Vampires, Souls, And Double Standards

[white avenger]

Okay, first of all, this is, indeed, another Angel vs Spike debate, and if you don't like the subject, feel free to ignore this thread entirely.

I've seen this for as long as I've been a fan of Buffy. Angel might feel remorse for what Angelus did, but he is in no way responsible for the rape, torture, and murder done by the monster, because the possession of a soul makes him a totally different man, one who is worthy of the term "hero," and should be loved and admired by all.

On the other hand...

Spike is a despicable, uncaring monster who only got his soul in order to get back in Buffy's good graces. He is a murderer, a sadist, a rapist, always has been, always will be, and the mere possession of a soul in no way relieves him of the responsibility for all of the evil thins that he did before getting it.

This isn't an effort to defend or condemn either character, it is for the express purpose of trying to resolve this double standard that undeniably exists. If Angel can be forgiven for all of the atrocities that he committed prior to obtaining a soul, why can't Spike be given the same courtesy? On the other hand, if Spike is going to be held forever answerable and unforgiven for what he did prior to obtaining his soul, why doesn't Angel get the same treatment?

Is it because the vast majority of Angelus' crimes were committed prior to his introduction on the show, and have never been depicted in much detail, whereas the single greatest offense that Spike ever committed was shown quite graphically on screen? Is it because Angel tends to spend a considerable amount of time regretting his past sins, whereas Spike pretty much remains unapologetic for his past?

Or do you fail to see any double standard here at all? Spike's a monster and Angelus isn't, nothing will ever change that fact, and that's just the way that it is.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

I agree there is a some sort of double standard about Spike not being forgiven for what he did, but I think there are grounds for that double standard.

Spikes for whatever reason has always been an anomaly of a vampire, he still had a lot of human qualities about him after being turned, the boundaries between William and Spike are very blurry.

This is my basis for Spike still carrying the responsibility of what he did, with Angel there are two very distinct characters for Angel and Angelus, Spike doesn't have that but I think the main part of the problem arises from Spike fans.

With Angel fans, I don't want to say them all cuz there may be people out there that don't agree, but most think of Angel and Angelus as completely separate (or as sperate as a vampire and it's former person could be), Spike does't have that, Fans choose which parts to carry over to souled Spike.

Oh he looked after Dawn, he didn't tell Glory who Dawn was, he helped the gang, he mourned Joyce, he got his soul - these are some of the good things that get brought up when people talk about Spike.
But you mention attempted rape or hitting Buffy and "He was soulless" immediately come up, choosing to keep the good stuff and disallow the bad stuff is what makes having the discussion frustrating.

If your going to say he isn't responsible for something like the attempted rape, then he wasn't responsible for getting a soul. Souled Spike had a soul forced upon him by Souless Spike, because he though a soul was the only thing stopping Buffy from loving her.

Why would he be responsible for the amazing act of getting a soul, but not the attempted rape? He should be responsible for both of those things or nothing, but that doesn't happen, people choose which parts they want to form their own version of Spike.

 

[Robb Stark]

I don't think that way.

@Black Eyed Guy had a great post that I agree with and would like to expand on a bit. I find sometimes, certainly not all the time, people tend to romanticize Spike at times, while ignoring the negative things he clearly did in S6. It wasn't just that one incident with Buffy. So many fans tend to view Spike through that entire season as this tortured champion who did everything for the right reasons, and that just isn't true. I mean, he was "The Doctor", and that all gets whitewashed.

Meanwhile, those same fans take him getting his soul back as some sort of "proof" that he's "better" than Angel. They confuse the fact that he was in love with Buffy and regained his soul so she would take him back with him being this altruistic champion. That he did everything for the right reasons with no selfish or ulterior motives. And that just isn't true.

For me, and I'm aware not everyone thinks this way, I draw the line at what Angel and Spike are responsible for when they get their souls back. For me, there's no double standard. I like them both and I understand them both. "Who's better" doesn't even enter into it.

