The Chip: a Pseudo-Soul?

[zobothehobo]

I think WA has covered it. Spike, like all vampires has an intellectual understanding of right and wrong. What he struggled with was an understanding of himself in relation to morality. In other words, he had something of an identity crisis.

I don't think Spike thought about morality much higher than in regards to his relationship with Buffy, hence the crisis he had at the end of Season 6. Getting a soul was more about doing what he thought Buffy wanted, but without knowing exactly what was going on in his head and with Spike himself not being to clear on his own identity, I don't know to what extent the chip played in his sense of morality. I'd wager not a lot. I contend that the soul had more than zappy feelings when he did what humans considered wrong. It gave him a deeper connection to human morality, whatever that means. The problem is Joss never really fully explained to nature of the soul, although he did say with a soul there is a difference, again whatever that means.

So are you of the opinion that Spike felt bad about the AR because Buffy was upset with him, not because he knew what he did was wrong?

 

[Kana]

So are you of the opinion that Spike felt bad about the AR because Buffy was upset with him, not because he knew what he did was wrong?

Well SoullessSpike would feel bad about hurting someone he loved. He felt bad about snapping at Dru, etc, (but not about hurting her because she was a masochist) but not about the various people he's tortured and killed over the years.

 

[VisionGirl]

So then, to go along with what WA, Kean, and Kana have said, Spike sought his soul merely in order to "get" Buffy, not because it was the "right" thing to do? But many people (Spuffies or not) claim that it was love for Buffy that led him to seek his soul. Again there's the question on whether a soulless vampire can truly love in the full sense of the word.

Add to this the fact at the end of season 6 that the writers mislead us into thinking that Spike didn't intend to get his soul, but got it by mistake- at least that's the way I first saw it, until season 7. Am I the only one?

 

[white avenger]

So then, to go along with what WA, Kean, and Kana have said, Spike sought his soul merely in order to "get" Buffy, not because it was the "right" thing to do? But many people (Spuffies or not) claim that it was love for Buffy that led him to seek his soul. Again there's the question on whether a soulless vampire can truly love in the full sense of the word.

Add to this the fact at the end of season 6 that the writers mislead us into thinking that Spike didn't intend to get his soul, but got it by mistake- at least that's the way I first saw it, until season 7. Am I the only one?

I think that Spike regained his soul as an act of atonement for what he had almost done to Buffy. The very fact that he felt the need to make that effort bespeaks a feeling of guilt, a desire to do what he considered the "right" thing to do, and, yes, the honest desire to be with Buffy. I don't think that "getting" her is as accurate description, however, as the one that he himself used. Spike regained his soul, through great pain and danger, because he wanted to become the kind of man who could be worthy of Buffy's love.

As I said before, all vampires have to know the difference between right and wrong, simply as a survival tool. They know, they just don't care. There in that bathroom, Spike suddenly realized that he DID care. That's why he got his soul.

 

[zobothehobo]

I think that Spike regained his soul as an act of atonement for what he had almost done to Buffy. The very fact that he felt the need to make that effort bespeaks a feeling of guilt, a desire to do what he considered the "right" thing to do, and, yes, the honest desire to be with Buffy. I don't think that "getting" her is as accurate description, however, as the one that he himself used. Spike regained his soul, through great pain and danger, because he wanted to become the kind of man who could be worthy of Buffy's love.

As I said before, all vampires have to know the difference between right and wrong, simply as a survival tool. They know, they just don't care. There in that bathroom, Spike suddenly realized that he DID care. That's why he got his soul.

EXACTLY! And he the chip allowed for caring. It held him back enough so he could care

 

[saturn5]

It didn't allow him to develop an understanding of right or wrong at all. It forced him to adapt to a new situation and what he learned was the best way to manipulate that situation to get what he needed/wanted to survive. So in practice that was him being unable to feed so he had to rely on the Scoobies to provide for him. They were unwilling to help him with due reasons so he gave them reasons to reward him. He helped them out, fought, got info etc. He didn't do this because he had new understanding of right or wrong. He did it because it was necessary to his survival.

Like WA has just said. He was muzzled, he was not enlightened or evolved.

