Why Angel or Spike

[thetopher]

For me this is where I think the 'shipping thing comes in, because I liked Spike and his character development just fine in Seasons 2, 3 ('Lover's Walk' is marvelous), 4 and even 5.
But when Spuffy comes along in S6 his character development...falters to put it mildly. And the less said about S7 the better.

 

[Kana]

I'm going to approach this from a different angle. I'm going to look at my personal experience when watching the show and how that affected my opinion of Spike and Angel respectively.

Personally, I never saw it as an 'either/or' issue. Although I've come to favour Angel, that has little to do with my feelings for Spike. I mean, I prefer Wesley to Andrew, but my liking Wesley as a character has little to do with how I feel about Andrew.

I actually like Spike and I personally don't believe he, himself, took anything away from the televised shows in general. In fact, I'd go as far to say he added quite a bit. So, I reiterate: While I prefer Angel to Spike, I'm not 'choosing' him over Spike.

The reason for position is that contrary to what some have said, I don't believe the narrative placed Angel and Spike at odds with one another. In season 1 of BTVS, Spike wasn't present. In Season 2, Angel had a soul for the first part of the season and Spike was one of the main antagonists and an entertaining one at that!! I appreciated both characters in completely different ways. When Angelus emerged, I couldn't really say I was rooting for him over Spike, because, well they are both villains. If anything I tended to sympathise with Spike, but in any respect, I still enjoyed Angelus as a villain, so again, no real preference there.

In Season 3, Spike was barely there and was a villain, while Angel was on the hero's path. Even in Season 7 of BTVS, Spike and Angel were treading different paths or at least there were at different stages. Spike had just won a soul, while Angel had spent years already as a champion and a leader.

It was only in Ats Season 5 where the competition on screen was pronounced, but even then, in the later part of the season, Angel and Spike were cooperating and the Bangel vs Spuffy issue was mostly played for laughs.

Yes, you could argue their competition in the 'Verse lasted over a century, but even then, for most part, they were not in competition with one another.

I actaully found a lot of the competition is noted online on the forums. The common issues I've seen discussed are:
1) Shipping
2) Moral superiority
This can include, the fact that Angel has been fighting for good for longer, or that Spike won a soul etc...
3) Who deserves the Shanshu

None of those issues mean anything to me because

1)I don't care with whom Buffy ends up.
2) I don't see heroism as some sort of scoreboard, such as "X has saved the world more" etc. Both of them are on individual journeys and their heroism can be appreciated independently of each other.
3) The Shanshu is not necessarily a determining factor in regards to which character I prefer.

That's all for now, but as always, this is just in my humble opinion.

 

[Mr Trick]

I'm ok with S2 Spike. And I know S2 Spike would laugh long and hard about S5 and beyond Spike before doing something drastic to avoid becoming that. But I can still watch S4 because there are awesome standalone episodes and since Spike is shoehorned into a lot of episodes that Season and in S5 (mostly with Dawn) it makes him easier to ignore. That's what fast forward buttons are made for after all. I actually did stop watching the show during it's innitial run sometime in S6 (probably the episode with the famous balcony scene). I made it through the tedious crap that was S5 so I thought I should stick it out, hoping it would get better. It wasn't until years later that I rewatched the whole series. Now I stick to Canonverse only (S1-S4) and the Dawnverse is some alternate reality with people that only look like the scoobies.

It's funny how the Spike-loving camp constantly asks me why I bother with the show. Even if I repeat the same reasons why over and over it's like I have to justify myself every time because not loving Spike = not a show worth watching. You people need to accept that everybody is just different. We all have different standarts and opinions, otherwise discussion boards like this one would be useless. You don't care for my opinion then just ignore whatever I write. But I answered the question of this thread and then I'm being asked to justify MY opinion.


I like villains and I like bad guys and I don't see anything wrong with it. I like S2 Spike just fine. S4 Spike to a degree as well. S5 and beyond is where I have trouble. And please tell me you are kidding when you ask what Spike's persona has to do with me not liking him. I assume you have come across people you don't like. Maybe even people that offend you on a very basic human level.