I don't think it's particularly difficult to discern why some fans do have the double standard you're talking about when you think about it. Look at the way Spike acts in AtS S5. Can you honestly tell me he talks, jokes or acts any differently than Spike in S4 of BTVS? No, he doesn't. He fights for good for the right reasons, yes, but everything else about him is the same. THAT is the difference. With Angel and Angelus, it's black and white. Angel is clearly a hero and Angelus is clearly straight up evil. Everything they do, every way they act and talk, is radically different from one another. Now because I like Angel and I like Spike, I can make the distinction, but I understand in that light why many can't.

I understand where you're coming from and why it's frustrating, just as I get frustrated when I hear people think that Angel or Spike should be held responsible for everything their soulless counterparts did. They're characters we care about, so I do get it. But personally, there's no double standard for me.

 

[Buffy Summers]

If Angel can be forgiven for all of the atrocities that he committed prior to obtaining a soul, why can't Spike be given the same courtesy? On the other hand, if Spike is going to be held forever answerable and unforgiven for what he did prior to obtaining his soul, why doesn't Angel get the same treatment?

Honestly I think this is a failure of the writing team. From the introduction of the Angelus character, he was always treated as a completely separate vampire from Angel. When they chose to initiate this "Spike getting a soul" thing, it didn't exactly jive with continuity. They had already put Spike on the path to being a white hat, so there already was a disconnect between how they treated Angelus vs Spike.

What made Angel different from Angelus was the gypsy curse. Which made him feel. Spike already had "feelings" prior to getting a soul. So there wasn't the black and white contrast with Spike we saw with Angel.

Is it because the vast majority of Angelus' crimes were committed prior to his introduction on the show, and have never been depicted in much detail,

Killing Jenny? The cruel things he did to Buffy? I think we saw a lot to hate Angelus for.

They didn't portray Spike as entirely evil prior to him getting a soul, so he didn't entirely seem like a different person afterward.

If they had done this earlier in the series, maybe it would have worked, but the writers made the line too blurry with Spike for him to be treated as two people.

JMHO.

---------- Post added at 12:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------

And also! kittenpoker in the Was Spike a Good Man? thread mentioned how Spike was as a human. Having a soul didn't make him more like his human self, either. Not saying that Angel is currently a lot like he was as a human, but Angel is a better man now than he was as a human. And Spike kind of backtracked from a purely doing right vs doing wrong POV.

 

[kittenpoker]

And also! kittenpoker in the Was Spike a Good Man? thread mentioned how Spike was as a human. Having a soul didn't make him more like his human self, either. Not saying that Angel is currently a lot like he was as a human, but Angel is a better man now than he was as a human. And Spike kind of backtracked from a purely doing right vs doing wrong POV.

I agree with this. I think William as a man - was a better man than Liam. And Spike, as a soulless vampire, was a better "man" than Angelus - BUT, yeah angel (the vampire with the soul) is a better man than Spike with a soul.....

Honestly I really wish Lilah instead of Spike was on Angel, S5 (gets ready for rotten veggies to be thrown my way)

 

[Tuppence]

For me (who does not favour either Angel or Spike; I like them both equally) I forgave both of them for their sins when they had a soul. BUT I always thought Spike was the better person/vampire. I try to explain as best I can how I think of it all (be warned, rambling may follow).

For me Angel and Angelus are entirely separate entities. For all the horrors Angelus committed, Angel is not really the person who committed them (but I understand why Giles found it so hard to forgive, because even though logic would say this isn't the same person, his heart and emotions would just see the person who killed the person he loved). But when you compare soulless Angel to soulless Spike, Spike is the better person, for even when he is evil and trying to kill Buffy you see affection for Drusilla, his upset when Angelus steals her attention and affection, his oddly random affection for Joyce and then of course he develops feelings for Buffy and almost brotherly feelings for Dawn (something which Angelus would be entirely incapable of).

The reason for this, in my opinion, is that who you are as a human has an impact on who you are as a vampire. Liam was quite frankly a little s**t and so when he becomes a vampire that is made times a hundred so he becomes really evil whereas William was overly good, a little too good that he is a bit of a pushover as a human, and so even as a vampire some remnants of that remain.

