Why Angel or Spike

[Mr Trick]

For what its worth as long as the rape discussion is kept respectful on both sides (which it pretty much has) then I don't see any problems. I don't think anyone was trying to say that people such as myself were being pro-rape. Thing is I can see why it is such a sensitive topic, and I can see where thetopher is coming from by saying that the scene itself made sense, but that the what came after it wasn't very well handled. Likewise I think there is a lot in what bespangled said about Buffy going through just as worse if not worse elsewhere during the series. If you boil it down to such moments it is a dark show, but it is also that strength of character which makes Buffy such a strong character also.

 

[EVIL UU]

OK, so like, what are you trying to achieve? Spike tried to rape the lead character - people will hate him for that and there's absolutely nothing you can say to make them not hate him. Nobody can - even I can't and I'm good. Moreover, there's nothing the writers could have done or can do about it. Sacrifices, suffering, cool factor - it doesn't matter, it's a point of no return. And it's not even about the act or about how it's portrayed or dealt with, I mean, Spike tried to rape Willow and Xander tried to rape Buffy and nobody cares. It's about trust. Spike violated Buffy's trust in a way no other character did and it's his capacity to violate that's so provoking and incendiary.

You know, I love Spike and in the grand scheme of things I'm really not that bothered with "Seeing Red" - Spike's a colorful and entertaining character and that's what matters to me the most but I also understand why people positively hate his guts, which is why it doesn't bother me at all.

 

[bespangeled]

OK, so like, what are you trying to achieve? Spike tried to rape the lead character - people will hate him for that and there's absolutely nothing you can say to make them not hate him. Nobody can - even I can't and I'm good. Moreover, there's nothing the writers could have done or can do about it. Sacrifices, suffering, cool factor - it doesn't matter, it's a point of no return. And it's not even about the act or about how it's portrayed or dealt with, I mean, Spike tried to rape Willow and Xander tried to rape Buffy and nobody cares. It's about trust. Spike violated Buffy's trust in a way no other character did and it's his capacity to violate that's so provoking and incendiary.

You know, I love Spike and in the grand scheme of things I'm really not that bothered with "Seeing Red" - Spike's a colorful and entertaining character and that's what matters to me the most but I also understand why people positively hate his guts, which is why it doesn't bother me at all.

Yes - betraying her trust! That's the key to me , as well. I think he also betrayed himself - he promised he would never hurt her and then he did. He is a demon without a soul and no matter how hard he tries he is still capable of not only assaulting Buffy but taking advantage of her trust to have the opportunity to even try.

I don't expect people to see sacrifice and suffering as a reason not to be angry and hate Spike. I do wonder about the idea that he is not held to account.

 

[Taake]

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?

It was never about purity for me, it's about not seeing Buffy's emotional journey in how she gets over it, it's not that she can't recover it's that its not made to seem as if it's important.


Or we can go back to Angel and Spike as the topic intended. We've had AR threads before and they always come back to the same point anyway.

 

[The Bronze]

Not trying to suggest people can't hate Spike. I'm just making the observation that it's an odd place to draw a line in the sand.

Let's say Spike has 100 years as a vampire on the clock. Then take an extremely conservative estimate of him eating one person a month to keep his strength up. Straight away his kill count is 1200 people.

Then take what he says about things his done to girls like Dawn and/or Dana and it's fairly safe to assume rape wasn't something he shyed away from. Again a conservative estimate of 1 person raped every 5 years would give Spike 20 rape victims.

The trust issue is puzzling as well. He sells out Angelus and Dru to Buffy. He operates for both sides of the Adam and Buffy battle. He's a soulless vampire and naturally untrustworthy. 

Taake: This is nothing more than victim blaming. The AR is clearly NOT consensual. This suggests that anyone who's had rough sex in the past is fair game in the future. Patently untrue.

Woah! That's a million miles away from what my comment says. Did you click the wrong button because otherwise I'm completely lost as to how my comment could possibly get such a reaction?

 

[bespangeled]

It was never about purity for me, it's about not seeing Buffy's emotional journey in how she gets over it, it's not that she can't recover it's that its not made to seem as if it's important.


Or we can go back to Angel and Spike as the topic intended. We've had AR threads before and they always come back to the same point anyway.

