There is no evidence that Giles was visited by the First at all- that's just your opinion.
Giles decision about Spike is completley ration, knowing what we knew at the time, that the First could take control of him on a whim, just by humming some tune. None of them, except Giles, had a notion about how to stop/cure it. When Giles proposed cure seemed to have failed he moved on to the next solution- eliminating the problem. It was Buffy that saw it as a betrayal, because she didn't think of Spike rationally, it was all emotions.
A lot of the consesus is that S7 Buffy did not think clearly when it came to Spike, nobody, not Giles, Willow, Xander or the Potentials thought she was behaving rationally, 'cause she wasn't. That, partly is what led to her ousting, it wasn't just the vineyard and what happened there.
You can hand-wave it away all you want but by having a dangerous trigger-happy Spike walking around slayers-in-training was Buffy at her most reckless. The First could've used Spike at any time to cause havoc, kill anybody at any time- they were all just lucky that it didn't and that Spike only hurt Dawn.
Spike mere presence helped fracture the group and, whether he realised it or not, intended it or not, distracted Buffy and distanced her from her friends, because she leant on him, not on them.
Looking at it objectivly its hard to see Spike's being absence from those last critical episodes as anything other than a good thing.
Of course it is completely my opinion. I thought I had already said that. What is not shown on the screen is head canon. Mine is that Giles - a major player - was visited by the First.
Essentially your arguments are the same as thetopher - Buffy, who killed Angel when it was needed, was not able to kill Spike because she was irrationally in love with him. Spike, who deliberately did not react to the stone until later in the same day, was also deliberately doing many evil things as well as being a risk. Giles, who took Buffy out and talked to her about how she was now a general, knew at that very minute that he was taking all her power away by arranging a murder behind her back.
And there is a consensus and you are completely objective and in no way effected by your dislike of Spike. Got it.
So if killing Spike was the rational choice why not just kill him. Go into the living room and stake him. If Giles was certain he was correct to remove a threat that Buffy refused to see - why the big charade? Why do it behind her back rather than in front of her face?
---------- Post added at 07:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:47 PM ----------
I don't think either were wrong.
From Giles' POV he tried talking to Buffy rationally in the basement after Spike just proved the trigger to still be active and it didn't work. I don't think there is anything he could have done either to stop Wood and his vendetta. Giles is a big picture kind of guy so for him I see the following possible scenarios play out:
1) Wood kills Spike thereby removing a threat, weapon of the First and major distraction of Buffy's from the picture.
2) Spike kills Wood proving once and for all that a soul doesn't mean good and then Spike would have to be dealt with anyway.
The simple reason he lures Buffy away is because that way she is kept out of it, preventing her from murdering a human being to protect Spike (and she said herself she would let Spike murder Wood). And quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised by S7 Buffy doing it herself since she had no regard for human life anymore and the writers goal was to have Buffy stand by Spike to the point of insanity.
Wood's vendatta had the pleasant side effect of deactivating the trigger so the First's influence over Spike was gone.
So no I don't think either of them were wrong in what they did. Spike was a threat that needed to be dealt with and Buffy wouldn't listen to reason. Unchaining the triggered Spike after he had just thrown a cot at Dawn that could have killed her (not that Buffy cared) just because the shackles made Spike uncomfortable. Letting him run loose in a house full of people that can't possibly defend themselves if he goes on a triggered rampage. Yeah the word insanity spring to mind.
Except for the part where Angel, Buffy, Faith, any of the newly empowered Slayers and possibly Willow or Dawn could have worn the bling. And saying 'it turned out alright' is the worst excuse ever. And I doubt it would work on Holden, Linda and all the other people that were killed and their families.
Okay - pretty much the same argument. It amazes me what huge Spuffy believers you all are. I mean when Angel was a threat Buffy went after him, and even though he was no longer a threat and the love of her life, she killed him. But she was irrationally besotted by Spike, and completely unable to listen to reason or take any action against him.
As for the choices - another one would be that Giles stops Wood and actually respects Buffy's decisions. As to Buffy no longer respecting human life - why bother to fight at all? Just leave town with Spike and let the First win if you no longer care about humans. Yes, she did tell Wood that if he tried to kill Spike again that Spike would kill him - and that she would let him because it was the mission that mattered - that mission being saving humanity.
And yes, anyone could have worn the bling. But it was Spike who did wear it, thus dying to save the world.
---------- Post added at 08:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 PM ----------
And I don't care. Again just because it worked out ok doesn't make it ok. Lots of people died because the writers decided Buffy had to be completely bonkers and irrational when it comes to Spike. When you get down to it you can lay the blame of the deaths at Buffy's feet since it was that irrationality that cost them thier lives.