Whilst the chip didn't make Spike good it did allow him to develop somewhat despite his pronouncement that 'demons don't change' (which is why humanity rules the world!). Spike has an easier time after regaining his soul than Angel did, partly because he's become accustomed to living in the human world, partly because he has Buffy and the rest of the scoobs but also because CHOSE to get it back, as he says later, this makes him better than Angel

 

[Kean]

Whilst the chip didn't make Spike good it did allow him to develop somewhat despite his pronouncement that 'demons don't change' (which is why humanity rules the world!). Spike has an easier time after regaining his soul than Angel did, partly because he's become accustomed to living in the human world, partly because he has Buffy and the rest of the scoobs but also because CHOSE to get it back, as he says later, this makes him better than Angel

No, it really really doesn't. Angel had a soul thrust upon him the same way Buffy had being a slayer thrust upon her. Does that mean that all the potential Slayers are better than Buffy because she asked them if they wanted to be slayers and they said yes? No. Not at all.

 

[Moscow Watcher]

Kean - I don't think that deciding to be or not to be good and deciding to be or not to be strong is the same type of dilemma.

 

[Kean]

Kean - I don't think that deciding to be or not to be good and deciding to be or not to be strong is the same type of dilemma.

I still see it as similar. Deciding to be good/strong has nothing to do with actually exercising that goodness or strength. Getting a soul was a statement of intent. Spike still had to follow through, though.

My point is that simply declaring oneself "whatever" does not make you that.

Right here, right now, I can call myself the Queen of Ireland, I'll even go and get myself a crown and build myself a nice little castle on the Hill of Tara. But just because I have a castle and crown, doesn't mean I'm queen.

In Empty Places Anya told Buffy that she had not earned the right to be in charge, The leader, The Slayer. She was utterly wrong though. Because Buffy has earned that right over seven long years. Buffy has died for that right.

In S1 Anya may have been able to apply that argument legitimately but by S7 Buffy held that position because it was rightfully hers. She had fought for it. She deserved it.

Maybe Spike is better than Angel? Who knows? We need to see him good first, before he can be better.

 

[zobothehobo]

Kean-the point Spike was trying to make by saying he was better than Angel was that Angelus killed to ensure he wouldn't regain his soul. He had to have it cursed on him. Spike fought for his. Compare soulless Angel and soulless Spike and Spike is "better" because he WANTED his soul. He fought for it. Angel so desperately DIDN'T want his. He fought against it.

I think he was trying to guilt Angel by making him remember that soulless him didn't want a soul. But the other vampire with a soul didn't HAVE to have his soul cursed upon him. So it's not a vampire with a soul thing anymore... it's an Angel thing.

 

[Kean]

Kean-the point Spike was trying to make by saying he was better than Angel was that Angelus killed to ensure he wouldn't regain his soul. He had to have it cursed on him. Spike fought for his. Compare soulless Angel and soulless Spike and Spike is "better" because he WANTED his soul. He fought for it. Angel so desperately DIDN'T want his. He fought against it.

I think he was trying to guilt Angel by making him remember that soulless him didn't want a soul. But the other vampire with a soul didn't HAVE to have his soul cursed upon him. So it's not a vampire with a soul thing anymore... it's an Angel thing.

That is a caparison between soulless Spike and Angelus though. That isn't a comparison between Spike and Angel. Just because Spike may have been less evil (and that is very much up for debate-he got his name from putting railroad spikes through people's heads after all) than Angelus, it has no baring on who is the better "man" (with a soul).

 

[white avenger]

Maybe Spike is better than Angel? Who knows? We need to see him good first, before he can be better.

And the key word there just might be "see." Giles and Xander saw Spike as a soulless monster, a "thing," at best a resource to be used however was necessary, but never trusted, and never allowed to think that he was good enough to associate with them without some sort of restraints, either physical or psychological. Wood saw him as the monster who murdered his mother, who was responsible for his being raised (in Beverly Hills, there REALLY HAS TO BE a story there, and I would love to hear it sometime) by her former Watcher. A soulless monster, not to be trusted, an indiscriminate killer, only restrained from murdering again by a tiny electronic device implanted in his brain. Given their attitude, I'm surprised that, as his first act after having the chip removed, he didn't slaughter the whole ungrateful lot of them.

Dawn almost certainly first saw Spike as someone dark and mysterious, dangerous, and downright smolderingly hot, the way that any adolescent girl would have. The fact that he at first couldn't hurt her, then later WOULDN'T hurt her, who would, in fact, invite her into his dank, dark crypt and tell her chilling tales of his bad old days, but who, most importantly, treated her as a person, and not a little sister, resulted in friendship and probably even an adolescent crush that, if Spike ever noticed, never either seemed to encourage or exploit. When necessary, he even endured torture rather that betray either her or her sister.

