Why Did Buffy Trust And Defend Spike?

[ladydorotea]

Angel was "brainwashed" by the Gypsies but chose to be a hero, himself.

Angel was not 'brainwashed by Gypsies to be 'a hero himself'. He was cursed with a soul.

To quote from the creator himself :"With a soul comes a more adult understanding. That is again, a little vague, but… can I say that I believe in the soul? I don’t know that I can. It’s a beautiful concept, as is resurrection and a lot of other things we have on the show that I’m not really sure I can explain and I certainly don’t believe in. It does fall prey to convenience, but at the same time it has consistently marked the real difference between somebody with a complex moral structure and someone who may be affable and even likable, but ultimately eats kittens. "

After years of doing nothing, and at least one instance of feeding off a victim, he decided to be truly good and not merely neutral. That, again, was his own choice and was not the result of the interference of any person or any magic.

Because he had a soul - so he could make a selfless decision. Vampire without a soul will 'eat kittens' without much of a blink of an eye - it the eating process does not interfere with his digestion or current agenda. Generally speaking a souled vampire can be equated with human - 'complex moral structure' wise. Or so the creator of the series tells us. So, S7 circa Spike Spike should be trustworthy - as much as any human being is. No more - no less.

Vampire who 'gets a soul for himself' is in a sense an oxymoron - until you remember the 'complex moral structure' clause. If one vampire can be convinced that cutting off ones nose will get them ice cream - and if getting ice cream would be worth living the rest of the un-life without a nose - a vampire might as well go for it. It does not make them heroic - just ice-cream addict.

 

[BangelsBetter]

Because If she didn't he probably would have tried to rape her again. I myself have never been a victim of a rape attempt. But I would try my best to stay on my rapers good side so he doesn't try to rape me again.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

[MENTION=9316]ladydorotea[/MENTION]: I think you misunderstood me. I was actually attempting to say exactly what you did with regard to considering a souled vampire's actions. 🙂

Angel was not 'brainwashed by Gypsies to be 'a hero himself'. He was cursed with a soul.

What I said was in response to a comment that said that Angel was only good because he was "brainwashed." I responded:
"Angel was "brainwashed" by the Gypsies but chose to be a hero, himself."
Again, as you've said, he was given the soul but he chose to be a hero. The soul alone was not what made him good.

Generally speaking a souled vampire can be equated with human - 'complex moral structure' wise. Or so the creator of the series tells us. So, S7 circa Spike Spike should be trustworthy - as much as any human being is. No more - no less.

I think if you re-read my earlier post you'll see that that's exactly what I was saying as well. 🙂 And to reiterate: vampires with souls should not necessarily be judged more harshly than human beings merely because of their composition. Vampires transgress by nature and so do humans. Vampires with souls who attempt to redeem themselves should be shown the same consideration as humans who attempt to do the same, (ie Willow as in the previous example).

LD, We've had lots of arguments on here but this time we're on the same page. 😉...

EDIT: except for that last paragraph you just added, but I'll leave that, haha.

 

[ladydorotea]

[MENTION=9316]ladydorotea[/MENTION]: I think you misunderstood me. I was actually attempting to say exactly what you did. 🙂



What I said was in response to a comment that said that Angel was only good because he was "brainwashed." I responded:
"Angel was "brainwashed" by the Gypsies but chose to be a hero, himself."
Again, as you've said, he was given the soul but he chose to be a hero. The soul alone was not what made him good.

I beg to disagree and to clarify the disagreement - without a soul Angel ( and any other vampire) was incapable of becoming good. Soul created a potential that eventually was realized. Without a soul he would have remained a monster.

I think if you re-read my earlier post you'll see that that's exactly what I was saying as well. 🙂 And to reiterate: vampires with souls should not necessarily be judged more harshly than human beings merely because of their composition. Vampires transgress by nature and so do humans. Vampires with souls who attempt to redeem themselves should be shown the same consideration as humans who attempt to do the same, (ie Willow as in the previous example).