Anyway I have nothing more to say to this because it's reaching the point of stupidity. Don't ask a question and when someone gives an aswer tear them a new one and ask them to justify themselves. And then ask redundant questions for the hell of it. Or maybe you are just doing it to get 'likes' from Silverspike

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I was suggesting that you were attaching your hatred for Spike's persona like he was someone in real life. Being bad in the right kind of way is good on television, because it can be entertaining, but also challenge people to think, but naturally you wouldn't want to hang around with that sort of person in real life. My other point was simply that if Spike gets to you as a villain then maybe that is because the writers/actor have done their jobs well. The attempted rape scene seems a sticking point for some. I can see why, but for me it had a purpose, and advanced the storyline and the Spike character. I was just responding o

I'm going to approach this from a different angle. I'm going to look at my personal experience when watching the show and how that affected my opinion of Spike and Angel respectively.

Personally, I never saw it as an 'either/or' issue. Although I've come to favour Angel, that has little to do with my feelings for Spike. I mean, I prefer Wesley to Andrew, but my liking Wesley as a character has little to do with how I feel about Andrew.

I actually like Spike and I personally don't believe he, himself, took anything away from the televised shows in general. In fact, I'd go as far to say he added quite a bit. So, I reiterate: While I prefer Angel to Spike, I'm not 'choosing' him over Spike.

The reason for position is that contrary to what some have said, I don't believe the narrative placed Angel and Spike at odds with one another. In season 1 of BTVS, Spike wasn't present. In Season 2, Angel had a soul for the first part of the season and Spike was one of the main antagonists and an entertaining one at that!! I appreciated both characters in completely different ways. When Angelus emerged, I couldn't really say I was rooting for him over Spike, because, well they are both villains. If anything I tended to sympathise with Spike, but in any respect, I still enjoyed Angelus as a villain, so again, no real preference there.

In Season 3, Spike was barely there and was a villain, while Angel was on the hero's path. Even in Season 7 of BTVS, Spike and Angel were treading different paths or at least there were at different stages. Spike had just won a soul, while Angel had spent years already as a champion and a leader.

It was only in Ats Season 5 where the competition on screen was pronounced, but even then, in the later part of the season, Angel and Spike were cooperating and the Bangel vs Spuffy issue was mostly played for laughs.

Yes, you could argue their competition in the 'Verse lasted over a century, but even then, for most part, they were not in competition with one another.

I actaully found a lot of the competition is noted online on the forums. The common issues I've seen discussed are:
1) Shipping
2) Moral superiority
This can include, the fact that Angel has been fighting for good for longer, or that Spike won a soul etc...
3) Who deserves the Shanshu

None of those issues mean anything to me because

1)I don't care with whom Buffy ends up.
2) I don't see heroism as some sort of scoreboard, such as "X has saved the world more" etc. Both of them are on individual journeys and their heroism can be appreciated independently of each other.
3) The Shanshu is not necessarily a determining factor in regards to which character I prefer.

That's all for now, but as always, this is just in my humble opinion.

Very good. This what a think mostly. They are different characters who bring something different to the shows good or bad. If given a choice I prefer Spike, but Angel did grow on me after the season one. Its not a a either or I agree.

 

[bespangeled]

I'm ok with S2 Spike. And I know S2 Spike would laugh long and hard about S5 and beyond Spike before doing something drastic to avoid becoming that. But I can still watch S4 because there are awesome standalone episodes and since Spike is shoehorned into a lot of episodes that Season and in S5 (mostly with Dawn) it makes him easier to ignore. That's what fast forward buttons are made for after all. I actually did stop watching the show during it's innitial run sometime in S6 (probably the episode with the famous balcony scene). I made it through the tedious crap that was S5 so I thought I should stick it out, hoping it would get better. It wasn't until years later that I rewatched the whole series. Now I stick to Canonverse only (S1-S4) and the Dawnverse is some alternate reality with people that only look like the scoobies.

It's funny how the Spike-loving camp constantly asks me why I bother with the show. Even if I repeat the same reasons why over and over it's like I have to justify myself every time because not loving Spike = not a show worth watching. You people need to accept that everybody is just different. We all have different standarts and opinions, otherwise discussion boards like this one would be useless. You don't care for my opinion then just ignore whatever I write. But I answered the question of this thread and then I'm being asked to justify MY opinion.

Just to be clear, I'm not in any camp. You posted on a thread so I simply assumed you were open to discussion. I've never spoken to you before so I had no idea what reasons you keep repeating over and over. There are many folks who don't love Spike, or like him, and who just plain can't stand him - that's fine with me. You gave a solid answer expressing why you feel there has to be a winner.

I will say, though, that for someone who wants to be treated gently, you definitely can dish it out. When you chose to cast aspersions on what others believe then chances are you'll get answered in kind.

