most fans enjoyed glimpses of the good stuff in him. I feel like they completely ditched their own canon in S5, and then panicked in S6 and tried to rapidly back-pedal. There has always been a disconnect between his actions from one season to the next.

It was not simply because he loved Buffy and would do anything he could to have her. Leaving cardless flowers for Joyce, wanting to protect and comfort Dawn, nearly sacrificing himself not to impress Buffy, but to save her from pain he couldn't bear to see her in, staying after she died to protect her sister and her friends--those don't scream "Selfishly motivated!" A lot of his actions do, absolutely. But there's just as big a list of things that truly shows that Spike was coming from a good place.

 

[King of Hell]

if you watched Ats S5, you'd see that he only started to be good for noble reasons by then (according to Lindsay & Angel, which Spike never disagreed with), all he did was to impress Buffy, or to protect her, or to do something she wanted him to. the flowers for Joyce were something Buffy would appreciate, even if she didn't know, & he protected Dawn because he made a promise to her.
in the start of Angel S5, he was still not a champion for noble reasons, until Lindsay confronted him & told him that the powers considered him a champion, when he was done with his first mission, Lindsay told him that its the first time he ever helped someone because its the right thing to do, & not to impress some girl. also, Angel said Spike got his soul to get into Buffy's pants, which enraged Spike. he never disagreed with any of them.

I choose to believe he loved her & did everything for her, because its more logical, & doesn't leave a continuity error behind. plus, he said it himself in Btvs S7.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

I choose to believe he loved her & did everything for her, because its more logical, & doesn't leave a continuity error behind. plus, he said it himself in Btvs S7.

We've beat this topic to death like a dead horse, so I I'll refrain from commenting on how I feel regarding Spike's soul.

I too choose to believe he loved her, and therefore that all of his actions postsoul were modivated by that love.

Before that? Could Spike love without a soul? What modivated him then? We'll argue that until the end of time.

 

[white avenger]

Something that is seldom if ever considered when the soulless/souled vampire issue comes up is that Spike remains Spike, with or without the soul. He's still a study in contradictions: a poet and a warrior; a monster and a Champion; a mortal enemy and a lover; a rapist and a defender. He is all of those things, with or without a soul. His character, except for a brief few weeks. months at the most, of insanity, remains the same. He is impulsive and passionate, literate and crude, and he remains all of those things, whether or not he possesses a soul. That is one of the reasons that he is able to adjust to it so quickly, while it took Angel decades to accomplish the same thing. Angel, with his soul, is merely Angelus suppressed, held back, but always lurking, waiting, ready to take the least opportunity to escape. That's what he told Faith in Season 4 "Orpheus." Spike is simply Spike. We have such a hard time defining the differences in him with or without a soul because, except for a conscience and whatever restraints that it might put on his behavior (very little, from what I've seen) he remains exactly the same person from "School Hard" to "Not Fade Away," with the exception of the self confidence that he has acquired over those 7 years, and that his alliance is now with what we like to think of as the good guys. That's really why there has never been any real reason to give him a name change to differentiate between his two states. Unlike Angelus/Angel, there is no hidden persona or alter ego with Spike. Spike is simply Spike. Love him, hate him, or feel indifferent toward him, what you see, with Spike, is what you get.

 

[King of Hell]

I think yes he did love her, James in Angel S3 "heartthrob" showed that vampires can love like anyone else, Darla said she loves Angel in Btvs S1, she also proved it in Ats but wasn't willing to admit it, the master also loved Darla in a father-daughter way, Spike loved Dru in Btvs S2.
I think thats enough to prove that they can fall in love, but their lack of soul makes them feel no remorse, & lose the sense of right & wrong.

Something that is seldom if ever considered when the soulless/souled vampire issue comes up is that Spike remains Spike, with or without the soul. He's still a study in contradictions: a poet and a warrior; a monster and a Champion; a mortal enemy and a lover; a rapist and a defender. He is all of those things, with or without a soul. His character, except for a brief few weeks. months at the most, of insanity, remains the same. He is impulsive and passionate, literate and crude, and he remains all of those things, whether or not he possesses a soul. That is one of the reasons that he is able to adjust to it so quickly, while it took Angel decades to accomplish the same thing. Angel, with his soul, is merely Angelus suppressed, held back, but always lurking, waiting, ready to take the least opportunity to escape. That's what he told Faith in Season 4 "Orpheus." Spike is simply Spike. We have such a hard time defining the differences in him with or without a soul because, except for a conscience and whatever restraints that it might put on his behavior (very little, from what I've seen) he remains exactly the same person from "School Hard" to "Not Fade Away," with the exception of the self confidence that he has acquired over those 7 years, and that his alliance is now with what we like to think of as the good guys. That's really why there has never been any real reason to give him a name change to differentiate between his two states. Unlike Angelus/Angel, there is no hidden persona or alter ego with Spike. Spike is simply Spike. Love him, hate him, or feel indifferent toward him, what you see, with Spike, is what you get.