LD, We've had lots of arguments on here but this time we're on the same page. 😉...

EDIT: except for that last paragraph you just added, but I'll leave that, haha.

I only follow Joss' explanation here - which begs to differ between kitten-eating affable soulless demons - who are fully charismatic and can be mistaken for having a consciousness - and souled beings who actually can fathom as to 'why' eating babies of any species is kind of questionable - moral wise - regardless of how delicious and nutritious they are.

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=9316]ladydorotea[/MENTION]

Angel actually did not physically kill a single Slayer so far *by his own hand*

So they retconned it already?

Hacks. Bloody hacks.
[MENTION=11975]Always Bangel[/MENTION]

After all, the souls that Angel and Spike get back are theirs to begin with. That's who they were before they were turned. I understand how it's not a natural thing, you're right when you say that it's done through magic and power, but that doesn't make them an abomination. Angel and Spike, when they were turned into vampires, had their lives and personalities stolen from them. Giving them back doesn't seem like brainwashing.

William and Liam are dead. Squeezing their souls into magically animated corpses doesn't turn those corpses into living beings both William and Liam were. They're gone. A soul doesn't turn a vampire into the person the vampire's body belonged to. You just have a demon that animates a corpse with a human soul on top of it. It's an artificial construct, prone to malfunction and manipulation.

It cannot be trusted.

If he was the one who chose it, how is that, in any form, brainwashing?

Voluntary or not, it is still brainwashing. An artificial change forced with magic.

And Spike changes dramatically.

No. No. No. No. No. That's a lie perpetuated by some of Spike's fans. Spike never changes, ever. He's a character with virtually no character development throughout the series. He was obsessed with his mother, then with Cecily, then with Drusilla and finally with Buffy. Everything he does is a byproduct of that obsession. Everything. The only factor that changes are women.
[MENTION=11014]Gum Gnome33[/MENTION]

Unless the vampire goes and does it for himself, voluntarily. If a vampire himself is the one who makes the official change to benevolent by getting his own soul back, then half the "magic" is in his own ability to make the decision.

Again, voluntary brainwashing is still brainwashing and a decision to make a change is not a change. You know what would be a real change? Spike becoming good without a chip in his head, without Buffy and without William's soul. That would be a real change, but such a transgression is beyond the grasp of a vampire. Unlike humans, they are incapable of it.

This sounds a whole lot like humanity to me.

You're wrong.

Angel was "brainwashed" by the Gypsies but chose to be a hero, himself. After years of doing nothing, and at least one instance of feeding off a victim, he decided to be truly good and not merely neutral. That, again, was his own choice and was not the result of the interference of any person or any magic.

No. Angel started fighting evil as soon as two years after his ensouling and became a regular champion during First World War. It was a result of gypsies' spell, nothing else. He started doing nothing again in the 70s but got back into business because of Whistler's interference.

 

[dexeded]

William and Liam are dead. Squeezing their souls into magically animated corpses doesn't turn those corpses into living beings both William and Liam were. They're gone. A soul doesn't turn a vampire into the person the vampire's body belonged to. You just have a demon that animates a corpse with a human soul on top of it. It's an artificial construct, prone to malfunction and manipulation.

It cannot be trusted.

It's debatable what a soul really is in the Buffyverse, since there's really never been a concrete explanation of it. One possiblity is that it introduces moral responsibility and understanding to the host; another is that it is the host itself (like William or Liam themselves). One point we agree on, however, is that the demon is also residing in the body. I don't see how a souled vampire committed to good cannot be trusted. Angel and Spike have proven that they can control their demon with the soul. The malfunction and manipulation you speak of, I can only link to The First's trigger, which has little to do with the soul's balance with the demon, but Spike's own traumatic memories. The First could do that to anyone, vampires or Slayer or human. The only crime Spike is guilty of with regards to the trigger is possessing enough strength to endanger people. Buffy, who is stronger than Spike, could have been implanted with a trigger, in which case she would be more dangerous.