 

[AnthonyCordova]

@Kana They are the only two vampires to have an intimate relationship with Buffy, they have a far more profound impact on Buffy and her development than any other intimate relationship she had (Riley), they are the only two vampires in known lore (during tv) to have souls (these are not inconsequential things, they are central points for the show), even though the Shanshu prophecy competition was initiated by Lindsey the writers obviously wanted to put Angel and Spike at odds (again) and play with the audience's feelings about them against each other, make the audience ask themselves who they would prefer the Shanshu was about or who they thought it was for, etc. etc. On top of all of that they are two characters that stand in stark contrast from each other personality-wise and else. And the points where Angel and Spike are in opposition to each other have to do with some of the most important things about the show (e.g. relationship to Buffy...which from what I understand is still a lingering issue in the comics, etc.). I definitely think that the show played them off and against each other to get the audience to think about those things. And they played them off each other in so many other contexts too (e.g. Spike and Angelus S2, etc.) that I think it became very natural for many people to see it as an either/or, even if strictly speaking it wasn't contextualized that way all of the time.

I think you downplay and dismiss too quickly the points of contrast that Spike and Angel had in relief with each other. And just because they are not in shared-space conflict all of the time doesn't necessarily mean they were not intentionally meant to be considered that way anyway, at least in part. Angel's romance with Buffy was in S2 and 3 and Spike's was S5/S6/S7, so the competition didn't happen on-screen with shared time, but it was there anyway. Spike referred to Angel several times in jealosy during his conversations with Buffy at the time they were "doing it" and Angel clearly was put off by it when it came up several times...and from a large big picture perspective I felt that Spuffy S5/S6/S7 was meant to be considered against Bangel S2-3. To me at least it seems obvious, but it is interesting that many people don't think so. I really think the writers and Whedon meant for them to be considered against each other.

And just to repeat, I really like both Spike and Angel, for the most part.

oh, and just because two characters get along (like Angel and Spike latter half of Angel S5) doesn't mean they are not placed in contrast with each other anyway. I can think of many books I like where two characters get along the whole time but they are still very much intended to be thought in contrast to each other and against one another.

They might not be an either/or for many people anyway, but I definitely can see a strong argument that the creator of the show and the writers had it in mind from a big picture narrative perspective that the two characters would contrast each other dramatically, and they suceeded in my view. Which is why I think there is a greater tendency on the part of the fans to take sides, because the contrast kind of encourages it. It kind of does. 
sorry about the repetition. Phone posts, can't always read while I type quickly on the go.

 

[bespangeled]

@Kana They are the only two vampires to have an intimate relationship with Buffy, they have a far more profound impact on Buffy and her development than any other intimate relationship she had (Riley), they are the only two vampires in known lore (during tv) to have souls (these are not inconsequential things, they are central points for the show), even though the Shanshu prophecy competition was initiated by Lindsey the writers obviously wanted to put Angel and Spike at odds (again) and play with the audience's feelings about them against each other, make the audience ask themselves who they would prefer the Shanshu was about or who they thought it was for, etc. etc. On top of all of that they are two characters that stand in stark contrast from each other personality-wise and else. And the points where Angel and Spike are in opposition to each other have to do with some of the most important things about the show (e.g. relationship to Buffy...which from what I understand is still a lingering issue in the comics, etc.). I definitely think that the show played them off and against each other to get the audience to think about those things. And they played them off each other in so many other contexts too (e.g. Spike and Angelus S2, etc.) that I think it became very natural for many people to see it as an either/or, even if strictly speaking it wasn't contextualized that way all of the time.

Compare and contrast isn't always compete. I love to watch the fight in Destiny, in part because I think Angel and Spike are being more honestly themselves. They are a mix of souled and remembering who they were when they weren't souled. It gives me some ideas as to why they've interacted the way they have, and who they are now. I really do find it interesting that all three of Angel's boys have daddy issues (and both Penn and Spike made comments that Angel did not correct.) I don't think that, other than the fight, they were put into competition.

Spike and Angel have a long history together - Buffy was the light for both of them. And I hate the thought of the Shanshu for the same reason I hate the idea of heaven/hell. Do good in order to get rewarded - not a philosophy I embrace. So if either gets it, I go for Angel. At least he really seems to want it.