But for those who would naturally put forward the argument of Spike's attempted rape; for me that didn't seem something soulless, but quite the opposite. I think in his mind he didn't see it as trying to rape her, he was just in love with her to the point of obsession as desperate to be with her again. It's only afterwards when she throws him off that he realises what he almost did and then the next thing you know he goes off to get a soul which I think was his choosing to search for redemption and to prevent him hurting Buffy again and, in his mind, hopefully be the man she deserves.

 

[white avenger]

I agree there is a some sort of double standard about Spike not being forgiven for what he did, but I think there are grounds for that double standard.

Spikes for whatever reason has always been an anomaly of a vampire, he still had a lot of human qualities about him after being turned, the boundaries between William and Spike are very blurry.

This is my basis for Spike still carrying the responsibility of what he did, with Angel there are two very distinct characters for Angel and Angelus, Spike doesn't have that but I think the main part of the problem arises from Spike fans.

With Angel fans, I don't want to say them all cuz there may be people out there that don't agree, but most think of Angel and Angelus as completely separate (or as sperate as a vampire and it's former person could be), Spike does't have that, Fans choose which parts to carry over to souled Spike.

Oh he looked after Dawn, he didn't tell Glory who Dawn was, he helped the gang, he mourned Joyce, he got his soul - these are some of the good things that get brought up when people talk about Spike.
But you mention attempted rape or hitting Buffy and "He was soulless" immediately come up, choosing to keep the good stuff and disallow the bad stuff is what makes having the discussion frustrating.

If your going to say he isn't responsible for something like the attempted rape, then he wasn't responsible for getting a soul. Souled Spike had a soul forced upon him by Souless Spike, because he though a soul was the only thing stopping Buffy from loving her.

Why would he be responsible for the amazing act of getting a soul, but not the attempted rape? He should be responsible for both of those things or nothing, but that doesn't happen, people choose which parts they want to form their own version of Spike.

Let's forget the method by which the two vampires regained their respective souls. The important fact is that they both have souls, and in the Buffyverse at least before Season 7, the vampire in question is essentially two totally separate characters, even to the point of having different names. The monster is without a soul, and the hero HAS the soul, and is not held responsible for anything that the monster did. For some reason, that totally changed with Spike in Season 7. He doesn't even change his name.

But to say that there is no change in the basic personality between soulless Spike and ensouled Spike isn't really accurate. The problem is that, while there is a personality change, it is more of a gradual evolution than we saw with Angel. Compare Spike in Season 2 with Spike of Season 7, and the changes are much more noticeable. It should be pointed out here that the same thing almost certainly happened with Angel, but the problem is that we never saw that happen. By the time that we first saw Angel, he had had years, even decades, to become the the person that Buffy first met in that alley (which was, it just occurred to me, the same place that she first met Spike.)

It's much easier to see the division between monster and hero with Angel, because Angelus is portrayed as pure evil, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and Angel is exactly the opposite. Spike, however, isn't all black and white. His change begins in Season 4, with the acquirement of the chip, and could be accredited, at least in the beginning, to simple self preservation, combined with a romantic fixation with Buffy. But for whatever reason, the change is genuine, and it effectively blurs the presoul/post-soul change, and offers, at best, a poor excuse to not give Spike the same consideration as Angel receives, once both men have souls.

 

[EVIL UU]

Angel and Spike are identical characters. People come up with elaborate intellectual constructs to differentiate them but it's all groundless nonsense, of course the fact that the lore is a convoluted, retro-continuation riddled, contradictory mess doesn't help either.

It's simple, really. If Spike is responsible for what he did without a soul then so is Angel. If Spike isn't responsible, then so isn't Angel. If Angel without a soul is a different person then so is Spike without a soul. If Angel's never murdered Jenny, Spike's never had sex with Buffy.

Alright, my popcorn's ready, get it on shippers!

 

[brinkster130]

I suppose it is a bit of a double standard, but one that I think is easily understandable and that the writers really created themselves by making Spike such an exception to the rule.