Voluntary or not, it is still brainwashing. An artificial change forced with magic.

Magic is not artificial. It's been explained time and time again that magic is natural, one with the earth. Using magic to change things is not artificial. And even if it is, what's wrong with something artificial? This entire world is operating on electricity and technology, inventions humans create to harness natural energy.

No. No. No. No. No. That's a lie perpetuated by some of Spike's fans. Spike never changes, ever. He's a character with virtually no character development throughout the series. He was obsessed with his mother, then with Cecily, then with Drusilla and finally with Buffy. Everything he does is a byproduct of that obsession. Everything. The only factor that changes are women.


Again, voluntary brainwashing is still brainwashing and a decision to make a change is not a change. You know what would be a real change? Spike becoming good without a chip in his head, without Buffy and without William's soul. That would be a real change, but such a transgression is beyond the grasp of a vampire. Unlike humans, they are incapable of it.

I agree that Spike could not become truly good without the chip, Buffy, and the soul. But I think what you're failing to consider (also with regards to saying he has no character development) is that a catalyst is always needed to make a change, even for humans. Love was a permanent, overriding part of Spike. That's what doesn't change for him. But all the women were catalysts for his very real changes. And in AtS S5, Spike finally functions on his own without those women and chooses his own path.

You're wrong.

No, she's not. Human make the same mistakes all the time. Just look at war. History repeats itself. People are quite immutable.

No. Angel started fighting evil as soon as two years after his ensouling and became a regular champion during First World War. It was a result of gypsies' spell, nothing else. He started doing nothing again in the 70s but got back into business because of Whistler's interference.

Two years after his ensouling? That would be 1900. How did he start fighting evil then? If you're referring to the Boxer Rebellion, he wasn't fighting at all. He let evil things happen, but just didn't do evil things himself. That's basically his modus operandi for the better part of the century. WWI (all the way in 1943) seems to be the exception, and he was essentially forced to participate in the rescue. Only in 1996 does he commit to the fight against evil. He could have refused Whistler, but decided not to after seeing Buffy. Unlike Spike, his initial motivation was not purely because of Buffy, but because he saw something worth fighting for. Again, this is rooted in the catalyst factor I brought in earlier. Whistler and Buffy were catalysts; Angel made the choice.

 

[Vamp Jenny]

No. No. No. No. No. That's a lie perpetuated by some of Spike's fans. Spike never changes, ever. He's a character with virtually no character development throughout the series. He was obsessed with his mother, then with Cecily, then with Drusilla and finally with Buffy. Everything he does is a byproduct of that obsession. Everything. The only factor that changes are women.

Spike may be passionnate and act majorly depending on the women in his life, but that doesn't mean he never changes. Being dependent (that's how I interpret the way he gravitates around the women he loves) is only part of his personnality, not all of it. The first time Spike did something good, it wasn't because he loved Buffy. It was becuase he liked the earth as it was, with humans being like "Happy Meals walking around".

After he came back in Sunnydale in S4, he started helping the scooby-gang, but not by choice. Thenn, he got acclimated to them and started helping because he wanted to. But it took him a while before he realized that he loved Buffy. And if I remember correctly, he wasn't so thrilled about it at first... If you don,t want to be in love with somebody, why would you help them, except if it helps you too at the same time? Spike kept helping the gang because it served him to a certain point (i.e.: doing good didn't give him a headache).

Yes, eventually he kept on helping the gang because he loved Buffy. But he also loved Dawn like a little sister, he liked Willow and Tara, he even liked Xander to a certain extend.

He didn't help only because it was what Buffy wanted. There's way more to that and saying that he never changes and only goes the way his obsession does is you being a very bad judge of character, imo.