I think you downplay and dismiss too quickly the points of contrast that Spike and Angel had in relief with each other. And just because they are not in shared-space conflict all of the time doesn't necessarily mean they were not intentionally meant to be considered that way anyway, at least in part. Angel's romance with Buffy was in S2 and 3 and Spike's was S5/S6/S7, so the competition didn't happen on-screen with shared time, but it was there anyway. Spike referred to Angel several times in jealosy during his conversations with Buffy at the time they were "doing it" and Angel clearly was put off by it when it came up several times...and from a large big picture perspective I felt that Spuffy S5/S6/S7 was meant to be considered against Bangel S2-3. To me at least it seems obvious, but it is interesting that many people don't think so. I really think the writers and Whedon meant for them to be considered against each other.

I also see Spike and Buffy occurring at a much different time than Bangel. All three characters are very different people in some critical ways. Can you compare your high school dream to your first adult relationship? Can you compare starry eyed true love with something messy, complicated and twisted in some odd ways? Those are question for both Spike and Angel as well as Buffy. The question for me is who was Buffy and who was Angel? Season 4 AtS Angel is definitely not the man Buffy fell in love with. He has changed, and so has Buffy. But Spike had the camera on him while he made a total 180 - from gleeful sociopathic killer to somber self sacrificing and souled. There are three journeys there, but there is no winner.

And just to repeat, I really like both Spike and Angel, for the most part.

oh, and just because two characters get along (like Angel and Spike latter half of Angel S5) doesn't mean they are not placed in contrast with each other anyway. I can think of many books I like where two characters get along the whole time but they are still very much intended to be thought in contrast to each other and against one another.

They might not be an either/or for many people anyway, but I definitely can see a strong argument that the creator of the show and the writers had it in mind from a big picture narrative perspective that the two characters would contrast each other dramatically, and they suceeded in my view. Which is why I think there is a greater tendency on the part of the fans to take sides, because the contrast kind of encourages it. It kind of does.

 

sorry about the repetition. Phone posts, can't always read while I type quickly on the go.

You typed this on a freakin phone!

 

[Skanky Vamp]

You typed this on a freakin phone!

I know. I can hardly type a mobile email, thinking that whole post was done on a phone is actually kinda awesome. 
That's WEIRD..

 

[RomanticSoul]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I was suggesting that you were attaching your hatred for Spike's persona like he was someone in real life. Being bad in the right kind of way is good on television, because it can be entertaining, but also challenge people to think, but naturally you wouldn't want to hang around with that sort of person in real life. My other point was simply that if Spike gets to you as a villain then maybe that is because the writers/actor have done their jobs well. The attempted rape scene seems a sticking point for some. I can see why, but for me it had a purpose, and advanced the storyline and the Spike character. I was just responding o

Nope he didn't do his job. It's nothing against the actor it's just the character that repulses me on a very basic human level. I feel that way, you don't but that's because we are all very different people wo feel/think differently. And that's perfectly fine for me. I just wonder why that's reason to question my sanity like I'm unable to seperate fiction from reality. Your experience and feelings when it comes to a work of fiction will always be influenced by who you are. At least it's that way for me. Which is why people feel so differently about certain issues.

I will say, though, that for someone who wants to be treated gently, you definitely can dish it out. When you chose to cast aspersions on what others believe then chances are you'll get answered in kind.

Where did I say I wanted to be treated gently? Point me to where I said it in my previous post. And you bet I'm sick of having it thrown at my head that my many issues with certain Seasons or characters makes me some kind of mentally defective person. So I'm done being nice and ready to dish out. My opnions are my opinions...why am I asked to justify them? It's the way I feel about things. You don't see me doing it to other people mainly because I have accepted that we are all very different people who think about the same things differently. So I don't see why my way of feeling/thinking means I can't seperate reality from fiction, I'm unable to suspend my disbelief and I'm asked why I even bother watching the show in the first place because clearly Buffy is so not the show for me.

Btw nice going Silverspike. Using someone elses post yet again to get a little dig in. How cute. Just surprised you didn't use that opportunity to point out again that I'm unworthy of the brilliance that is Spike...I mean Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

 

[Taake]

The attempted rape scene seems a sticking point for some. I can see why, but for me it had a purpose, and advanced the storyline and the Spike character.