there is a difference between soulless Spike & ensoulled Spike, soulless Spike has no problem hurting Buffy, because there's no such thing as right & wrong in his dictionary. what made the difference minimum, to me, is his love for Buffy, & the fact that he sought his soul for her. when Angel was ensoulled, he sought Darla because she was the closest thing to him, but he couldn't stand the cruelty, in the end he had no one besides him, that's why it took so long for him to find peace. Angel stood by human Darla until she found peace too, it only took Angel a few days, & to show her that he really cared.

 

[Kelsey]

I think yes he did love her, James in Angel S3 "heartthrob" showed that vampires can love like anyone else, Darla said she loves Angel in Btvs S1, she also proved it in Ats but wasn't willing to admit it, the master also loved Darla in a father-daughter way, Spike loved Dru in Btvs S2.
I think thats enough to prove that they can fall in love, but their lack of soul makes them feel no remorse, & lose the sense of right & wrong.

I always liked this quote by Drusilla: "Oh, we can, you know. We can love quite well. If not wisely." I know vampires are evil and killers and whatnot, but there's something very poetic and beautiful about that thought.

Yes, I think vampires can love. However, I think Spike's love tended to run deeper than most; it was in his character to be "love's bitch," whether human or demon. And I generally agree with the idea that vampires don't feel remorse and know right from wrong--they're essentially without a concience. However, Spike is again just a little different. He feels no remorse for the majority of the things he does, yet attempting to rape Buffy filled him with such guilt that he sought his soul. He wasn't good, but he wasn't strictly an evil, soulless vampire. He was, and still is, an extremely complicated character.

there is a difference between soulless Spike & ensoulled Spike, soulless Spike has no problem hurting Buffy, because there's no such thing as right & wrong in his dictionary. what made the difference minimum, to me, is his love for Buffy, & the fact that he sought his soul for her. when Angel was ensoulled, he sought Darla because she was the closest thing to him, but he couldn't stand the cruelty, in the end he had no one besides him, that's why it took so long for him to find peace. Angel stood by human Darla until she found peace too, it only took Angel a few days, & to show her that he really cared.

Agreed for the most part. Though I don't think Spike ever really wanted to hurt Buffy; I think he was twisted and she was twisted, and at that point they just both craved violence.

 

[King of Hell]

I always liked this quote by Drusilla: "Oh, we can, you know. We can love quite well. If not wisely." I know vampires are evil and killers and whatnot, but there's something very poetic and beautiful about that thought.

Yes, I think vampires can love. However, I think Spike's love tended to run deeper than most; it was in his character to be "love's bitch," whether human or demon. And I generally agree with the idea that vampires don't feel remorse and know right from wrong--they're essentially without a concience. However, Spike is again just a little different. He feels no remorse for the majority of the things he does, yet attempting to rape Buffy filled him with such guilt that he sought his soul. He wasn't good, but he wasn't strictly an evil, soulless vampire. He was, and still is, an extremely complicated character.

this is where I disagree, in the Buffyverse, the bits about the soul weren't very clear, but they were clear about one thing, no guilt & no remorse. if you watch the episode "why we fight" in Ats S5, you see that the only man Angel sired when he had a soul, got a little bit of his soul, he was different from other vampires, he felt no guilt & no remorse, yet he felt no pleasure, so I think that actually supports the fact that soul & guilt are connected.
what I think Spike felt after he attempted to rape her is that he hurt her, he didn't feel guilt, but he felt he did something she would never forgive him for, so he thought of the one thing that prevented their relationship...a soul.

Agreed for the most part. Though I don't think Spike ever really wanted to hurt Buffy; I think he was twisted and she was twisted, and at that point they just both craved violence.

yes he didn't want to hurt her, he has no sense of right or wrong, love is different to vampires, when Spike wanted Dru back, he though of torturing her 'till she loves him again, which explains his attempt to rape her.