Again, voluntary brainwashing is still brainwashing and a decision to make a change is not a change. You know what would be a real change? Spike becoming good without a chip in his head, without Buffy and without William's soul. That would be a real change, but such a transgression is beyond the grasp of a vampire. Unlike humans, they are incapable of it.

Vampires have been depicted as monsters. They're supposed to be the ultimate paradoxe, a monster that looks like a human. But they used to be human, they used to have a choice to be either good or evil. So what, because they've been turned, they can't make a choice anymore? Or is it just that the choice of being evil is way easier to follow when you don't have a soul? I vote for the second option. It's not because whe haven't seen a vampire not be good without a soul that it couldn't be possible, especially in a universe where all other possibilities have been showed at one point or another. Spike and Angel went through different path, both leading to the same end, their soul restored. But that doesn't mean that if they never got their soul back, they wouldn't have changed in the same way, just on a longer run... You can't get proof of how vampires can turn out when given the real choice to be either good or evil with the same path and consequences.

No. Angel started fighting evil as soon as two years after his ensouling and became a regular champion during First World War. It was a result of gypsies' spell, nothing else. He started doing nothing again in the 70s but got back into business because of Whistler's interference.

"Angel became a regular champion during World war 1...."??? Except if there is a comic out there that shows him being a hero, I can only recall one situation where he helped during the war. And it wasn't his choice. He wanted to be left alone, but the "government" wanted him to help and so they made sure he would help. I think I remember them threatening him at one point... Angel was (dare I say it? oh why not) pathetic after he got his soul back. I don't see him helping the Americans during any war, especially when he didn't care about it at all.

He started helping for good when Whistler came to him.

_________________

But this discussion is about Spike right? So here's my thoughts:

Buffy knew what having his soul was doing to Spike. She saw how tortured he was. despite the way they both had threated each other in the previous year, he had became a part of the gang to her. And having his soul back meant for her that he was good.

She believed in him, believed in what he could be. He was an ally and a friend. After all, wasn't he the first one she told about being in Heaven in S6? She obviously liked and trusted him.

And along the way of S7, when she was in need of someone to listen, to have her back, to keep her afloat, he was there. She knew he would always be there.

And of course she loved him. You'd have to be blind (or really don't want to) to not see it. She loved him enough to keep him close and protect him the same way she knew he'd protect her.

 

[Icarium]

(And, Bangels, if the Spuffies aren't allowed to use the "because she loved him and him alone" argument, neither can you use the "she had been hit in the head too many times by that time" argument)

But those are the only two explanations that make any sort of sense, to be honest. The rest of the season you might explain away somehow but her treatment of the trigger (a device which had absolutely nothing to do with whether Spike was a saint or a devil as it overrode Spike's free will) has to be explained with "Buffy was too stupid to think straight". Whether it was because she was blinded by love or because she generally had the mental capacity of a lemming that season depends on the interpretation. I have probably repeated that too many times but here goes - in Lies Joss Whedon Told Me she wasn't trusting Spike with her (and everyone else's) life, she was trusting The First, that's why many viewers think she (and the show) had completely lost the plot at that point.

Over the course of the series, at some point or another, Buffy, Willow, Xander, Angel, Spike, Wesley, Cordelia, Gunn, Oz and Riley are all either possessed, mind-controlled, brainwashed or turned evil through forces beyond their control. Should Buffy have killed all of them? Come on. Don't really see how that makes her an idiot.

And none of the above was allowed to roam free when they were possessed if the good guys could prevent it - see Oz when the moon is full, Hyena!Xander, Vamp!Willow, Buffy in Living Conditions, etc. That's why Spike's "I will be chained...but only occasionally... sort of like a half-pregnant woman, you see" nonsense sticks like a sore thumb.

Apparently that idiotic Disney princess saw something in Spike that everyone else missed, and she was, ultimately, proven right.