Personally, as someone who loved and adored Spike seasons 2-5, I just don't understand how one can defend a "storyline" that's advanced in this way. It advances Spike's storyline... mm, okay yeah, sure.... I don't see it that way and even if you do, they did it at the cost of Buffy and then they just glossed over it. Fine, he weeped at a cross about it, but really - that's all it took for her to forgive that? I don't buy it. It's not about Buffy. Like you said - it's Spike's storyline and his character. But I for one was not watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer for the sake of Spike. The attempted rape will forever remain a "sticking point" to me because I don't like to see a female character abused or violated soley for the purpose of the a male character's developement.

The writers could have done anything, but they chose this and for me, and apparently others, it ruined Spike.
If you can overlook this I personally think you're kind of blue-eyed but I respect that this is your view and only hope that one day you might see it differently.

This "assassination" so to speak of Spike's character was to me entirely unrelated to Angel. Before this I could enjoy them both. But here, to me, the writers crossed a line, bungled it, and tried to sweep it under a rug. If anything, seeing where they were willing to go, I'm very pleased they removed Angel from the Buffyverse and put him in another city, because had this been Angel I wouldn't have forgiven it either. This was a bad plot all together and one they clearly weren't able to handle.

 

[Mr Trick]

Personally, as someone who loved and adored Spike seasons 2-5, I just don't understand how one can defend a "storyline" that's advanced in this way. It advances Spike's storyline... mm, okay yeah, sure.... I don't see it that way and even if you do, they did it at the cost of Buffy and then they just glossed over it. Fine, he weeped at a cross about it, but really - that's all it took for her to forgive that? I don't buy it. It's not about Buffy. Like you said - it's Spike's storyline and his character. But I for one was not watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer for the sake of Spike. The attempted rape will forever remain a "sticking point" to me because I don't like to see a female character abused or violated soley for the purpose of the a male character's developement.

The writers could have done anything, but they chose this and for me, and apparently others, it ruined Spike.
If you can overlook this I personally think you're kind of blue-eyed but I respect that this is your view and only hope that one day you might see it differently.

This "assassination" so to speak of Spike's character was to me entirely unrelated to Angel. Before this I could enjoy them both. But here, to me, the writers crossed a line, bungled it, and tried to sweep it under a rug. If anything, seeing where they were willing to go, I'm very pleased they removed Angel from the Buffyverse and put him in another city, because had this been Angel I wouldn't have forgiven it either. This was a bad plot all together and one they clearly weren't able to handle.

Completely understand where you are coming from. But first of all I don't think it is just about advancing Spike's story, but also Buffys, because it is this horrble act that makes her see that there are still traces of the old Spike in him, so therefore brings her to the conclusion that she doesn't want to be in a relationship with him. It also changes other characters view on Spike such as Dawn who up to that point had actually been one of his supporters in the Buffy camp.

I am not trying to make light of what Spike does it is disturbing, but then sadly things like that do go on in real life and television has a role to represent it. Maybe, they did rush the next part of the story, but one reason for that might be it being a TV series the limitations of time contraits. I don't think Buffy does forgive him just like that, its just that things do change due to him getting a soul, and also she is always one to think of the fight to save the world before her own personal trumor.

 

[EVIL UU]

brings her to the conclusion that she doesn't want to be in a relationship with him.

Buffy comes to such conclusion in "As You Were" when she breaks up with Spike.

 

[Taake]

Completely understand where you are coming from. But first of all I don't think it is just about advancing Spike's story, but also Buffys, because it is this horrble act that makes her see that there are still traces of the old Spike in him, so therefore brings her to the conclusion that she doesn't want to be in a relationship with him. It also changes other characters view on Spike such as Dawn who up to that point had actually been one of his supporters in the Buffy camp.

I am not trying to make light of what Spike does it is disturbing, but then sadly things like that do go on in real life and television has a role to represent it. Maybe, they did rush the next part of the story, but one reason for that might be it being a TV series the limitations of time contraits. I don't think Buffy does forgive him just like that, its just that things do change due to him getting a soul, and also she is always one to think of the fight to save the world before her own personal trumor.

I simply can't agree because we see almost nothing of Buffy's emotions here, except for Xander finding her in the bathroom. But after there is no space in which we see her deal with her emotions, there's no advancement of how she's coping with it. So it is about Spike. It just hop-skippety-skips by a few months and we're supposed to think that she's just fine? Because when Spike resurfaces it's all about him, it's all about how he got a soul because of it etc ad nauseum. It's not about Buffy at all.

And honestly, time constraint of TV is no excuse. If they didn't have time to deal with how the protagonist of the show felt about such a major violation it should never have been a part of the show. Simple as that.