Personally the reasons I hold this double standard (to a degree) are:

- Spike's attitude pre and post soul. He is suppose to be a vampire that retained some of his humanity, as evidenced by his human feelings for Dru, Joyce, Dawn, Buffy etc. yet he can't be bothered to feel guilt or remorse about anything once he has a soul that would allow him to feel even more? Just doesn't add up that the vampire with human feelings would be so unapologetic about what he did.

- Why should Spike be credited for the "good" he did pre-soul and excused for the bad? This happens all the time with his character, IMO it's one or the other...he doesn't get the benefits of both.

- Spike never really cared about doing what was right unless it would somehow improve Buffy's opinion of him. We saw Angle move past Buffy and find a mission of his own but we never saw that with Spike. His actions are always 100% motivated by a female he is trying to impress - as a fan of the show I would have liked to see Spike do something for himself.

 

[white avenger]

I suppose it is a bit of a double standard, but one that I think is easily understandable and that the writers really created themselves by making Spike such an exception to the rule.

Plus the fact that they had spent 3 years establishing a very popular character, and they didn't want to take a chance by drastically changing him. Their changes were subtle, then pretty much dismissed when Buffy told Spike that she wanted the "man who almost killed me when we first met" back. That was their excuse for the little or no noticeable change in the character.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Interesting points all around! Here's my two cents:

Vampires are supposed to be far worse and far more dangerous than the most despicable human being. That's the reason for which Buffy won't voluntarily kill even a KNOWN murderer, but will kill a fledgling vampire BEFORE it has even claimed a victim! Vampires are meant to be so deadly and so unabashedly evil to the core that there is absolutely no way in which anything they ever say or do can be anything other than terrifying. If we stick to this, then it's very simple to see Angelus and Angel as two different beings.

The show does a great job at setting up this clear distinction for us, throughout the first 3 seasons. It allows us to feel no guilt over rooting for Angel once he is re-ensouled, despite the fact that he killed Jenny Calender months earlier. Again, the writers give us this gift. We can root for Angel in season 3 in the wake of Angelus's rampage.

Then they introduce Spike, telling us he has retained a lot of his humanity. We even feel sorry for him when his beloved Dru is obviously two-timing him with Angelus, as he watches from a wheelchair. We're being manipulated into seeing him more and more like a human being than an irredeemable monster, in spite of the fact that he is still nothing but a killer!

This pattern obviously continues, and Spike really begins to act like a human being, albeit not a "good" or altruistic one, starting in season 5. Developing feelings for a human being? Gosh, it's another incredibly humanistic thing to do! Once Spike "joins" the scooby gang in seasons 5 and 6, he is helping, partially out of boredom but mostly in order to impress Buffy. And as I've said before, there are some moments which indicate that he actually makes a lot of progress toward resembling a decent human being, namely those that occur out of Buffy's earshot or during her death. The point is: as time goes on, he starts to resemble an actual human being more and more. And not just because his diet has changed. But because he has moments of empathy. Wants to develop consistent relationships with human beings (Buffy, Dawn, Joyce).

Something shifts in the perception of the viewer and now when Spike does something that should be impressive given that he is a soulless vampire who should be doing nothing but plotting the demise of all of the scoobies, (obviously by the hands of another), to a lot of fans it merely falls into the "meh, so what?" category.

And it's true: deciding NOT to kill the object of his obsession even after she torches all of his belongings and then breaks up with him is not exactly the mark of a great man. It's pretty much what we would consider "normal." But considering that this restraint is coming from a soulless vampire, it becomes impressive.

What if, in season 2, Angelus suddenly wanted to comfort Dawn, (assuming she existed?) Or left flowers for Joyce? Or almost died in order to save another human being, ("Intervention?") The contrast between monster and man would be so stark that I have no doubt these deeds would be lauded by many just as the horrible acts would be looked down upon. And again we would have this issue: what do we make of a being with this kind of duality in character?

For me, this is all summed up really well in "Triangle." Spike, seeing that Buffy is near, makes a very clear point that he is not sampling ANY of the victims, and expects her to be proud of him.