Why does this always come up? I mean, really? She was proven right because the big bad from another TV show sent some jewellery that Spike could wear, something she couldn't have possibly predicted? Or because Wood's actions committed behind her back led to the removal of the trigger, something which Buffy not only didn't see coming but worked actively to prevent? Or because the First was the biggest moron in the history of time and inexplicably didn't kill her and basically gifted her the Scythe? She was right only by writer's fiat. Might as well claim she was right to let Spike go in Halloween because she somehow predicted him saving the world...

The first time Spike did something good, it wasn't because he loved Buffy. It was becuase he liked the earth as it was, with humans being like "Happy Meals walking around".

No, it was because he loved Drusilla. Notice that once he gets he, Spike leaves, never mind that Buffy appears to be losing the fight and the world is about to be sucked in hell.

 

[Kean]

No. No. No. No. No. That's a lie perpetuated by some of Spike's fans. Spike never changes, ever. He's a character with virtually no character development throughout the series. He was obsessed with his mother, then with Cecily, then with Drusilla and finally with Buffy. Everything he does is a byproduct of that obsession. Everything. The only factor that changes are women.
[MENTION=11014]Gum Gnome33[/MENTION]

I agree with this, Spike has been following the same pattern since his mother. Though I'd add Angel in S5 of Ats to that list.

However, there may be out of verse explanation for this. A friend went to the Denver Con last week and she said that JM told the audience how he played Spike with a soul from day one. He said he had a kid to support and wanted the audience to like him so he played Spike in a way that would help him stay on the show. He went on to say that that was why he struggled with playing Spike when there was supposed to be a significant difference in his behaviour i.e. being chipped, soulled.

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=11500]drizzlydaze[/MENTION]

No, she's not. Human make the same mistakes all the time. Just look at war. History repeats itself. People are quite immutable.

Yes, she is. We're talking here about individuals and their individual mistakes, not humanity as a whole. And even if so, considering the percentage of people involved in wars throughout the ages, yes the humanity as a whole has also learned quite a lot.

Magic is not artificial.

I didn't say it was.

And even if it is, what's wrong with something artificial? This entire world is operating on electricity and technology, inventions humans create to harness natural energy

I find it most fortunate that you used the word "something" to describe a vampire with a soul, you even compared it to an invention, technology, a tool. Because that's what ensouled vampires are, they are tools. You don't trust your tools, you use them and you disable them when they malfunction so nobody gets hurt. Spike was a malfunctioning tool, yet Buffy didn't slay him because of her utter irresponsibility.

I don't see how a souled vampire committed to good cannot be trusted. Angel and Spike have proven that they can control their demon with the soul.

Because fighting evil is against their nature, no matter what they do and how much they are committed, in the end they cause even more pain and suffering. When they're evil it's bad, when they're "good" it's even worse. Buffy died because Spike in his infinite foolishness brought Dawn to Doc. Angel was a force for good until Angelus happened. And then Twilight. The cycle will keep on repeating. Who's going to die next because Angel or Spike want to play big damn heroes and get the girl? Dawn? Buffy, for good this time? Or maybe they'll actually destroy the world? That would be fun. I reckon Angel would still chase redemption in a post-apocalyptic everybody-is-dead type of wasteland.

The point is - even those committed vampires with a soul cannot be trusted. They are far too unreliable and prone to backfiring, more so than human beings. Willow had to develop an addiction to cocaine magic and had her girlfriend murdered to go dark and yet, she was able to pull back. For Angel it was sleeping with Buffy and talking to a dog. No, seriously. And magic had to be involved to make him "good" again.

[MENTION=11846]Vamp Jenny[/MENTION]

Vampires have been depicted as monsters.

They are monsters.

But they used to be human, they used to have a choice to be either good or evil. So what, because they've been turned, they can't make a choice anymore

Vampires did not use to be human. The body of a vampire used to belong to a human, that's all.

Vampires have been depicted as monsters. They're supposed to be the ultimate paradoxe, a monster that looks like a human. But they used to be human, they used to have a choice to be either good or evil. So what, because they've been turned, they can't make a choice anymore? Or is it just that the choice of being evil is way easier to follow when you don't have a soul? I vote for the second option. It's not because whe haven't seen a vampire not be good without a soul that it couldn't be possible, especially in a universe where all other possibilities have been showed at one point or another. Spike and Angel went through different path, both leading to the same end, their soul restored. But that doesn't mean that if they never got their soul back, they wouldn't have changed in the same way, just on a longer run... You can't get proof of how vampires can turn out when given the real choice to be either good or evil with the same path and consequences.

Uh...you don't prove a negative. I say, a vampire cannot change and become good without brainwashing. It's up to you to prove that they in fact can. Sorry, but that's how it works.

 

[Jodast]

To anybody this applies to: Please stop arguing over interpretations. You are all correct about things as you see them. There is no right or wrong answer. Not until Joss intervenes and tells us otherwise.

 

[dexeded]

Yes, she is. We're talking here about individuals and their individual mistakes, not humanity as a whole. And even if so, considering the percentage of people involved in wars throughout the ages, yes the humanity as a whole has also learned quite a lot.

So how can soulful vampires not change (unlike humans)? Still say it's the exact same degree of flexibility.

I find it most fortunate that you used the word "something" to describe a vampire with a soul, you even compared it to an invention, technology, a tool. Because that's what ensouled vampires are, they are tools. You don't trust your tools, you use them and you disable them when they malfunction so nobody gets hurt. Spike was a malfunctioning tool, yet Buffy didn't slay him because of her utter irresponsibility.

Aaaand now we're just arguing semantics. When I referred to 'something', I was referring to the process of attaining a soul, not a souled vampire. Why are ensouled vampires tools? The same way Slayers are tools? The PTB uses all white hats as tools for good. But they are their own person. As I said, the trigger could have happened to anyone, not just Spike. All of them could have been used as tools for The First.

But those are the only two explanations that make any sort of sense, to be honest. The rest of the season you might explain away somehow but her treatment of the trigger (a device which had absolutely nothing to do with whether Spike was a saint or a devil as it overrode Spike's free will) has to be explained with "Buffy was too stupid to think straight". Whether it was because she was blinded by love or because she generally had the mental capacity of a lemming that season depends on the interpretation. I have probably repeated that too many times but here goes - in Lies Joss Whedon Told Me she wasn't trusting Spike with her (and everyone else's) life, she was trusting The First, that's why many viewers think she (and the show) had completely lost the plot at that point.

Why does this always come up? I mean, really? She was proven right because the big bad from another TV show sent some jewellery that Spike could wear, something she couldn't have possibly predicted?

(This applies to EVIL UU and Icarium) Also, when you consider that The First wanted to use Spike himself, it shows that The First knew he was important. It's ridiculous to consider that The First wouldn't know how easily Buffy could have slayed him, which was quite possibly the point in the first place. Get him to do as much damage as he could, then get the hero herself to dispose of him. Because The First knew he was important, essential in the final fight. We're talking about an omniscient before-time force who has all the knowledge and all the power, and now, the opportunity to strike. So Buffy chose the path of chaining Spike up to stop him from harming people while still letting him live (so to speak) for the fight against evil. She knew The First thought he was important, and she was right. She couldn't have predicted it, but The First did.

Or because Wood's actions committed behind her back led to the removal of the trigger, something which Buffy not only didn't see coming but worked actively to prevent? Or because the First was the biggest moron in the history of time and inexplicably didn't kill her and basically gifted her the Scythe? She was right only by writer's fiat. Might as well claim she was right to let Spike go in Halloween because she somehow predicted him saving the world...

They did try to take the trigger out with the Prokaryote stone. It didn't work, but they would've kept trying. The point is, right after that Wood's actions deactivated the trigger, so whether their efforts would have borne fruit in the end is void since it was already out.