 

[white avenger]

this is where I disagree, in the Buffyverse, the bits about the soul weren't very clear, but they were clear about one thing, no guilt & no remorse.

what I think Spike felt after he attempted to rape her is that he hurt her, he didn't feel guilt, but he felt he did something she would never forgive him for, so he thought of the one thing that prevented their relationship...a soul.

And yet in "Lies My Parents Told Me," Spike says that he has felt guilt and remorse for all of these years for turning his mother and then having to stake her because she became, unlike him, a typical vampire. A normal, amoral, vampire would have felt no disgust or even qualms about accepting the sexual advances that his mother made toward him, even in the manner that she did it. Incest is one of the most serious taboos of our society now, and was so in William's time, as well. Spike, on the other hand, not only rejected her, but actually apologized for doing so and having to stake her.

In "The Gift," can anyone truly say that Spike did not feel remorse when he told Buffy, "I know you'll never love me. I know that I'm a monster." How could an unfeeling monster, incapable of loving anyone or anything, truthfully make a statement like that. How could he say at the beginning of Season 6, "Every night I save you..."?

So Spike most certainly could, before acquiring his soul, feel both guilt and remorse, plus loyalty, even to the point of undergoing severe torture at the hands of Glory and her minions, rather than reveal that Dawn was the Key. He displayed quite real sorrow at Buffy's death at the end of Season 5, and he demonstrated integrity by guarding Dawn and fighting beside the Scoobies during the summer that Buffy was dead. When the biker demons raided Sunnydale, Spike made the statement that what they were doing "looked like fun," but he honored his "promise to (his) lady" by not joining in. Even without a soul, Spike managed to keep his demon suppressed every bit as well as Angel, WITH his soul, managed to do.

Now, there are some here who will rush to say that Spike's chip restrained his demon more than any self control ever did, and to an extent they would be right. But the chip didn't make Spike resist Glory. The chip didn't make him honor his promise to a dead Slayer to protect her sister. And the chip didn't make him stay and help the Scoobies patrol the hellmouth. Honor, integrity, and, yes, love, made him do that. Or, more accurately, ALLOWED him to do that. There was no force involved. He could have left at any moment, and, no more than he was appreciated by Xander, Giles, and the others, he would have been perfectly justified in doing so.

But he made a promise to a lady. And he kept it, even without a soul.

 

[Kelsey]

this is where I disagree, in the Buffyverse, the bits about the soul weren't very clear, but they were clear about one thing, no guilt & no remorse. if you watch the episode "why we fight" in Ats S5, you see that the only man Angel sired when he had a soul, got a little bit of his soul, he was different from other vampires, he felt no guilt & no remorse, yet he felt no pleasure, so I think that actually supports the fact that soul & guilt are connected.
what I think Spike felt after he attempted to rape her is that he hurt her, he didn't feel guilt, but he felt he did something she would never forgive him for, so he thought of the one thing that prevented their relationship...a soul.

Well, that.... I completely disagree with. Just a different view of the events, I suppose. =) I see his reaction afterwards, his quest to get the soul and his breakdown in Beneath You, and there's no doubt for me that he felt intensely guilty.

yes he didn't want to hurt her, he has no sense of right or wrong, love is different to vampires, when Spike wanted Dru back, he though of torturing her 'till she loves him again, which explains his attempt to rape her.

Agree with that.

 

[King of Hell]

Now, there are some here who will rush to say that Spike's chip restrained his demon more than any self control ever did, and to an extent they would be right. But the chip didn't make Spike resist Glory. The chip didn't make him honor his promise to a dead Slayer to protect her sister. And the chip didn't make him stay and help the Scoobies patrol the hellmouth. Honor, integrity, and, yes, love, made him do that. Or, more accurately, ALLOWED him to do that. There was no force involved. He could have left at any moment, and, no more than he was appreciated by Xander, Giles, and the others, he would have been perfectly justified in doing so.

you didn't read my whole post, Spike did love Buffy, & did all of this because he loved Buffy, but he still loved her in an evil twisted way, the way he loved Dru, but Buffy didn't like the way he loved her, so he got ensouled for her. the chip only helped him in getting close to Buffy, first he used her to get money in exchange for info, later on Buffy needed him in a professional sense, until he fell in love with her. the chip helped Spike indirectly.

soulless creatures feel no remorse is still a touchy subject, James in "Heartthrob" went crazy for the loss of his girlfriend, he cut his heart out so he could fight Angel & avenge her. Spike was also sad after Buffy died, & he went crazy after he tried to rape her, I wouldn't say its remorse, its a realization that he wasn't the man she deserved, she needed someone with a soul. & it actually makes sense, because it creates no plot hole.