She says, "You want credit for NOT feeding off of victims?" And he says, "Well, yeah." And he means it. This, for a vampire, is very impressive. Particularly one who can't feed on his own and has not had human blood in a very long time. Buffy of course is disgusted at the notion that he would expect her to find any of this worth her time. And Spike feels as though he should be awarded a medal. Sure, he did it to impress a girl. It's not because he's thinking of the greater good or, (at this point in the series), even motivated to help out at all. But to him it's a milestone, whereas for any being with a soul it's called "being normal."

And while we were led by the writers into feeling comfortable about keeping Angel in 2 different categories, we were punished by the writers for starting to feel good about Spike at the end of season 6. In a lot of ways though, I think this contrast makes for a good show. Good writing after all is quite a lot of manipulation.


My own take is that we should hold Angelus and Spike(us) to all of their deeds without souls. The fact that Spikeus has some good ones on his list in no way makes him "good" in an absolute sense, but those deeds can't be overlooked any more than the horrific ones. It's messy yes, but he begins to straddle both the good and the bad in the middle of season 5. Not good, not all bad, and not neutral, either. That's all.

Once ensouled, it's fair to say that the two have a clean slate though I wouldn't fault anyone who couldn't overlook what they did in those bodies.

Btw [MENTION=10582]brinkster130[/MENTION] I totally agree that there is so much inconsistency in his characterization in Ats season 5 given the new soul, that makes his development puzzling. It's super frustrating..

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Let's forget the method by which the two vampires regained their respective souls. The important fact is that they both have souls, and in the Buffyverse at least before Season 7, the vampire in question is essentially two totally separate characters, even to the point of having different names. The monster is without a soul, and the hero HAS the soul, and is not held responsible for anything that the monster did. For some reason, that totally changed with Spike in Season 7. He doesn't even change his name.

I'd be all for dropping holding his pre-season 7 stuff against him, and one or two Spike fan may agree, but others will then chime in with good stuff he did in season 5/6 and then when you comment on that stuff you basically having to approach the same argument from 2 different ways for the same character, it's more fan frustration then actual blame on the character of Spike.

I don't think I'm the only one who's not a fan of Spike, to name Spike fans as the reason for not liking the character, and it's because having a discussion on Spike gets spread so thin, really every thread debating Spike should have 2 threads, one where Spike fans who want to count Season 5 and 6 towards his good stuff, and another for those who want to take season 7 as his only good season.

But to say that there is no change in the basic personality between soulless Spike and ensouled Spike isn't really accurate. The problem is that, while there is a personality change, it is more of a gradual evolution than we saw with Angel. Compare Spike in Season 2 with Spike of Season 7, and the changes are much more noticeable. It should be pointed out here that the same thing almost certainly happened with Angel, but the problem is that we never saw that happen. By the time that we first saw Angel, he had had years, even decades, to become the the person that Buffy first met in that alley (which was, it just occurred to me, the same place that she first met Spike.)

It's much easier to see the division between monster and hero with Angel, because Angelus is portrayed as pure evil, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and Angel is exactly the opposite. Spike, however, isn't all black and white. His change begins in Season 4, with the acquirement of the chip, and could be accredited, at least in the beginning, to simple self preservation, combined with a romantic fixation with Buffy. But for whatever reason, the change is genuine, and it effectively blurs the presoul/post-soul change, and offers, at best, a poor excuse to not give Spike the same consideration as Angel receives, once both men have souls.

See from what you've said here, to me that means Spike started adapting from season 4 had adapted to a point where having a soul wasn't much of a difference to him, because he evolved to that point - that simply means he definitely should be held accountable for his bad things such as the attempted rape because, because the Spike that tried to do that to Buffy was pretty much the same as the one in season 7. It's completely a double standard, but if you'r giving Spike the benefit of having been able to evolve, then it means he's also responsible for the bad things he did.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

I really don't get that thing, how having a soul equates to a demon being good.
The prisons have loads of mass murderers who have souls.
Giles has a soul yet he killed.
So what is the difference between Spike and Angel?
Well, they are both vampires, the only difference I can see is that with Spike, you get what you see. The Spike you see did all them bad things and all them good things.
With Angel that isn't the case, because Angelus might pop up.