Buffy saw Spike as a mortal enemy, quite possibly the closest thing to her match in power and skill that she would ever encounter, who evolved over the space of a few years from enemy to information source, to reluctant ally, to trusted ally, to friend, to lover, (and, yes, attempted rapist, but she got past that. Maybe some of the others should have done the same) Also, she saw a man who suffered the unimaginable in order to attain the unbelievable, primarily as an act of atonement for what he had tried to do to her. In short, Buffy seen, to quote another character, "the best and worst" of Spike, and she "understood with perfect clarity" exactly what he was: a better man. A man capable of accomplishing almost anything, a man worthy of being trusted above and beyond all others. A man who she could love, even if he, himself, couldn't accept it.

Buffy saw in Spike the man who, in Season 8, she could trust unquestioningly, even above and beyond the man who she professed to love completely. (I said PROFESSED, Miss K. Get that evil glint out of your eyes!)

Yes, with Spike, almost certainly, it all depends on what you see. Or rather, what you're WILLING to see.

 

[Kean]

And the key word there just might be "see." Giles and Xander saw Spike as a soulless monster, a "thing," at best a resource to be used however was necessary, but never trusted, and never allowed to think that he was good enough to associate with them without some sort of restraints, either physical or psychological.

Can you honestly say those concerns were unfounded? Given his history and how volatile he was, even with a soul. It would have been ludicrous for them to welcome him with open, apologetic arms.

Wood saw him as the monster who murdered his mother, who was responsible for his being raised (in Beverly Hills, there REALLY HAS TO BE a story there, and I would love to hear it sometime) by her former Watcher. A soulless monster, not to be trusted, an indiscriminate killer, only restrained from murdering again by a tiny electronic device implanted in his brain.

Did Spike ever give Wood any reason not to believe any of this? Spike displayed the complete opposite of remorse about killing Wood's mother. Spike savoured his defeat of Wood. And this was with a soul.

Given their attitude, I'm surprised that, as his first act after having the chip removed, he didn't slaughter the whole ungrateful lot of them.

Yes, poor Spike. Big meanies hurting his feelings. *There there, there there*

Gosh, he is so misunderstood.

Buffy saw Spike as a mortal enemy, quite possibly the closest thing to her match in power and skill that she would ever encounter

You wish.

Buffy saw in Spike the man who, in Season 8, she could trust unquestioningly

,

That remains to be seen. Until the betrayer is revealed, everyone is a suspect. Including your White Knight of a Dreamboat. 😛

Yes, with Spike, almost certainly, it all depends on what you see. Or rather, what you're WILLING to see.

Works both ways my friend. I'll honestly look for the good in him when you honestly acknowledge the bad, without waxing lyrical on it.

 

[white avenger]

I was basically talking about the different perceptions that the characters have of Spike, and how those perceptions slant their assessment of his reliability and character. The identity of the Betrayer wasn't any part of it. However, if you would like to make a little bet as to whether or not Spike ends up being the hero or the Betrayer...

My shirt against yours? You don't even have to wear it. But you can't throw it away, destroy it, defile it in any way, or give it away.Just knowing that you have it would be enough for me.

---------- Post added at 12:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------

Kean agrees: So not only will we have ship wars, but shirt wars too?

Okay, I'm flexible. Coffee mug, baseball cap, baby blanket, you choose the merchendise, I pick the logo.

 

[Kana]

The soul is the curious thing but I'd still stand by judging the soulled vampire by the soulled vampires deeds rather than the soulless vampires deeds.

I've always thought that soullessSpike was a great case for moral ambiguity but I wouldn't burden him by judging him for his actions before he got a soul, or at least judging him in the same way as I would someone with a soul.

The reason I say this? Consistency. Arguing moral superiority in these cases becomes tricky, which may or may not be Kean's point. Anne was a loving mother but became a individual who thrived on cruelty. Sound familiar? Angel isn't perfect, but for most part has good intentions and is probably more altruistic than most. Take his soul away he then becomes legendary for his evil.

The reason I mention this is not for the seemingly innevitable favourite character war but to truly understand the nature of the soul and vampirism.