I think James is the only vampire I could relate to Spike, I guess they were similar as humans. though Darla did show some sign of grief when she lost Angelus, she went nuts, but she gave up, she can handle her emotions because she's older, I guess.

 

[Kelsey]

you didn't read my whole post, Spike did love Buffy, & did all of this because he loved Buffy, but he still loved her in an evil twisted way, the way he loved Dru, but Buffy didn't like the way he loved her, so he got ensouled for her. the chip only helped him in getting close to Buffy, first he used her to get money in exchange for info, later on Buffy needed him in a professional sense, until he fell in love with her. the chip helped Spike indirectly.

Right, but I don't think it was just an "evil, twisted way." Spike did things that were really very good because he loved Buffy. There was definitely a twisted, obsessed aspect to his love, but there was also a very loyal, true, good aspect to it. Especially when he says, "I know you'll never love me. I know that I'm a monster, but you treat me like a man." He's accepting that he won't have her--which would be all he cared about if he was obsessed with her--and he still marches into battle for her.

soulless creatures feel no remorse is still a touchy subject, James in "Heartthrob" went crazy for the loss of his girlfriend, he cut his heart out so he could fight Angel & avenge her. Spike was also sad after Buffy died, & he went crazy after he tried to rape her, I wouldn't say its remorse, its a realization that he wasn't the man she deserved, she needed someone with a soul. & it actually makes sense, because it creates no plot hole.

Eh, I still disagree. Don't you think realizing "he wasn't the man she deserved" is a form of remorse? I watch those scenes afterwards, and it's very clear to me he feels bad for what he's done.

 

[King of Hell]

Right, but I don't think it was just an "evil, twisted way." Spike did things that were really very good because he loved Buffy. There was definitely a twisted, obsessed aspect to his love, but there was also a very loyal, true, good aspect to it. Especially when he says, "I know you'll never love me. I know that I'm a monster, but you treat me like a man." He's accepting that he won't have her--which would be all he cared about if he was obsessed with her--and he still marches into battle for her.

he loved her, & he thought he'd do good things because those good things would make her look at him in a better way, & she might someday accept him.

Eh, I still disagree. Don't you think realizing "he wasn't the man she deserved" is a form of remorse? I watch those scenes afterwards, and it's very clear to me he feels bad for what he's done.

I don't think so, I think after spending a couple of years in love with her, he just picked up on her traits, & her view on right or wrong, & in her POV, what he did is wrong. am still not willing to accept he felt remorse because it would leave behind the biggest plot hole in the show. though I understand the way you see it, am just leaning on the other side because its the rules of the Buffyverse that soulless vampires feel no remorse, there is no exception, because even Lawson who had part of his soul, felt no remorse. it doesn't make sense if a soulless vampire would feel remorse more than a partly ensouled vampire, and Lawson was a good & righteous man, not a drunken whorin' bad boy like Liam.

 

[Kelsey]

he loved her, & he thought he'd do good things because those good things would make her look at him in a better way, & she might someday accept him.

I don't think so, I think after spending a couple of years in love with her, he just picked up on her traits, & her view on right or wrong, & in her POV, what he did is wrong. am still not willing to accept he felt remorse because it would leave behind the biggest plot hole in the show. though I understand the way you see it, am just leaning on the other side because its the rules of the Buffyverse that soulless vampires feel no remorse, there is no exception, because even Lawson who had part of his soul, felt no remorse. it doesn't make sense if a soulless vampire would feel remorse more than a partly ensouled vampire, and Lawson was a good & righteous man, not a drunken whorin' bad boy like Liam.

Your view's understandable. I'm just the type of person who, if something good is happening on on-screen (I thought Spike was one of the best characters on BTVS, and the most interesting)then I don't really care about whatever rules he's breaking. Also, I don't think things should be that black and white in the first place. I'm not a fan of that ever. After all, Buffy should never have been able to have friends, go to high school and have a life, because Slayers didn't do those things. If Buffy wasn't a singularly different type of Slayer, we wouldn't even have our show. Similarly, if Spike wasn't a singularly different type of vampire, we never would have gotten the Spike storyline.

As for him doing good things to make her think more of him, you have to stretch that reasoning pretty far to make it encompass nearly dying for her, staying to protect her friends after she's long gone, and truly caring about Dawn and Joyce. There were a lot of things Spike did that he never even told Buffy or the Scoobs about.