 

[white avenger]

See from what you've said here, to me that means Spike started adapting from season 4 had adapted to a point where having a soul wasn't much of a difference to him, because he evolved to that point - that simply means he definitely should be held accountable for his bad things such as the attempted rape because, because the Spike that tried to do that to Buffy was pretty much the same as the one in season 7. It's completely a double standard, but if you'r giving Spike the benefit of having been able to evolve, then it means he's also responsible for the bad things he did.

No, I was just trying to explain why there wasn't a a more drastic change in how Spike acted in Season 6 as compared to Season 7. I'm perfectly willing to have Spike held responsible for every single offense that he committed from the moment that he first crawled out of his grave to the moment that he regained his soul, just as long as the same thing is applied to Angel. But if we're going to hold Spike responsible for his presoul offenses and give Angel a free ride for the things that he did, then that's a double standard. Either give both men the benefit of a clean slate from the moment that they obtain their souls, or continue to hold both men responsible. Either way works fine for me, just as long as the same rules apply to both Spike and Angel equally.

And while we're on that subject, either condemn Buffy for forgiving Angel and continuing to love him, or quit complaining about her doing the exact same thing for Spike. Either both men are worthy of forgiveness and a second chance, or neither one is. Buffy knew what Angel did to Dru, and she forgave him for that, with not a single murmur from anyone about her doing so.

 

[Buffy Summers]

I think it makes a difference that Angel was remorseful for what he'd done as Angelus. The fact that Spike didn't spend a hundred years wracked with guilt after gaining a soul, says to me he wasn't all that sorry for all the people he'd killed...

Let's forget the method by which the two vampires regained their respective souls. The important fact is that they both have souls, and in the Buffyverse at least before Season 7, the vampire in question is essentially two totally separate characters, even to the point of having different names. The monster is without a soul, and the hero HAS the soul, and is not held responsible for anything that the monster did. For some reason, that totally changed with Spike in Season 7. He doesn't even change his name.

The method by which Angel and Spike got their souls I think is important, though, because it is different for each of them and clearly was treated differently for each of them by the writers. I think a better dividing line, and what I think a lot of people like myself really see in their minds, is the division line between when the characters became "good". I don't think anyone holds the things Spike did with Angelus against him, but they hold Spike's rape of Buffy against him because he had already started being seen as having become "good". I don't think it's really the "soul" that viewers judge Angel and Spike by, but, I guess, whether or not they should know better at such and such point in time.

But to say that there is no change in the basic personality between soulless Spike and ensouled Spike isn't really accurate. The problem is that, while there is a personality change, it is more of a gradual evolution than we saw with Angel.

Just being honest, either there's a change or there isn't; if it's due to having a soul, it should be immediate.

 

[Kean]

I think the creative team have to carry the brunt of the blame for this. With Angel it is made fundamentally clear that Angelus is a separate entity from Angel, to the point where it is remarked that they not only have separate memories but also separate intellects, too ("Awakening", Angel 4x10). Angel is visibly and irrevocably changed by first being turned and then again being resouled. Liam is a lost, useless drunk, but he is not the monster that Angelus is, and then in the hopeless swamp of Angelus' memories, the soul (Liam) is utterly transformed, he is not the boy we saw in Ireland. The memories of the demon's deeds in his body remake who he is as a person. That's how significant and emotionally traumatising having a human soul pushed into a demon's body is. At least, that is what we believe it to be, given that Angel, and later Darla, go through immeasurable anguish and trauma once resouled.

Then there is Spike who, "spent three weeks moaning in a basement and then you were fine!" What the audience understands to be the consequence of a demon receiving a soul is not what we experience with Spike. In fact, he seems troublingly unmoved by the whole thing. It isn't until "Damage" in Angel S5 that we see anything resembling remorse from him. But it still doesn't change him. If you showed clips from Spike from before he was ensouled and after I think a casual viewer would be none the wiser that anything had changed. Personally, I find it hard to be moved by that. I have a similar issue with Willow.

While, ultimately, the blame of this shoddy storytelling and continuity bludgeoing has to rest with the writers, some of the blame goes to James Marsters, too. He said at con recently that he always, from day one, played Spike as having a soul. Marsters said he had a kid and needed the work so he did everything he could to make Spike likable. So when Spike actually was ensouled there very little room in which to convey that.