Metaphysically, wouldn't it undermine the soul to say it's more or less a glorified chip? Every individual can change but there surely must be a soul/no soul dichotomy.

Giles and Xander saw Spike as a soulless monster, a "thing," at best a resource to be used however was necessary, but never trusted, and never allowed to think that he was good enough to associate with them without some sort of restraints, either physical or psychological.

I'm sure it was more the situation they were worried about and how Buffy was handling it. As I said before, it wasn't about not trusting Spike per se but about not trusting things would work out if you close your eyes and wish real hard, which buffy appeared to be doing. We were talking about something Spike couldn't control, trusting him was irrelevant. Also, wasn't Xander the one who mentioned the whole trigger thing to begin with?

 

[Kean]

The reason I say this? Consistency. Arguing moral superiority in these cases becomes tricky, which may or may not be Kean's point. Anne was a loving mother but became a individual who thrived on cruelty. Sound familiar? Angel isn't perfect, but for most part has good intentions and is probably more altruistic than most. Take his soul away he then becomes legendary for his evil.

Yup that pretty much was my point.

Metaphysically, wouldn't it undermine the soul to say it's more or less a glorified chip? Every individual can change but there surely must be a soul/no soul dichotomy.

I get slightly turned around here because in my mind we are souls but we have bodies. Not the other way around. So with that in mind comparing Angel and Spike without souls is utterly pointless because they aren't really Angel and Spike.

Whedon canon doesn't really follow that line of thinking though.

 

[white avenger]

I'm sure it was more the situation they were worried about and how Buffy was handling it. As I said before, it wasn't about not trusting Spike per se but about not trusting things would work out if you close your eyes and wish real hard, which buffy appeared to be doing. We were talking about something Spike couldn't control, trusting him was irrelevant. Also, wasn't Xander the one who mentioned the whole trigger thing to begin with?

If all of the hate and distrust of Spike only started after there was evidence that the First Evil was somehow controlling him, I would be more inclined to see that point. Xander called Spike an evil, soulless "thing," or words to that effect, in Season 6, despite his loyalty to Buffy and Dawn all of the help that he had been to the gang the previous summer, not to mention his taking care of Dawn while Buffy was dead. And before anyone points out that Spike couldn't have hurt Dawn as long as the chip was working, just bear in mind that, chip or no chip, the only thing that kept Spike there after Buffy died was his "promise to a lady," and his determination to honor that promise. Sure, he couldn't have actually harmed Dawn himself, but nothing would have prevented him from just standing back and letting something else do the job for him.

And as far as closed eyes were concerned, apparently Buffy was the only one capable of opening her eyes in Season 7 and seeing the changes that Spike had made in himself.

 

[Tillow4ever]

That is an amazing point! I've never thought about it that way! Very interesting... thanks for shedding some light! 😀 I've always thought Spike was WAY more human that Angelus ever was. I think it was his ability to love. He loved Drusilla WAY before he got a chip and he loved Buffy before he got a soul. I kinda sound stupid saying this stuff right now cause I have not been to college yet or taken psychology, but I think that's what I want to major in... so VERY interesting. 🙂

 

[saturn5]

Ultimately the chi[p is a big part of Spike's redemption but no substitute for a soul. We see he's still evil even with it. He genuinely loves Buffy and is aghast that she is upset with him but he can't truly appreciate why.

The key line here is when Buffy is finally able to fight him off and then asks him 'Now ask me why I can never love you?'. Souled Spike would never have raped Buffy. Unsouled Spike certainly would. For Buffy to love him he must have his soul

 

[Kana]

What I can’t decide is ho much of Spike’s journey was about conscious change. As I said before, if we adhere to Angel’s definition, I’d say it’s difficult to tell. Moral change is not about reacting but acting. It’s about making a decision to be a better person because you believe in being better. If someone already has the faculty to do so, then why would they need a metaphysical ball of conscience?

The problem with Spike’s ability to love, it doesn’t negate the evil in itself. We see that other vampires are very capable of love but are still considered evil. If he loves Buffy and using her for the cues, is this really the internal change that Angel was talking about? Or is change something that can come from different directions. Angel never chose to have a soul but continues to try and do good with one.

If we look at Spike’s history, it’s unlikely he would have changed had it not been for the chip and he never asked for it. It still leaves the question, when did Spike really act and not react.