😀

I know it's not about purity per se. I'm merely talking about an idea set that comes from way back when men first had items they wished kept in the family. It was then that women were told that threats to their virtue were worse then other threats. To be honest, Buffy never showed any difficulty recovering from Xander's rape attempt which was more brutal both verbally and physically. This kind of attack is just another attack to her. Also, clearly she didn't see a general risk or she wouldn't have taken Dawn over there.

This was completely personal, far beyond possessed Xander. This person had relied on her trust and faith in him in order to get near enough to attack her, to hurt her, to scare her, to try to force a perversion of something they had shared. I don't think there was much of a physical issue given how she heals. It was being assaulted by someone she had come to care for a bit - betrayal from the hands of someone she had been foolish enough to trust.

Here is my issue - when someone has a single list of specific reactions that all victims must share, I get leery. Sort of getting into the 'but was she really raped?' thing seen in some political circles. All soldiers have different reactions to war. Not all vets are crazed with PTSD. All abused children respond differently to the pressures of life. The most dangerous message to give any victim is that "this will ruin your life - you are forever damaged"

Buffy is known for killing demons, dying twice, and has all sorts of superpowers. She doesn't need to have an emotional journey and make this hugely and obviously important recovery - we don't have to say that only this reaction is normal. When you're dealing with a victim you want them to characterize who they are and how they feel, what they need, when they need it. Not sure if I am saying this right - but it was learned through life experiences.

Buffy left Spike to rot - and I think that's about how much she cared about him after three months. Since it was personal that was her personal decision. It's a valid decision. We all know there's not a single other character she would do that with. She would probably even rescue the Mayor or Ben.

 

[thetopher]

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?

Almost every other character who screws up goes through more than Spike does. Dramatically speaking they are seen to be punished for their transgressions, its actually important for a lot of the fans to see this.
It's just not enough that the character is sorry, or changes, or doesn't do it again- they have to be held to some sort of account by somebody. Buffy doesn't do it to Spike (and yet she is critised for what she did in S6) so somebody else should've done so.
Examples:

Angel suffers hellish torment for a 100+ years for everything Angelus did. But when he comes back he's still held to account by Xander (who uses Faith to try and kill him) and Giles (who's icy behaviour towards him is completely in character) far more than Spike is in S7.

Wesley unintentionally ruins Connor's life. He then is almost killed twice (once by a formerly close friend), loses all his allies and is a pariah to them, and eventually even loses Fred, the woman he truly loves. He then starts to lose it completely and ends up dying.

Faith goes to jail for three years for what she did, and when she busts out she is almost killed by The Beast, then by Angelus- she almost dies to save Angel. And even then she is given the cold shoulder by almost everybody in Sunnydale.

Spike spends a few months wimpering in a basement and suddenly all is forgiven? Quite frankly, no it isn't enough.

The events in 'Seeing Red' are barely mentioned by anybody in S7 which is a terrible way to handle what was supposed to be a deliberatly shocking event. It was supposed to be that so it would be the impetuse to drive Spike to get his soul.
If it's that important to him, then it should be just as important to the victim- Buffy. But its not- the fact that it isn't even addressed is shameful.

Anyway, clearly it doesn't bother everybody as much, this its just my opinion so that's the end of the matter- I've said my peace.

 

[The Bronze]

@thetopher so the verse is based around karma then and Spike is the exception?

I mean just off the top of my head I can think of a few bad things that happened to Spike:

1. Brain surgery and chip insertion by The Initiative
2. Mind control and loss of free will at the hand of The First
3. Kidnapped and tortured by The First
4. Beating and execution attempt from Wood and Giles
5. Being incinerated by the amulet
6. Tortured and mutilated by Dana

There's probably some more but you get the point. When does his karma level out for you?

As a side note, what terrible thing do you reckon Buffy did as a child to warrant a lifetime of assaults? Must have been horrendous for her to be dragged out of heaven to continue receiving her karmic punishments.

 

[thetopher]

I mean just off the top of my head I can think of a few bad things that happened to Spike:

That's why I specifically gave examples of bad things happening to characters after they had majorly screwed up whilst being 'good'. Angel sleeping with Buffy, Wesley abducting Connor, Faith going rogue. These people, people that we're supposed to root for, are seen to pay for their bad choices and the hurt they inflict on others (whether accidentally or maliciously).

It happens on both shows most of the time- the only exceptions to this are Willow and Spike in S7- Willow gets a few (literal) flesh wounds in one episode and Spike gets 'drowned' by the First's minions and then all is forgiven.

The chip and everything happens to Spike whiles he's still 'evil' and makes his journey from villain to ally to hero. We're not rooting for him, we're simply seeing his journey, his transformation.
The 'Seeing Red' incident is the last step in that (or it was supposed to be according to the writers) and so 'Lo, Spike is now a good guy' and yet dramatically he isn't seen to suffer for his last, terrible final act.
This wouldn't be so bad in a way except Buffy is singled out through dialogue (and rewriten dialogue at that) and told 'what you did to Spike was wrong. For shame.'🙄
Spike is not because he's 'good now'.

As a side note, what terrible thing do you reckon Buffy did as a child to warrant a lifetime of assaults? Must have been horrendous for her to be dragged out of heaven to continue receiving her karmic punishments.

Buffy is the main protagonist- it is her lot in life to have interesting and dramatic things happen to her because it's her damn show and that's what fans want to see. It's not Spike's show therefore he doesn't actually need to be there.
If he screws up then he has to have bad things happen to him- as happens with every other character in the show and the examples I've given- apart from Willow in S7. (And even then Willow is at least seen to be struggling with her darker self and ridden with guilt about what she did, not so with Spike)

 

[The Bronze]

You're just lumping in a lot of very loosely connected ideas and trying to form a rule for the verse which simply doesn't exist.

The characters react individually and this varies from one person to the next and one action to the next. Angel isn't punished by the show for making the mistake of sleeping with Buffy. He has a curse that he's not fully aware of and that is a condition of the curse. It's not to do with karmic punishment of a bad decision. Same thing with Xander setting Faith on him. It's not a rule of the verse it is a decision taken individually by a character based on his thoughts and fears. Xander sees Angel as a threat that needs to be stopped, the others don't. It's what makes the show interesting. The exact same situation is played out with Wood, Giles and Spike.

The same with Faith going to prison. She commits various crimes and eventually turns herself in as a last resort. That's not a karmic punishment of the verse that's just how the situation played out. Buffy wants to punish Faith for her vendetta against her, Angel wants to help her because he thinks he can. Different characters with different reactions.

The verse would be an extremely boring place if a rigid set of rules were put in place about how a bad deed must be handled in exactly the same way.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

You know the scene that always makes me laugh when Willow is helping Dawnie with her homework and they are acting out a triangle and Willow calls Xander obtuse. Obtuse. That's a funny word.

 

[thetopher]

You're just lumping in a lot of very loosely connected ideas and trying to form a rule for the verse which simply doesn't exist.

Nope, it's actually themactically important that bad decisions have and are seen to have) negative consequences for a character.
When the Buffy writers fail to hold a character to account for their actions its always noticed by some fan or other and is commented upon. See Xander summoning sSeet or the like.

Anyway, whatever. My main point is that Buffy is held to account for her actions in S6 (even though she is the victim of attempted rape) and Spike is not.

 

[The Bronze]

Anyway, whatever. My main point is that Buffy is held to account for her actions in S6 (even though she is the victim of attempted rape) and Spike is not.

Held to account by whom? Spike says she used him while rambling in the church I believe. Buffy then herself says she used him and was trying to punish herself. It's the two parties involved vocalising what happened. She's not dragged before a court to explain herself. They also talk about Spike's side of things various times from 7 onwards including plenty of apologies.

Wood then does a pretty solid job of holding Spike accountable for past actions committed without a soul. 
A few more examples of people not being held to account in the verse:

1. Giles drugs Buffy and pretty much leaves her for dead by allowing her to patrol etc. in helpless. Accountability? One line from Buffy and never mentioned again after the episode.

2. Joyce attempts to have Buffy, Willow and Amy burnt alive in Gingerbread. Accountability? None, not a thing.

At what point would you say the rule doesn't exist rather than everyone is an exception to it?

 

[thetopher]

Held to account by whom?

Uh, the writers?
The writers are the ones who came up with the rape plot and then fail to follow up on it. It's awful, but Spike's speech was deliberately rewritten to draw attention to the fact that it was Buffy who used him.

Then there's most of Buffy's part in 'LMPTM' which is written to draw attention again to Buffy's terrible behaviour during S6 and how she and Spike used each other.

Then there's the conversation in 'Never Leave Me' between the two of them, again drawing attention to Buffy's unhealthy behaviour- 'remember how she abused Spike, Spike who stalked the depressed chick incessently until Buffy caved.' Poor Spike. 🙄

1. Giles drugs Buffy and pretty much leaves her for dead by allowing her to patrol etc. in helpless. Accountability? One line from Buffy and never mentioned again after the episode.

Giles also saves a weakened Buffy and Joyce from a vampire in the same episode. Giles then gets fired as a direct result of ignoring orders and going to rescue Buffy. Loses his position, salary, etc. Is replaced by Wesley, spends mostof S4 utterly obsolete only to return in S5 when Buffy asks him to.

I actually think that the writers should have had more Buffy/Giles emotional fallout from this but to say there are no consequences for Giles is ignoring a lot of what happens.

2. Joyce attempts to have Buffy, Willow and Amy burnt alive in Gingerbread. Accountability? None, not a thing.

Joyce was mind-controled by a demon. Just like I don't call out Willow for trying to ax-murder Xander while being under a love-spell. Diminished responsibility.

There are exceptions (I even drew your attention to one) but in general its a rule of the show, and the fact that Spike's actions in 'Seeing Red' are ignored by everybody after the first couple of episodes is inexcusable. If the writers didn't know how to deal with it properly they shouldn't have thought it up in the first place.

 

[The Bronze]

Giles also saves a weakened Buffy and Joyce from a vampire in the same episode. Giles then gets fired as a direct result of ignoring orders and going to rescue Buffy. Loses his position, salary, etc. Is replaced by Wesley, spends mostof S4 utterly obsolete only to return in S5 when Buffy asks him to.

I actually think that the writers should have had more Buffy/Giles emotional fallout from this but to say there are no consequences for Giles is ignoring a lot of what happens.

There are no consequences for Giles after he drugs Buffy. He has negative consequences when at the last minute he stops being a dick and tries to help. The writers then dish out punishment for his good decision. This is the exact opposite of how you're saying the rules of the verse are set up.

Joyce was mind-controled by a demon. Just like I don't call out Willow for trying to ax-murder Xander while being under a love-spell. Diminished responsibility.

I don't really buy this as an excuse for Joyce. She's just gullible as far as I can tell. Funny how the spell didn't affect Buffy, Amy, Willow, Xander, Giles and so on. Diminished responsibility is fine for the love spell on both Willow and Joyce and the entire female population but not in this case.

 

[thetopher]

There are no consequences for Giles after he drugs Buffy. He has negative consequences when at the last minute he stops being a dick and tries to help.

I doesn't matter that he eventually did the right think because he first did the wrong thing of his own free will.
I never said that there had to be a logical progression in the story (that was your argument) all I said is that the viewer usually expects the character to suffer for their bad decision/betrayal after the fact. This does happen to Giles- he betrays Buffy and, karmically, he suffers for it.

I've also partially agreed with you in the fact that I don't feel the personal betrayal of the act is addressed throughly enough. But Spike's ins't addressed at all, whist Buffy's behaviour is- overall its the double standard that I resent.

And as I've said it sometimes doesn't happen- Andrew is another example of somebody who never has to face the consequences of his actions, (murdering Jonathan in coldblood, any of the things he did in S6 actually, creating a demon in S8, his violation of Buffy in S9, the list goes on...) or Anya really. It's one of the reasons why I dislike those characters so much.

Also Wood was eventually shown to be in the wrong (although Spike not giving a shit about his actions is telling) in his taking revenge on Spike. Wood hits Spike around a bit and then Spike more than retailates- he spits on the memory of Wood's mother.

I don't really buy this as an excuse for Joyce. She's just gullible as far as I can tell. Funny how the spell didn't affect Buffy, Amy, Willow, Xander, Giles and so on.