Perhaps a further reason for the double standard is that Spike is often lauded for his "good" deeds while soulless. If we are not to judge him for his soulless acts, I see no reason why we should laude him for them, either. Everyone has their own take on it, but I don't view Spike's "good" deeds as altruistic but merely what he had to do to survive. I don't think he did them out of any true goodness. They couldn't be, he had neither a soul nor a conscience. If he already possessed those qualities, why would he seek out a soul at all?

Think of it this way, how much have you changed in your life? How different are you from the person you were ten years ago? Five? Last year, even? Pretty different, right? I know I am. But Spike of say, the Boxer Rebellion, feels too much like the Spike of current canon. It doesn't encourage non-Spike fans to sympathise with the character, especially when we have a canon showing us that he should be fundamentally and visibly altered by the experiences he has gone through.

I'm not saying it is fair, one way or another, but this is certainly a significant reason why I am utterly unmoved by the character.

 

[white avenger]

I think it makes a difference that Angel was remorseful for what he'd done as Angelus. The fact that Spike didn't spend a hundred years wracked with guilt after gaining a soul, says to me he wasn't all that sorry for all the people he'd killed...



The method by which Angel and Spike got their souls I think is important, though, because it is different for each of them and clearly was treated differently for each of them by the writers. I think a better dividing line, and what I think a lot of people like myself really see in their minds, is the division line between when the characters became "good". I don't think anyone holds the things Spike did with Angelus against him, but they hold Spike's rape of Buffy against him because he had already started being seen as having become "good". I don't think it's really the "soul" that viewers judge Angel and Spike by, but, I guess, whether or not they should know better at such and such point in time.



Just being honest, either there's a change or there isn't; if it's due to having a soul, it should be immediate.

Spike WAS remorseful over the things that he had done, to the point that the knowledge of it drove him insane. The only reason that he was able to overcome that initial shock was that he, unlike Angel, had someone to support, encourage, and stand by him during that time. Buffy. When Angel got his soul, he had Darla screaming, "What have they DONE to you!?" and telling him how what had happened made him less that he had previously been. In point of fact, neither Angel nor Spike were able to fully accept their condition and actually begin working toward becoming better men until Buffy showed them that they could be. Spike just met her sooner after regaining his soul than Angel did.

As has been pointed out before, the attempted rape was quite likely Spike attempting to duplicate what happened in "Gone,' and hoping for the same results. The realization that that wasn't the case probably had as much to do with him stopping as any resistance that Buffy was able to offer (I just KNOW I'm going to get burned at the stake for saying that)

As for the "change" between presoul Spike and ensouled Spike, it was definitely there, but it wasn't as noticeable, In the beginning of Season 6, when the demon gang was trashing Sunnydale, Spike told Dawn that it looked like fun, and it was mainly his promise to Buffy that kept him from doing something similar. That was presoul Spike. He did good, but not simply because it was the right thing to do. He did it either out of fear of punishment or the desire to impress someone who he cared for, pretty much the same reasons that children, who have no instinctive concept of right or wrong, behave properly. Regaining his soul gave Spike back both the knowledge of the difference between right and wrong, and, more importantly, the actual desire to do right simply because it was what should be done. That's a poor explanation, I know, but my point is, the major change that occurred when Spike regained his soul was more internal than external, and what change that there actually was, Buffy specifically told him that she neither wanted nor needed in their current situation. She needed the "old" Spike back to help her in her fight. Therefore, if you don't like what ensouled Spike became, you have to blame the Slayer for him being that way. He tried to change, but she wouldn't let him.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Then there is Spike who, "spent three weeks moaning in a basement and then you were fine!" What the audience understands to be the consequence of a demon receiving a soul is not what we experience with Spike. In fact, he seems troublingly unmoved by the whole thing. It isn't until "Damage" in Angel S5 that we see anything resembling remorse from him. But it still doesn't change him. If you showed clips from Spike from before he was ensouled and after I think a casual viewer would be none the wiser that anything had changed. Personally, I find it hard to be moved by that. I have a similar issue with Willow.