 

[Mr Trick]

I simply can't agree because we see almost nothing of Buffy's emotions here, except for Xander finding her in the bathroom. But after there is no space in which we see her deal with her emotions, there's no advancement of how she's coping with it. So it is about Spike. It just hop-skippety-skips by a few months and we're supposed to think that she's just fine? Because when Spike resurfaces it's all about him, it's all about how he got a soul because of it etc ad nauseum. It's not about Buffy at all.

And honestly, time constraint of TV is no excuse. If they didn't have time to deal with how the protagonist of the show felt about such a major violation it should never have been a part of the show. Simple as that.[/QUOTE]

But then did they know at that point that the show would not go on past S7? On the rest you make some very good points, maybe I will feel differently over time.

 

[Aud]

I simply can't agree because we see almost nothing of Buffy's emotions here, except for Xander finding her in the bathroom. But after there is no space in which we see her deal with her emotions, there's no advancement of how she's coping with it. So it is about Spike. It just hop-skippety-skips by a few months and we're supposed to think that she's just fine? Because when Spike resurfaces it's all about him, it's all about how he got a soul because of it etc ad nauseum. It's not about Buffy at all.

And honestly, time constraint of TV is no excuse. If they didn't have time to deal with how the protagonist of the show felt about such a major violation it should never have been a part of the show. Simple as that.

I completely agree with you, here and in your immediately prior post. There was an article last month about rape on television, drawing a distinction between rape storylines that provide rich stories/developments for female characters, and those that are used as sloppy plot devices that get readily dismissed. (http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/dec/13/tv-rape-portrayal-storm). The scene on BTVS was the latter type.

And before I see any protestations that the scene in BTVS was merely an attempt, I just want to point out that not all plot devices play out in exactly the same way on every show. What you can't deny is that this scene was still one involving an attempt to rape, and therefore analogous principles apply. It was a crude plot device to advance Spike's story.

I don't think it is just about advancing Spike's story, but also Buffys, because it is this horrble act that makes her see that there are still traces of the old Spike in him, so therefore brings her to the conclusion that she doesn't want to be in a relationship with him.

@EVIL UU already pointed out that this chronology is incorrect. I also want to add that the writers themselves have stated that they created this scene because they needed to push Spike to the point that he would feel compelled to go seek out a soul. Buffy was just a plot device to make that happen for him.

Looping all that back to the original thread topic, one of the major points of comparison between Spike and Angel is the manner in which they acquired their souls. To me, the fact that Spike actively sought out his soul does not make him a champion on par with Angel, nor does the fact that Angel had his soul conferred on him unwillingly make him any less worthy of it and of redemption/heroism than Spike. Some people seem to think that the fact that Spike acquired a soul made him more of an equal to Angel (in many regards), but that never jived with me. To me, there was little--if anything--heroic or noble about the fact that Spike sought out his soul, and so the comparison was never a strong or legitimate one.

 

[The Bronze]

I don't really see how the character of a mass murdering rapist can be ruined by him attempting to rape somebody. That line was crossed a century ago.

People seem to forget that Buffy has encountered physical, mental and sexual abuse almost non stop for 6-7 years by the time Seeing Red comes about. There's no reason for her to act differently in the face of this failed attack than the others.

 

[bespangeled]

Yes, Buffy did break up with Spike in "As You Were" but she was upset at the fact that Spike and Anya, both unattached adults, had comfort sex. Dawn told Spike this, and he thought that if it made her upset she still had feelings for him.

I know some people feel that the rape of one character (men and boys are victims too) is never the way to advance the story of another. I completely understand and in principal I agree. For me, maybe I come from a darker place, the assault was hideous and awful but I am really glad that they didn't make the rest of the series "Buffy Recovers". On that very day, the day of the assault, Tara was murdered, Buffy was shot and nearly died, and Willow went dark!Willow. I'm not all that sure that Spike's assault would register as the top worst trauma of the day, let alone the month or year. And that is true of the show - Buffy has survived so much and gone on it would be a complete change of the entire series if suddenly Buffy was a traumatized victim unable to help when all this is going on. They did deal with the rape two ways that I can see. Buffy brought it up to Spike when he showed up to help her, and then Buffy let him stay in the basement of crazy rather than help him out.

As for the souls - one was a gift and the other was a curse so of course they have different reactions. Two different realities, not one better or one worse. The fact that Angel did not start out helping people immediately is a bit more notable - he was truly lost until he found Buffy. Spike already had Angel's example, and Buffy to follow.