Because fighting evil is against their nature, no matter what they do and how much they are committed, in the end they cause even more pain and suffering. When they're evil it's bad, when they're "good" it's even worse. Buffy died because Spike in his infinite foolishness brought Dawn to Doc.

That was pre-soul. In any case, his only fault here is having evil contacts, which is a given, since he's an evil vampire still.

Angel was a force for good until Angelus happened. And then Twilight. The cycle will keep on repeating. Who's going to die next because Angel or Spike want to play big damn heroes and get the girl? Dawn? Buffy, for good this time? Or maybe they'll actually destroy the world? That would be fun. I reckon Angel would still chase redemption in a post-apocalyptic everybody-is-dead type of wasteland.

I'll give you the point for Twilight. But as for Angelus... he is soulless, so he would obviously do evil. In any case, the two times (not counting the temporary happiness thing in AtS S1) Angel does lose his soul, there honestly isn't much damage done. First time: Jenny dies, a couple other innocents die, world fails to get sucked into hell. Second time: he kills the Beast and fails to kill a lot of people, insulting them instead. Contrast with all the apocalypses Angel has averted, the people he's saved... Yeah, Angel's more of a force for good than for evil. As for the pre-soul Angelus, he was soulless and evil, so yeah.

The point is - even those committed vampires with a soul cannot be trusted. They are far too unreliable and prone to backfiring, more so than human beings. Willow had to develop an addiction to cocaine magic and had her girlfriend murdered to go dark and yet, she was able to pull back. For Angel it was sleeping with Buffy and talking to a dog. No, seriously. And magic had to be involved to make him "good" again.

Again, the damage done during the brief periods of soullessness is really quite minimal. What you're basically saying is that the chances of getting their soul taken away are large enough for them to get a death sentence. No, because they do much more good than evil. For Spike, in the canon SPIKE comics, his soul was taken away, but he remained good. Quite a different case from Angel.

If, on the other hand, you mean that even while soulful and trying to do good, they do more damage than good--that's just plain false. Even working in W&H, Angel did more good than he could ever do in the Hyperion, with all his resources.

 

[Icarium]

Also, when you consider that The First wanted to use Spike himself, it shows that The First knew he was important. It's ridiculous to consider that The First wouldn't know how easily Buffy could have slayed him, which was quite possibly the point in the first place. Get him to do as much damage as he could, then get the hero herself to dispose of him. Because The First knew he was important, essential in the final fight. We're talking about an omniscient before-time force who has all the knowledge and all the power, and now, the opportunity to strike. So Buffy chose the path of chaining Spike up to stop him from harming people while still letting him live (so to speak) for the fight against evil. She knew The First thought he was important, and she was right. She couldn't have predicted it, but The First did.

This makes no sense. If The First thought Spike was so dangerous his minions would have killed him, not triggered him. Since when has The First had the ability to see the future anyway? If it did then he is an even bigger idiot than I thought, and I consider him the dumbest villain in a TV show ever.

And in any event Buffy's blind trust in Spike didn't seem to have anything to do with the First considering Spike important or not. The First also considered faith and the Potentials important enough to try to to systematically wipe-out which indicated it felt threatened by them more than Spike whom he (inexplicably) spared but Buffy didn't trust those people at all compared to Spike.

 

[dexeded]

This makes no sense. If The First thought Spike was so dangerous his minions would have killed him, not triggered him. Since when has The First had the ability to see the future anyway? If it did then he is an even bigger idiot than I thought, and I consider him the dumbest villain in a TV show ever.

And in any event Buffy's blind trust in Spike didn't seem to have anything to do with the First considering Spike important or not. The First also considered faith and the Potentials important enough to try to to systematically wipe-out which indicated it felt threatened by them more than Spike whom he (inexplicably) spared but Buffy didn't trust those people at all compared to Spike.

