elisi | A little thought...

Oh, I totally agree. From his POV, Buffy had driven him to that point. Hence calling her a "bitch".

And the fact that he wasn't happy with who he was as a human didn't help, either--he didn't like the William side of himself and was always hiding it/trying to overcome it. So the fact that he had to call on William's soul to be, in his opinion, deserving of Buffy? Of course it wouldn't make him happy. :)

I don't think there's any evidence that the soul has a kind of human "personality" is there? Buffy called Spike "William" before he got the soul - thus implying that there is some kind of psychological continuity pre- and post-vamping - and getting their souls back didn't seem to make either Spike or Angel's personalities more similar to the way they were before losing their souls. I suspect that, because Spike himself thinks that he was still William post soul-loss (constructing "Spike" didn't happen until after he met Angel and took place over a period of time), he wouldn't associate the return of the soul with a return of "Williamness". In fact, I think there's plenty of evidence that he doesn't have a clue what effect regaining his soul might have, because he literally can't imagine it. He just thinks it'll make him Buffy's equal.

Hm...maybe I didn't word it right. I didn't mean to imply he was getting a personality transplant by getting the soul. I simply meant he must have feared the (as elisi so eloquently quoted) "fluffy puppy"-ness side of himself (which I think he does associate with his human self) taking over as Angel seemed to have been taken over by his soul.

As elisi originally stated, "demonic suicide". But I agree with you that he probably couldn't imagine what'd really happen. I'm just thinking about what could have been going through his mind--and all he had for reference, really, was Angel and his human self, neither of which he liked very much!

Buffy had driven him to that point. Hence calling her a "bitch".
*nods*

As

azdak pointed out it might not have been 'William' particularly, but seeing that the soul turned Angelus into 'a big, fluffy puppy with bad teeth' must have been bad!

That always seem the obvious answer to the question of why he was angry to me--he was really was angry at Buffy, and he was angry at himself as well. And he was scared and devastated and confused, and covering up all of the above with anger and bluster.

Oddly, many of the people who object to the idea that Spike could both be angry with Buffy and love her enough to get a soul are perfectly fine with the idea that Spike and Angel can have a love/hate realtionship in which they simultaneously care deeply for one another and want to beat the shit out of each other.

Yeah, I wasn't really suggesting that it was a new idea! ;) And I absolutely get your point re. A/S - it's the same with people who want to pair Spike with Illyria (who seems to treat him a lot worse than Buffy did in S6...).

Also it's good to keep in mind Spike's speech about love from 'Lovers Walk'. :)

Hm, I don't think Spike and Illyria are really comparable--sure, they have some sparring matches, but they are very explicitly sparring matches. Illyria's not beating him up to make herself feel better, and Spike is obviously enjoying the challenge. And most importantly, there's not really an emotional component in it for either of them. Illyria finds Spike amusing and entertaining, and Spike seems to be the only person on the show who sees Illyria as Illyria, rather than trying to hold on to bits of Fred (Wesley), or simply seeing her as something to be wiped out (Angel).

I think it would be very difficult to write a Spike/Illyria romance because Illyria is so alien and both of them are still moping over Wesley and Buffy, but I could see them becoming orgasm buddies.

I could see them becoming orgasm buddies.
Heh. I do have a weakness for Spillyria I must admit - I was thinking more about those who pair him up with pretty much anyone else apart from Buffy, because he's too good for her!

Oh - and I keep forgetting to ask this! You mentioned in a post (last week?) that the writers used Spike getting his soul as a way of bringing back metaphors in S6. What do you see Spike's soul as a metaphor for? I'm writing an essay on the whole thing and I'd love to know what you thought when you said that. Thank you! :)

Well, it's just that the soul, in Spike's case, is a metaphor for becoming a better person. If they'd wanted to, they could have foregone the metaphor, and just done it with plain old-fashioned character development--have Spike realize that what he'd done to Buffy horrified him, perhaps initially blame it on the chip and really go to Lurky to get it take out...and then discover that even with the chip gone, he still feels like crap about hurting Buffy, and has to acknowledge to himself that he really has changed--maybe not as much as Buffy wants, but it's not due to the chip making him soft, or whatever other excuses he's been giving himself. And then he'd have to figure out where to go from there, without magical assistance or a get-out-of-attempted-rape-free card. And he and Buffy might actually have been forced to deal with all the issues between them instead of shoving them under a rug with "He's got a soul now!"