So now we are at the point where people are getting angry, and feeling abused because others disagree. If you are here to simply express you opinion and prefer no response (or feel any questions are demands that you justify yourself) you may want to make note of that preference so others are aware. No television show is worth that degree of anger - and no one here is pro-rape.

 

[thetopher]

For me it's the double standard in which they treat Buffy and Spike after the fact- referring back to their individual behaviour in S6 .

Buffy is (rightly) criticised for simply using Spike during their twisted relationship. The speech in 'Beneath Me' ('Am I just flesh to you', etc) was specifically rewritten by Joss to make mention of the way Buffy used and abused Spike. (instead of originally where it was Spike admitting that he got his soul for selfish reasons)

And again in 'CWDP' Buffy refers to treating Spike badly during their relationship- emphasis is again 'shame on Buffy'.

But after 'Beneath Me' (where apparently Buffy is acting 'skittish' according to Spike) the attempted rape and everybody's reaction to it is never mentioned again. 'Move on people, it's over, it happened, it doesn't matter 'casue Spike's got a soul now and he's a completely different person' 🙄

There's a character disparity right there that borders on 'blame the victim'. That's why, to me, the whole Spike assault was an awful storyline where they fluffed the aftermath so the writers can get back to Buffy and Spike making googly eyes at each other for fan-service.
I also think that's why a lot of fans resent it- if Spike isn't properly held to account to the writers, then he's going to be viewed more negatively.

 

[bespangeled]

I simply can't agree because we see almost nothing of Buffy's emotions here, except for Xander finding her in the bathroom. But after there is no space in which we see her deal with her emotions, there's no advancement of how she's coping with it. So it is about Spike. It just hop-skippety-skips by a few months and we're supposed to think that she's just fine? Because when Spike resurfaces it's all about him, it's all about how he got a soul because of it etc ad nauseum. It's not about Buffy at all.

And honestly, time constraint of TV is no excuse. If they didn't have time to deal with how the protagonist of the show felt about such a major violation it should never have been a part of the show. Simple as that.

So this thread was supposed to be about Angel and Spike - why there had to be a winner. Now that the AR has become the topic I am about ready to pull out unsouled vamps and the murder of Jenny Calender and this will go way off topic. So can you split the thread?

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

Why does always seem like a choice has to be made between Spike or Angel?

I keep banging my head on the idea that you can only chose one or the other - Angel or Spike. But that's the message that keeps popping up here. If you say something nice about Spike, then you must be down on Angel. If you say something bad about Angel the you must be a Spike fan. If you say something nice about Angel, then you must be down on Spike If you say something bad about Spike the you must be a Angel fan fan.

I started as a rabid Spike fan - my first time through I was mesmerized by his arc and Marsters performance. So I sat down and rewatched the show trying to figure out how the hell that was done and taking copious notes.. (Not really creepy - I'm an author, so I do that when something really works for me. Market research.) I ended up still a Spike fan, but with a more realistic image of all the show, the characters, lessons and dynamics. I still love Spike - he's original. He has obnoxious down to an art form, and he doesn't care if you like him...except when he does. He likes to be underestimated - and he can screw up big time. He is weirdly honest at times and effectively manipulative in others. He is alert and savvy enough to be able to break the Scooby gang down in one afternoon. He's mercurial and he likes it that way - he's full of contradictions.

I also watched AtS twice - found that I loved it...and I had a new appreciation, affection - yeah, I fell for Angel. He's got those subtle and not so subtle mannerisms on the surface and he's wrestling against the darkness in himself so strongly below the surface. Yeah, he like to believe he's in charge, and he is the one in charge. He carries the heavy burdens, and each time he falters he gets back up. He wants to atone more than he wants redemption - he is in it for the right reasons. He's not only out there helping, at the start he's also learning how to live and work with humans - how to connect - a skill he has never needed. He's learning who he can be on his own. I love the moody, the angst, the wicked sense very dry humor, the mistakes, pain, strength. There's someone still young and unsure inside, and that's tough to play. Boreanaz really grew as actor - and I think it bears the best fruit during Angel.

Between them there's over a hundred years of knowing each other no matter how often or seldom they meet. There is Darla, and Dru, and a shared history. They're all relatives in the sense that they know each other much more deeply than anyone else can know them.