Then consider that the danger Spike posed was easily dealt with by chaining him in the basement rather than staking him. No doubt Buffy had some emotional attachment to him and thought he deserved a shot at redemption, so she chained him up and then attempted to get the trigger out.

(Also, I do think The First was the dumbest villain in a TV show ever.)

 

[EVIL UU]

So how can soulful vampires not change (unlike humans)?

Because they are dead. Change is an attribute of life and life only. Vampire with a soul is still a vampire, just a brainwashed one.

there honestly isn't much damage done. First time: Jenny dies, a couple other innocents die

Again, the damage done during the brief periods of soullessness is really quite minimal. What you're basically saying is that the chances of getting their soul taken away are large enough for them to get a death sentence. No, because they do much more good than evil.

Morality isn't some abstract scale with good deeds and bad deeds. The death of even a single innocent is a huge thing when the entire reason behind Slayer's existence is the protection of the innocents. Angel is like a paramedic and a serial killer, saves lives most of the time but once in a while goes on a killing spree, but it's fine because hey, he saves more lives after all, right?

WRONG.

See: "Dead Things". The scale concept is how a vampire understands the morality, a view which Buffy, myself here and the rest of humanity disagree with.

A paramedic serial killer like Angel needs to be stopped before he kills any more innocents, he needs help ( put a chip into his head just to make sure, lock him away, turn him into a human...whatever ) or he simply needs to be SLAIN.

he deserved a shot at redemption

Vampires are beyond redemption. It's not redemption when you have to brainwash them first.

 

[Robb Stark]

Morality isn't some abstract scale with good deeds and bad deeds. The death of even a single innocent is a huge thing when the entire reason behind Slayer's existence is the protection of the innocents. Angel is like a paramedic and a serial killer, saves lives most of the time but once in a while goes on a killing spree, but it's fine because hey, he saves more lives after all, right?

Okay, I don't think this is what anyone was saying at all, you're taking it way out of context. Angel's entire character arc over the course of the series is that he CAN'T ever make up for what Angelus has done. That's not the point.

I don't think we're going to agree on this, but the big issue seems to be that on the ground of a vampire having a soul still being capable of redemption. I think the show makes it very clear throughout that while true redemption may not be in the cards, forgiveness and trust are. We saw that very clearly in "Chosen" with Spike and that was pretty much the entire basis for Angel over 12 seasons.

I just don't think you get Angel and Spike.

 

[dexeded]

Morality isn't some abstract scale with good deeds and bad deeds. The death of even a single innocent is a huge thing when the entire reason behind Slayer's existence is the protection of the innocents. Angel is like a paramedic and a serial killer, saves lives most of the time but once in a while goes on a killing spree, but it's fine because hey, he saves more lives after all, right?

WRONG.

See: "Dead Things". The scale concept is how a vampire understands the morality, a view which Buffy, myself here and the rest of humanity disagree with.

...And yet Buffy disagrees with you as well. She thinks Angel and Spike should be given a second chance.

And I must not be a part of humanity, since I happen to believe--from a purely intellectual perspective--that Angel's good does outweigh the bad. Angel can never be redeemed, true, but he is still an asset to the side of good.

So the actual physical good Angel does outweighs the bad. Buffy feels he is not beyond forgiveness, so she keeps him around. Morally and physically, Angel is therefore an asset.

A paramedic serial killer like Angel needs to be stopped before he kills any more innocents, he needs help ( put a chip into his head just to make sure, lock him away, turn him into a human...whatever ) or he simply needs to be SLAIN.

If Angel were slain, what would happen to all the people he would have saved in the future? They would be dead. All because of 'What if he turns evil again?' Oh right, he might kill like two or three people. That sucks. And then dozens more people would die because souled Angel was not there to help them, on account of being dusted.

Vampires are beyond redemption. It's not redemption when you have to brainwash them first.

Yes, they are beyond redemption, but not beyond forgiveness. Again, I disagree with your brainwashing point, which I have addressed in one of my earlier posts that you did not reply to.