But that would have shaken the foundations of canon. (Which I don't think is a bad thing, necessarily, but it seems to have scared the bejezus out of ME.) They didn't want to do that. Perhaps more to the point, as David Fury once said, to have Spike succeed where Angel didn't even try would make Angel look bad. And they didn't want to do that, either. So instead of just having Spike become a better person through character development, they slapped soul in him in order to preserve the elements of canon that they wanted to preserve.

it's just that the soul, in Spike's case, is a metaphor for becoming a better person
Now I don't think so. Getting his soul back didn't make Angel a better person. The soul creates the *possibility* of becoming better - the choice is still up to the person in question. Because if there's anything to learn from S6 it's that souls don't make us 'good'. All the Scoobies have soul when they screw up - what it means in Spike's case is that he's finally 'up to their level' as it were.

I dealt with all of this at great length in my humongous soul-essay of course, but I did come up with a neat analogy there that I never expanded: Vampires are colourblind. They can see all the same colours (emotions, whatever), but can't see 'the hidden picture'. The extraordinary thing is that after the AR Spike becamse aware that there *was* a picture. But without the soul he would never be able to see it. I think that knowing what the problem is, is only the first step. If you don't do something about it, what's the point?

he and Buffy might actually have been forced to deal with all the issues between them instead of shoving them under a rug with "He's got a soul now!"
I keep disagreeing I'm afraid! *g* Because I don't think they could ever have dealt with it as long as he was soulless. He quite simply didn't understand why the relationship was wrong in the first place - didn't undestand what she meant when she said she was using him, didn't understand why she was so upset about Katrina... he didn't even understand why she couldn't let herself love him. Yes he developed a great deal, but there was no further he could go. A soul *was* character development.

(I'm really hoping that makes sense, because I'm meltingly hot and I think my brain has turned into goo!)

Lots and lots of sense. Good stuff! Inane comments! Yay!

Now I don't think so. Getting his soul back didn't make Angel a better person.

It didn't? Then why didn't he eat that baby when Darla asked him to? *g*

That's why I said that they were using a very different metaphor for Spike than for Angel, but they didn't do enough work to establish that it was different.

And of course they could have developed Spike further without a soul--if that's what they'd wanted to do. He's a fictional character, and he is what the writers make him. They could have turned him purple and given him wings, if they'd wanted to. But they didn't want to do that; they wanted to do something else--something that would preserve certain themes and pieces of canon that they saw as important. All writers do that: write what serves the story they want to tell.

Then why didn't he eat that baby when Darla asked him to? *g*
Why did Lindsey help the children in 'Blind Date'? *g*

they were using a very different metaphor for Spike than for Angel
I see what you mean, esp. since Angelus was EVIL OMG! But in favour of my side I think I should point out that in Becoming it seemed that Angel had done absolutely nothing good with his soul at all until he saw Buffy. Stinky rat-eating Angel really wasn't 'good' in any measurable way.

They could have turned him purple and given him wings, if they'd wanted to.
Bwah! You know I think I've read a fic that goes like that... Um, but yes, of course they could have done anything at all. But much as I love Spike I don't see why they should break canon just for the sake of one character. Unless they went the David Fury 'Spike kept a bit of his soul' way which I'm sure is not what you meant.

Anyway, I don't ship Buffy with unsouled Spike, so I'm very happy that they gave him his soul back. :)

Then why didn't he eat that baby when Darla asked him to? *g*
Why did Lindsey help the children in 'Blind Date'? *g*

Because, in both cases, they felt a pang of conscience. (Lindsey says as much; he'll do a lot of bad things, but hurting children is a line he's not willing to cross.) Which neither of them would have felt if they didn't have a soul. I'm not saying that having a soul makes you the best person you can be. But in the Jossverse, it makes you a better person than someone without a soul, because you can at least be pricked by conscience even if you choose to ignore those prickings. Pre-Buffy Angel was not a hero, certainly, but he was indisputably a better person than Angelus.

(And I'm also not saying that an unsouled being might not also have chosen to save the baby or the children, for other reasons. But they would not have done it purely because it was the right thing to do--and that is what Angel did with the baby.)