I can see you don't care much for Buffy but I used to. UPN was literally hell for Buffy's character. Between having her rolling around in the dirt with a soulles monster giggling herself silly as he tells stories about killing people and how he would kill her friends, to the insanity when it comes to Spike in S7 and general attitude they successfully killed my love for the character. And all of that to tell a story about a secondary character? No thanks, I pass.
I doubt we can agree on anything here but I respect the fact that you are one of the fans who really - I think - would have preferred that season 5 was the end of the show.
---------- Post added at 08:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:01 PM ----------
QFT. Everything working out ok isn't a validation of Buffy's faith in Spike. She had nothing to do with resolving the trigger crisis, and if things had continued the way she wanted, it would have ended in disaster.
S7 in general isn't that great for the Buffster. It was Angel and Lilah/W&H who defeated the First, not her. Activating the Slayers didn't seem like it was going to turn the tide that much, as they were still vastly overwhelmed by the Ubervamps. So what did Buffy accomplish at the end of the day? Not much. Which is a shame considering her name is in the title.
Well, what she accomplished was naming Spike her champion, and holding off the ubervamps until he was able to destroy them. Everything else is pure head canon, and we are all allowed to have our own.
---------- Post added at 09:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:04 PM ----------
We are not talking about the method here, but rather about strategic goal. Strategic goal for Giles is not killing Spike because he personally does not like him. Giles honestly thinks that Spike is a danger - on the same level that Ben was. And he did not flinch at killing Ben.
We were talking about method. You said that Wood and Giles were ambiguous and I said their chosen method proved they were not. But as for Ben - I completely agree - this is what I meant about preemptively killing someone.
I disagree here. Buffy's life's purpose is not protecting Spike. As a Slayer her duty is to the world, not to her former beau who tried to rape her and then went out and got better. She was rational enough about it ( ie not mixing personal feelings with her duty) in S2, and she was right. The fact that in S7 she goes all irrational when the world is hanging on the balance might be a mix of post-traumatic stress disorder inter-meshed with Stockholm syndrome, or it might be the work of the First on her, for all they know. There is not to say that the First is not affecting Buffy's judgement - by making her obsessively protective of the guy with the trigger in his head. The First is quite opportunistic entity ('But this will do' - to quote from S2.) It tries to break everybody's barriers, and there is no say that Buffy is not affected as much as Spike, Wood , or any of the Potentials. In fact , it is reasonable to assume after 'Amends' and 'Conversations with dead people' that at the right circumstances anybody can be breached and bent to unconsciously work for the First. Buffy as much as anybody else.
Sorry - I never said that protecting Spike was Buffy's life purpose. I said that Wood and Giles undermined Buffy by plotting to kill Spike - that was the entire purpose of the murder plot.They felt Buffy was too enmeshed and refused to see the risk.
Ah, yes - the AR. Not going there - it is a thread in and of itself. It also includes many other events in the series - it didn't happen in a vacuum. My experience there is that the two sides of fandom willing to discuss this are usually not at all willing to listen to each other.
What you are saying about season 2 vs seasons 6&7 is very Spuffy. Buffy's love for Angel was comparatively easily overturned when she was forced to kill him - just a kiss and a stab through the heart. But her feelings for Spike were so overwhelming that she lost complete control of rationality for two entire seasons. You give Spike's relationship with Buffy a whole lot more power than her relationship with Angel - and give Buffy far more investment in keeping Spike alive. I'm not a Spuffy fan, so I have to disagree.
Yes, we did see the First going after Buffy repetitively. Your head canon, as far as I can tell, is that the First made Buffy protect Spike, that Buffy was still suffering from PTSD, and that Buffy had somehow developed Stockhom syndrome (when did Spike abduct her and keep her captive?) and it is somewhat garbled for me.Between the three, I think I would pick the First - except that the First clearly wants Spike dead. Why else appear to Wood more than once and inflame his vendetta? As for PTSD - quite possible but it started in season one when she willingly went to her own death ans has affected every choice since then.
Now, this is absolutely unsupportable point of view. Wood is affected by visions of his dead mother, but it only means that his best judgement is compromised and he is not quite his rational self. The whole point of the First being able to make a healthy young girl kill herself from fear is that it can take over somebody's mind and make them irrational. (And no, Buffy, had no right to say what she said about Chloe.)
Actually we agree here. Wood's best judgement is overwhelmed by the visions sent to him from the First, and the First is able to make people behave irrationally. I know you don't believe the First ever visited Giles - I disagree with that.I actually pretty much agree with you here in terms of the specific power of the First.