Riley analysis was also interesting. Buffy never claimed Spike is too ethical to be the ’Doctor’, merely that he is too incompetent. Is Spike deadly and opportunistic at this stage though? I can fully believe that he is every bit as pragmatic and resourceful as he was before he had the chip. He also has an intellectual understanding of right and wrong. Is it enough to say he doesn’t care? He cared about the people closest to him, but as I’ve always said, it has nothing to do with his grasp on the concept but more about his identity and his relationship with human constructs of morality and his lack of emotional response to all the suffering he’s caused would perhaps the imply without the soul the emotional capacity of wanting to do good and feel good for doing was seriously lacking.

It still leaves me somewhat unsatisfied. What could he have achieved without a soul? If we look his actions through metaphorical microscope, it would truly be more astounding than the actual metaphysical truth: Can the soul be earned through deeds? Can our actions or being really overcome our nature or our essence?

I’d take a balanced view that we can’t really judge Spike for not following his conscience, because he didn’t have one before, nor can we judge Angel for the crimes of Angelus.

If all of the hate and distrust of Spike only started after there was evidence that the First Evil was somehow controlling him, I would be more inclined to see that point. Xander called Spike an evil, soulless "thing," or words to that effect, in Season 6, despite his loyalty to Buffy and Dawn all of the help that he had been to the gang the previous summer, not to mention his taking care of Dawn while Buffy was dead. And before anyone points out that Spike couldn't have hurt Dawn as long as the chip was working, just bear in mind that, chip or no chip, the only thing that kept Spike there after Buffy died was his "promise to a lady," and his determination to honor that promise. Sure, he couldn't have actually harmed Dawn himself, but nothing would have prevented him from just standing back and letting something else do the job for him.

Certainly Xander’s treatment of Spike was more emotional but I was more talking about Giles. For the most part his mistrust was because of his actions. Even with a soul, he’s betrayed the gang, why should they trust him? Unfortunately in such a situation the onus be on Spike to prove his trustworthiness, if we are to treat him like a man. As the discussion has gone, I don’t take for granted that Spike was good without a soul. The thing is, when he starts acting like one, Buffy begins to treat him like one but even she has her doubts until he gets soul.

After he gets a soul, Xander actually fights his corner, Buffy more or less trusts him outright and Giles gripe is Buffy overlooking the hold the First has over him. Funnily enough I understand all these view point. Believe it or not, I’m more intuitive when it comes to these things myself. If someone feels good, then I trust my instincts and these emotions that keep me connected.

And as far as closed eyes were concerned, apparently Buffy was the only one capable of opening her eyes in Season 7 and seeing the changes that Spike had made in himself.

As I said before, I still don’t believe Giles had a vendetta. He wouldn’t have accused Wood as such, disdainfully. Wood’s argument appealed to his view of the bigger picture. The argument hinges on whether he was liability or not, but this does not hinge on his intentions or his ability to change, it’s about what is likely to happen.

I get slightly turned around here because in my mind we are souls but we have bodies. Not the other way around. So with that in mind comparing Angel and Spike without souls is utterly pointless because they aren't really Angel and Spike.

Whedon canon doesn't really follow that line of thinking though.

As I’ve said before, Joss isn’t consistent in how he defines the soul, he admitted as much. And it’s problematic, especially when in Shells, Angel and Spike claim to be experts in souls however in the context of the episode they are talking about the soul as a spirit rather than the conscience. This further complicates things because the Spike talking in Season 7 onwards isn’t the Spike who went through the trials. If we are talking literally, even fighting to get a conscience for the right reasons seems paradoxical. If you know what the right thing is, why do you need a soul?

Ultimately the chi[p is a big part of Spike's redemption but no substitute for a soul. We see he's still evil even with it. He genuinely loves Buffy and is aghast that she is upset with him but he can't truly appreciate why.

The problem is why he doesn’t appreciate why. Spike is capable without a soul to know exactly what he’s doing. How it hurt someone, why they’d be upset. He’s not stupid. If you’re saying he can really understand why he himself is aghast then I’d agree. He doesn’t know where he fits because of his behaviour: getting a soul sorts out his identity crisis. Can we accuse Spike of the same thing Lilah accuses Wes of? In other words if Spike is asks to pick a side, he picks the one the woman of his dreams is on. I can’t answer that definitively.