So it's never an either/or choice to to me. Saying Angel did something bad doesn't mean I am comparing him to Spike. nor does it make Spike better than Angel. It not an owie or a hero contest. I tend to support Spike here on the board since he's the one more often attacked, but defending him is not attacking Angel. When I talk about believing that the two are seldom judged by the same yardstick, I am not saying one is better than the other. I like their shiny spots and their warty spots.I do ship them together but I also love them apart. Bangels and Spuffies have some bad blood between them, yeah. But I don't see Buffy as a trophy and I don't care who or if she chooses. There are reasons to dislike actions and choices both of them make. So why does comparing the two seem like it always has to have a winner?

I think it's always between these two because they were both vampires and her most controversial and passionate relationships. Riley never factors in because he was never the long-haul guy.

I feel you on the character bashing - it's irritating when fans feel like in order to love one character that means they must bash another to prove their loyalty. You know, like "Spike loved Buffy more - Angel left her!", "Spike got a soul for her, and Angel tried to kill her friends" etc.

I like your thoughts on Spike, too. You are right-on - he is interesting, but also incredibly flawed. Perhaps this is why so many fans are still so intrigued by him. For what it's worth, Angel was one of my favorite character s for a long time. Then Twilight happened, and I just couldn't reconcile that. He's dead to me now. Spike has always been my favorite character, and Spuffy my OTP, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate Angel. He is an incredibly interesting character.

 

[bespangeled]

For me it's the double standard in which they treat Buffy and Spike after the fact- referring back to their individual behaviour in S6 .

Buffy is (rightly) criticised for simply using Spike during their twisted relationship. The speech in 'Beneath Me' ('Am I just flesh to you', etc) was specifically rewritten by Joss to make mention of the way Buffy used and abused Spike. (instead of originally where it was Spike admitting that he got his soul for selfish reasons)

And again in 'CWDP' Buffy refers to treating Spike badly during their relationship- emphasis is again 'shame on Buffy'.

But after 'Beneath Me' (where apparently Buffy is acting 'skittish' according to Spike) the attempted rape and everybody's reaction to it is never mentioned again. 'Move on people, it's over, it happened, it doesn't matter 'casue Spike's got a soul now and he's a completely different person' 🙄

There's a character disparity right there that borders on 'blame the victim'. That's why, to me, the whole Spike assault was an awful storyline where they fluffed the aftermath so the writers can get back to Buffy and Spike making googly eyes at each other for fan-service.
I also think that's why a lot of fans resent it- if Spike isn't properly held to account to the writers, then he's going to be viewed more negatively.

I will probably regret this but...he goes off, goes through a series of trials that almost kill him - gets his soul back goes insane, manages to return and then does whatever Buffy wants him to do, apologizes, abuses himself, and then dies to save her. So - what would being held to account look like? Being left in the basement of crazy for weeks? If Buffy has managed to get over one of her close friends being murdered the very same day, why must she still be in recovery from the assault that many months later?

I don't like the message that you can kill all the monsters and survive all the other trauma - this alone cannot be recovered from. It goes back to the whole cult of virginity and purity, where being despoiled (or almost despoiled) is the worst that can happen to any female. Death is preferable, in order to not bring shame on your loved ones. Nor am I much for the idea that if you point out anything that the victim did wrong you are somehow saying they deserved rape. To say that any woman can do anything and never ever should get raped is true philosophically but not a practical life philosophy. 

I think it's always between these two because they were both vampires and her most controversial and passionate relationships. Riley never factors in because he was never the long-haul guy.

I feel you on the character bashing - it's irritating when fans feel like in order to love one character that means they must bash another to prove their loyalty. You know, like "Spike loved Buffy more - Angel left her!", "Spike got a soul for her, and Angel tried to kill her friends" etc.

I like your thoughts on Spike, too. You are right-on - he is interesting, but also incredibly flawed. Perhaps this is why so many fans are still so intrigued by him.

Both are flawed - much like a yin-yang (and Spike would be the female energy in that situation 😀).

The flaws are what makes the diamond sparkle - they are the insights into the characters. IMO, once you decide that this is a matter of black and white, good and bad, then you have sucked all the real drama out. However, we all bring our own lens to the show, and some people prefer to have on character to beat on. In some places I've been, that character is Angel - here it tends to be Spike.

I want all my characters complex. It's why I love Game of Thrones, and other shows that going beyond the simpler view of good and bad, and into the more universal questions - questions we like to debate here.