My problem is that his decision to take over shows he has no real respect for Buffy as a general or as a leader. If he believes she is irrational and completely compromised - if he felt so strongly Buffy was wrong - he should have just killed Spike, and removed Buffy from the position of leadership.
You seem to believe that Giles' opinion of the situation matters more than Buffy's, at least in his own mind - that it is okay for Giles to preemptively kill Spike in order to make sure that anything Giles is simply
imagining won't come true . You seem to believe it is okay for him to dupe her, and that it's okay to act out of fear rather than stay loyal even though you have fears. You also seem to believe that the threat is so immediate that it's okay for Giles to be a hypocrite who lies, connives, and facilitates preemptive murder behind the back of someone he claims to love and respect - for her own good - in other words someone who shows neither trust in nor loyalty to Buffy. Am I wrong on any of these specifics?
Once again, Giles is on board with eliminating Spike at this point not because he despises Spike as a person ( although yes, Giles generally thinks Spike is a bad joke , judging from his reaction in S6), but because at that particular point in the story Spike is a real danger - soul or not. Every vampire has to fight their demon, but on top of it Spike's being proven to be a walking talking bomb with a trigger set to kill at some point. That's the only reason Giles is going after him - same way he goes after Ben. As for Robin, he as, I tried to explain already, is himself compromised and honestly believes Buffy needs to be protected from Spike even against her will - because she is a Slayer and Spike has history with Slayers.
Giles showed how much he disliked Spike as soon as he returned. But once again - it is what the murder plot was designed to achieve and the way it was done. Giles was neither honest enough or man enough to just dust Spike. Based on whatever fears he had, Giles was doing the work of the First - helping to achieve it's goal of killing Spike. . He may have a rationale, but he is not the loyal and respectful support we saw in the first 6 seasons. As I said, if Giles was so sure he was right, why hide it all? If he believed Buffy was no longer rational, why let her be the leader?
Neither Willow , nor one of the potentials were repeat offenders at that point. And yes, Giles never felt particular affection towards Spike the way he felt about Willow. And yet the fact that Giles places no particular value on Spike's life 'at that point' because he does not see Spike as a potential champion of good - does not make Giles any more biased or OOC than his killing of Ben. And honestly, nobody is supposed to see Spike as a potential champion of good at this point. That's the whole plot of the season - would he turn evil again, or would he not? That's the suspense. Blaming Giles for not being as blind as Buffy is preposterous. Blaming Robin for hating his mother's killer and not trusting him - while being goaded by the First on top of that - is unfair.
Not seeing him as a champion is the worst rationale for killing him. Willow tried to kill Buffy, tried to kill Dawn, and tried to destroy the world - also not a reason to plot her murder.
The First is Evil - all of evil. To do evil supports the First. Buffy sees that when she tells Giles you can't achieve good by doing evil. Giles doesn't see it - and as it turns out, Giles is wrong. All the things Buffy saw in Spike are true - Spike is a champion who dies to save the world. Giles fears were simply fears - the product of an overactive imagination. He let himself be ruled by fear (evil) rather than seeing that his choice was evil and he should support Buffy.
Both. She has and agency, and is manipulated. It is a plot device.
You are gong purely Doylist here - so I'll just say that everything in the entire series is some form of plot device. That's the nature of fiction.
Spike gets a soul by his own choice - but not to help Buffy, or to be the champion of good. The whole season is build around him 'becoming' champion of good 'after' his soul kicks in and he realizes that there is more to having a moral compass than 'to be hers'. That's why he chooses the sacrifice in the end - because with the soul comes consciousness and responsibility. But by no means anybody is obliged to forgive him, believe in him, and risk the lives of their loved ones for him. Buffy does that at her own risk and it is she who is biased - but luckily for her she is the protagonist and she always gets it right in the end. The season is build around her 'grooming' Spike with her forgiveness to became her sacrifice, and it is all well and good, but the whole point of the plot was to keep it in suspense till the very end ( that's why the First takes Buffy's shape in the end and goads Spike into a fit of jealousy). To assume that Robin and Giles were somehow entitled of more knowledge than the audience is strange.
What fit of jealousy - supporting Buffy when she gets kicked out? Who was he jealous of? On a Doylist basis - I pretty much agree - the plot devices served the needs of the story to maintain suspense. But characters always have more knowledge than the audience, or why bother watching at all. You can't mix Doylist and Watsonian and get anything approaching logic - IMO.
I'm sorry for the huge long screed - I can't quite figure out how to get a new reply for these answers.
🙁