Joyce was the first to find the bodies, I also got the impression that the demon specifically targeted parents with its ability.
After all Snyder wasn't affected by the demon (he was just pleased with the new ammount of draconian powers he had) and neither was the Mayor so it wasn't adults. In the end the mob seemed to be made up of all parents.
I'll admit that it's been a while since I've seen the episode- I'm watching it on Friday so I'll have ot check that last part.

But I mean, Joyce was going to burn her daughter alive and you seriously think she was in her right mind? When has Joyce even done anything to indicate that she was, y'know, murderously psychotic towards Buffy?

 

[The Bronze]

If Giles doesn't drug Buffy then he loses his job and faces all the same consequences anyway. The writer's aren't showing a message of do a bad thing and face the consequences, just that sometimes shit happens. Some people make bad decisions and bad things happen to them, some people make bad decisions and nothing comes of it. That's life and that's what's on the show. You've brought up Anya and Andrew as well and it just goes to show that it's different for everyone.

I have a pretty low opinion of Joyce I have to admit. I think lots of her parenting is negligent. So I'll concede the magic / demon effect might carry some weight here. I just find it a bit difficult to swallow when so much of the town wasn't under the influence. You might be onto something with the only effecting parents part. I always thought that people with a bit of knowledge of the supernatural could see through the witch hunt stuff.

 

[thetopher]

Okay, how about I just prefer it when there are consequences for a characters bad actions. I do maintain that it does tend to happen most of the time, and when the writers are at least trying.
When it doesn't I tend to dislike the character involved. Maybe that's unfair but really, when the writers are trying so hard to make us like/respect/admire a character through such blatent manipulation, they could at least have other characters comment on how he hurt Buffy instead of hoping that we'd forget.


And if Joyce hadn't had direct contact with the demon (she seems to be the only one who sees the dead kids) then I would be a lot more unforgiving of her. As it is I think she was the most strongly affected of the parents and this helped explain why it got past her 'lack of ignorance' about the supernatural.

 

[The Bronze]

Okay, how about I just prefer it when there are consequences for a characters bad actions.

That seems about right. So to swing this back round to somewhere near the topic, does it annoy you when Angel is rewarded for his bad actions rather than punished? For example he leaves everyone to a slow and painful death at the Hyperion Hotel, which I'd say is a bad thing. Yet a few years down the line he's rewarded for this with a cheap deal on the place? Then when he erases the memories of his closest friends he's rewarded with a CEO position, penthouse apartment and garage full of super cars.

 

[thetopher]

It does actually, but then I see the 'Have You Now Or Have You Even Been' as more of a foreshadowing of his coming schism from the group- the first discovery that Angel might not always have been a goody-goody- broody pants. 😉

But you could also see the whole Hyperion as simply people giving in to their worst instincts (I'm not convinced it was any sort of powerful mind control- just playing on peoples fears, if they were weak enough they gave in, but that's just me) and then getting what was coming to them,
Angel didn't do anything evil exactly, he did try to help them- then was betrayed, then failed to prevent something bad from happeningby just giving up.
It was a dark decision but I understood it, Angel's still a work in progress at this stage.

The W&H deal though leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Angel did it all (somewhat) out of his love for Connor and wanting to give him a better life, but the tons of perks annoyed the hell out of me (the cars, the magic glass, the penthouse, etc).
In fact the whole of S5 just seems...morally comprimised (its part of its appeal for many- dark and murky), which it seems is why the nicest character (Fred) pays the heaviest price- it's totally not fair and that's sort of the point.

I guess overall I never think that Angel thrives because of his greyer choices or gets away with anything when it comes to his tough decisions, he feels the weight of them. And he's content I think, by the end of S5 to go out in a blaze of glory and die if it means stopping a great evil coming to pass. I always like the 'doomed hero' quality that he has.
In the end Angel asks all his allies if they want to join him and I think, if none of them had, he still would've gone ahead and done it on his own anyway.

I like that Angel doesn't believe in Shanshu anymore, I like that he knows that he's doomed (jeesh, especially after Twilight) but keeps on fighting anyway, I like that he stays away from Buffy because he knows that its best for both of them. I like it when he doesn't get content with his lot in unlife...because when he does, that's when his 'asshole' gene kicks in and he starts with the 'grand sweeping gesture', thing which in turn fouls everything up.