As you said, a lot of this falls on the writers and the arcs they created. Of course they couldn't have Spike wallow for 100 years if he was to return to Sunnydale in order to save the world a few months later. So there's an understandable disappointment there, for sure. I think they tried to expedite the grief period by having him do things like try to cut out his own heart and begging Buffy to kill him, (twice). It's unfair to say he was unchanged or felt no remorse.

Perhaps a further reason for the double standard is that Spike is often lauded for his "good" deeds while soulless. If we are not to judge him for his soulless acts, I see no reason why we should laude him for them, either.

But here's what I don't understand: why is it unacceptable for fans to both laud him for his good deeds AND hold him accountable for the horrific ones? Starting in season 5 when his values clearly begin to shift, he is no longer wholly bad but he of course is not good, either. Some fans, myself included, decide that he cannot be labeled but rather that he exists in a grey area in seasons 5 and 6. He is progressing toward something good but obviously is to be held fully accountable for the Doctor scheme and the sexual assault. I don't believe that the good things come from altruism either, but that doesn't mean that they are insignificant, especially because they are made by an entirely soulless creature who is fighting his nature in order to do them--selfishly motivated or not.

I don't think he did them out of any true goodness. They couldn't be, he had neither a soul nor a conscience. If he already possessed those qualities, why would he seek out a soul at all?

Agree, again, not "true" goodness. But there was enough there in order for him to realize that if he was ever going to truly control himself he would need to regain his soul.

 

[Buffy Summers]

I never said I didn't like what ensouled Spike became, I'm just trying to explain why Spike doesn't seem like two different people before and after soul.

🙂

 

[Black Eye Guy]

No, I was just trying to explain why there wasn't a a more drastic change in how Spike acted in Season 6 as compared to Season 7. I'm perfectly willing to have Spike held responsible for every single offense that he committed from the moment that he first crawled out of his grave to the moment that he regained his soul, just as long as the same thing is applied to Angel. But if we're going to hold Spike responsible for his presoul offenses and give Angel a free ride for the things that he did, then that's a double standard. Either give both men the benefit of a clean slate from the moment that they obtain their souls, or continue to hold both men responsible. Either way works fine for me, just as long as the same rules apply to both Spike and Angel equally.

That would only work if Spike was the rule, but he's not he's the exception. Everything we're told about what a vampire is lends itself to Angels distinct personality change. Spike isn't the normal example of the differences between a souled and unsouled vampire.

Because of Spikes specialness he has to take more responsibility for his actions then Angel does from fans.

You're perfectly willing to let Spike take responsibility because he went through changes that gave him a "similar to having a soul" personality, but as I said Spikes the exception not the rule.

And while we're on that subject, either condemn Buffy for forgiving Angel and continuing to love him, or quit complaining about her doing the exact same thing for Spike. Either both men are worthy of forgiveness and a second chance, or neither one is. Buffy knew what Angel did to Dru, and she forgave him for that, with not a single murmur from anyone about her doing so.

do you really not see the difference?

The person Buffy developed feelings for during season 6 was the killer, when he came back in Season 7 he was pretty much the same person.
She feel in love with Angel, he effectively died when Angelus came out, then Buffy killed Angel, to save the world, not Angelus, Angel. When he came back in Season 3 he isn't comparable to Angelus he is a separate person, who just spent another couple hundreds years tortured for what Angelus did.

But no Spike spent some time in a basement and hugged a cross so it's the same...?!?

Unfortunately you have to accept that Spike got to be different, he evolved to such a stage because of the chip, he developed a personality similar to if he had a soul. Spike wasn't much different in Season 7, without showing a real change in himself from season 6 to 7 he does have to take some responsibility.

He then goes on to show he hasn't changed much, he was kinda cool with all the bad stuff he did presoul. He is an ass to Wood about his mom, and beats the crap outta him. Compare that to Holtz coming back to Angel, Angel is remorseful and doesn't beat the crab outta Holtz. When Spike starts getting triggered he doesn't take himself out of the equation by going away he stays the same selfish vampire we've been seeing all along.