The writers of a show cannot break canon, because they are the writers of the show. They MAKE canon. Canon does not exist as some inviolate platonic ideal which they are transcribing. They create it. They change it. And they 'break' canon every time they implement an idea which contradicts previously established canon. In the Jossverse, there are many, many examples of the writers 'breaking' their own canon when they felt it would make a good story--like, for example, there can only be one Slayer at a time. In this case, they decided not to go there, for reasons that were good and sufficient for them.

Personally, I don't think that making Spike act exactly like a souled human without a soul would be a good idea. But I wasn't interested in seeing Spike become exactly like a souled human. I've already seen that story with Angel. But they gave him a soul, made him Angel Lite Now With 30% Less Brooding Angst! I just have to shrug and accept that.

Since Spike has zero chance of ever ending up with Buffy in canon because of the attempted rape, I don't think the soul made them any more shippable. (In fact, even less shippable, because the self-hate and self-doubt the soul engenders was instrumental in convincing him that she doesn't love him. And that's when Spike moves on, when he really believes that there is no chance.) But soul or no soul, he's always going to be tainted and unworthy of Buffy in the eyes of the canon writers.

Sadly I have nowhere near enough time to answer this properly. Can I direct you to my essay on souls and stuff instead, where I dealt with a lot of the issues you've put forward? Pretty please?

(And as for Spike being Angel Lite - see icon! *g*)

I do keep meaning to read it, honest!

The thing is, though, I've read a million essays on why the soul is a great thing. And for the people who wrote those essays, it is. It's a way of dealing with the subject that speaks to them, which touches them deeply. It just doesn't speak to me in that way. There are several things ME could have done to tell the story they wanted to tell more effectively, but even if they had done those things, it still wouldn't really be the story I was hoping to see. Which is fine; it is, after all, their story. And at this late date, I don't expect to convince anyone that one story is better than the other. All I can do is say that X did or did not work for me, and this is why it did or didn't work for me.

I do keep meaning to read it, honest!
The number of things I say that about... *sigh* Why doesn't fandom pay?

Although I feel I should maybe point out that the essay is in two parts - the first part is quite simply my replies to your very eloquent response to

peasant_'s post about redemption (if you remember that still?), so quite literally 'what *I* like in a story'. The second half is a lot more meandering, trying to work out the meaning of the soul in the Buffy verse. So if either (or both) sound too much like already covered territory, feel free to ignore it!

Sorry my brain is just *not* working today! Just realised that 'I'd love to know what you thought when you said that.' sounds all wrong. *facepalm* Sorry. I'm just curious as to your interpretation. And I think I'll go away and stop attempting to communicate anymore.

Aww, but I want to pair Illyria with Xander, and complete his "demon chicks attracted to me" list. :-)

Really, good post.

Also, you mentioned somewhere in the massive pile of comments on your last post that you would check the shooting script for "Intervention" - is that available for sale somewhere? I thought only seasons 1 through the middle of 3 were out, with a couple of extras (like "Chosen," "Once More, With Feeling," etc).

Aw, thank you! :)

is that available for sale somewhere
If you give me your e-mail address I can send you a little surprise. :)

millernumber1@gmail.com

Surprise? Not like "It's your 17th birthday so I'll go evil and kill all your friends" surprise, right? :-)

Heh. No - nothing like that. But you'll have to wait until tomorrow though!

Gosh, he's amazing. (is smitten)

Heh. *is smitten too*

I think he was angry simply because he suddenly understood that he was stuck. Trapped by his love for Buffy, trapped by his vampiric nature, trapped by the chip. He couldn't quit loving her, but couldn't stop being a vampire and at the same time he couldn't be a "complete" vampire because of the chip. He couldn't go forward and he couldn't go back. He was screwed. Spike is a creature in motion, being stuck is unbearable for him. He might have sung he was Buffy's "willing slave" (which btw recalls courtly love)but basically as a character he has always wanted freedom.

The soul quest was a way out!

Also...I wanted to add that calling Buffy a "bitch" first showed his frustration echoing the famous "Out. For. A. Walk. Bitch" and secondly hinted at Spike's lines in OMWF during the "Walk Through The Fire" song :

I hope she fries
I'm free if that bitch dies!
[tosses cigarette away angrily, then jumps up]
I better help her out

The frustrated angry man and the Champion-ready-to-fight-for-his-lady were both in OMWF and both still there when Spike left Sunnydale for his soul quest.

There's a lot of consistency in the writing!

Lots of excellent points! :) And thanks for re-posting it all in

lateseasonlove, we love good thoughts.

A little thought...

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject