elisi | Angel meta.

Current Mood: bored

Entry tags:

angel

Angel meta.

This was written ages ago, and came about after reading various posts about Angel and people’s dissatisfaction with S5 (and Angel’s arc) etc. Not sure why I’m posting it now, but hey ho, no one bothered to comment on my fic and I’m bored and trying to tidy (and I'm IMPATIENT and want it to be tomorrow) and I need people talking to me.

ETA: Don't mention the comics. None of them. They're irrelevant to this post.

Basically, when it comes to Angel, then I've come to the conclusion that (IMO) Angel isn't a hero. He looks the part of a hero, and he can play the part, plus he quite likes the part... But it's not really him. Spike is effortlessly heroic - he follows his blood (heart) and he does the right thing more by instinct than design. (Ditto Buffy. And the Doctor etc.) But Angel... He started out as a bit of a lad, and when he became a vampire this slotted in beautifully with his former world view. Plus, he'd finally found something he was really good at. And then came the soul, and everything he ever was or had been was pulled out from underneath him, and all he could see was guilt. And he doesn't know what to do with that. The powers come along and dangle redemption and purpose and destiny and other shiny things in front of his nose and he feels that Yes, he can do this. He can be someone again. To quote Anna, because she always said it best:

He only sees the soul, the soul that is all that keeps him on the side of the good. It's a terrible paradox. If he accepts the guilt of his past, he makes a mockery of guilt, of repentance, because he feels it only because he is crippled with a soul. If he denies it, he denies the truth.

So he won't look within. He'll look without. He'll focus on destiny, on redemption, on the eternal balance between good and evil. And yes, there’s a Shanshu in his vocabulary. If he gets it right often enough, if he gets it right when it counts, there's a reward in this. Is it a reward? That's one I've talked about before. But is it really a reward for *him*? Or the just the reward that is owed the Champion he feels it's his duty to be? Really, what does Angel want? Does he even know that?

In my own post-NFA scenarios, Spike is always the more straightforward hero, and Angel the one who does what needs doing, the one getting his hands dirty, because he's given up on 'redemption', and just wants to do what he can to fix things - fighting against the dark side with their own weapons. I guess that's why I find some people's complaints about S5 and the show generally (he forgot about helping people! He never learns!) so difficult to get my head around, because in my mind he's exactly where he should be [at the end of NFA]. It's not pretty, but it's a place where he can just be himself. I started off by comparing him to Spike, because William - and by extension Spike - is a good man. Angel isn’t:

“It’s not the demon in me that needs killing, it’s the man.”

And now I’m just going to quote a huge chunk of this post by

shadowkat67, because she says it beautifully:

Angel the Series had the same set-up. Angel himself never really changes or evolves, but those around him do - except being a noir series, they don't get redeemed, instead they become corrupted by their association with Angel. Much as those surrounding Dexter and House slowly become corrupted. In Dexter, his sister's moral code is slowly eroding. And in House, all of his assistant's moral codes are eroding. The two who leave, do so, in part, because they can't handle it. This is the anti-hero set-up, where the audience is deluded into thinking that the writers intend to redeem the lead character, when actually they don't plan to do that at all - instead they plan on showing how the lead character's actions and outlook affects everyone around him. Everyone falls into the abyss - which is literally what did happen on Angel - everyone fell into hell, including the city they resided.

The lead never really changes in these shows. He never addresses his flaws. Or shows true remorse for his actions, if anything he continues to feel justified, and the moment he questions what he is doing - someone either close to him or another character will pat him on the head and say, no it is justified. He is surrounded by enablers.

I think what I’m trying to say is that is that I think Angel is a subversion of the hero trope. Possibly done in too straight a manner, but still... The writers readily admit that they didn't have a clue what to do with him, and just took him any- and everywhere. And I think that... letting him not worry about his redemption is the key. He gets it now and again, but with his W&H deal and then the final battle he's burnt his bridges. Presuming he survives, then he's signed away the shanshu - there's nothing in it for him. No pretty girl, no reward, no matter what he does. And I think that's good. I like that story.

There are echoes of it in Jack's story in Children of Earth - making a terrible choice (a choice which makes you a monster), in order to try to right a wrong/save the day/use the power you have. Generally because the character was the one to screw up in the first place/because people are often monsters. It's a very, very bleak world view, but I admire that it's carried through to the bitter end and not flinched away from. There are no magic fix-its, no way of going back, and 'sorry' would be an insult. (By the way, the Quor-Toth vids are some of my favourite vids EVER (esp I’m Not Driving Anymore and Cleansed by Fire), and show that gorgeous downwards spiral perfectly. You can blame them for me posting this, since they reminded me just how much I love S5...) To quote Anna again:

I've always loved Angel differently to the way I loved Buffy. Once upon a time I said that Buffy was character-driven where Angel is theme-driven, that sometimes in Angel it felt like the characters were subservient to the story. And now I start to see that that was the point of Angel; that it was about characters trying to be bigger than the story they were in. It was a battle, character versus story, and the answer was always that you could only fight your story so far. That in the end you'd have to seize your story, whichever point of that story you'd find yourself at, and make it yours. I think that's what Angel leaves with me. It's your story. Tell it.

Or, to quote the show, from the first and last episode of S5:

MATT
Did you get to the store?

BOY
They didn't have a lot. I got Punisher.

MATT
My dad won't let me read that.

BOY
Oh, man! It's so good. He kills everyone. You can borrow mine.

~~~

ANGEL
Give me the hell on Earth speech, Lindsey. I know how bad things are, how much sway the demons hold. I happen to be the greatest mass murderer you've ever met.

LINDSEY
Never given you props for that, have I?
[...]
Everybody goes on about your soul. Vampire with a soul. Nobody ever mentions the fact that you're really a vampire with big brass testes. This is gonna be a circus. I mean, win or lose, you're about to pick the nastiest fight since mankind drop-kicked the last demon out of this dimension.

That’s Angel. Redemption, helping people, all that jazz? Not his story. Because Angel?

(For the flipside to this, go read

girlpire's How Angel Saved My Life, which I love to tiny pieces - I adore Angel, he's one of my favourite characters ever. But I take him as he is.)

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

I agree with a lot of the things that you say here, although I see Angel's struggle with redemption a little bit differently. Part of the problem with Angel's quest is that, in his own words, 'it started with a girl.' This is one hundred percent not the right reason to try and be a better person, but it is so very in character with Angel that it is almost the only choice he can make.

Angel is not a good man. Period. He wasn't a good man as a human, he gloried in depravity as an unsouled vampire, and until he saw Buffy, he wallowed in guilt with a soul. In fact, as evidenced in Are You Now, Or Have You Ever Been, he pretty much didn't even care to try and do anything about the guilt, and would deliberately choose NOT to do good if he was pissed off.

So, like I said, Angel is not a good man. I think a part of him wants to be. He will even go through the motions of trying at times, but he will never succeed. In the end, though, that's why I adore him.

Uhg, I need move coffee before trying to be meta in the morning.

So, like I said, Angel is not a good man. I think a part of him wants to be. He will even go through the motions of trying at times, but he will never succeed. In the end, though, that's why I adore him.
Oh absolutely. I love him to TINY PIECES. He didn't want any of the stuff that gets thrown at him. Unfortunately for him, however, killing is the only thing he's really good at...

(And your meta is lovely. This post was deliberately stark and only looking at one side.)

Brilliant and really well written. I've never gotten the, "Mmmmmmmm, Angel!" thing or those who see him as heroic. NFA is simply hubris gone wild.

The thing is (and I just added this) - I love Angel enormously. I think he tries, but he's fighting his own nature every step of the way. Heroism doesn't come naturally to everyone. I don't want to put the guy down, I just get frustrated by people who get frustrated. ;)

Oh and thank you. :)

Edited 2011-09-30 12:45 (UTC)

nice. Shanshu = eternal reward, giving it up means being left with no, or at least less, meaning. Which I guess makes Angel our modern-day, jack the ripper, everyman. Buffy being our everywoman, of course. Betwixt, between.

Thank you. I just don't think Angel fits into the hero narrative at all, and is actually a rather clever subversion of people's expectations when seeing a dark, brooding guy in a long coat... ;)

ETA: Oh and very much yes to your 'everyman' observation.

Edited 2011-09-30 12:50 (UTC)

totally! Even from the beginning. He's all like, "um, buffy, some bad sh*t is coming down, so, um, good luck with that." I always thought it was bizarre that he didn't help more. Now I kind of get it.

I think he tries, but usually for the wrong reasons: not so much for others as for his allusive redemption.

Very good point. And one of the things I love so much about S5 is the way it highlights all of Angel's flaws by bringing in Spike and just letting him be himself.

(And this is also why they're so perfect for each other. *g*)

This whole post.

I agree with you about Angel. I like his character, but he isn't a terribly nice person. The foundation (Liam) was a bit rotten when he got turned, and he never had an internalized reason to do the right thing.

What you said re: the corruption of the other characters is something I hadn't thought of before. I mean, you see all of them learn and grow and become something more, particularly over the first couple of seasons. And then it all goes to hell in a hand basket.

One of the things I think I've seen in Ats is that Angel is motivated by external factors and forces. He has his guilt thrust upon him, he wants to get the girl, he wants to get the Champion's reward. Other characters are motivated by internal factors; they genuinely want to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.

this post & the timing of same makes me want to play a whedon/doctor parallels game ... :)

So very much yes to all of that! And it's why I love him so!

You're right about how he corrupts those around him though. I hadn't thought about it that way, but very true. In a sense it was Spike who was the only one not corrupted by season 5, wasn't it? Wes, Gun, Fred, and my beloved Lorne were all corrupted and none of them came out the other end, though Lorne physically survived. Huh, gonna have to think about that!

Work has been nuts and real life has been busy too. I totally missed that you updated My Immortal; gonna have to catch up tomorrow!

RTD and Joss playing with their dollies... (Srsly, those two? SO MANY similarities.)

Moffat plays on a lot of the same themes (since the shows overlap, rather, in what they do), but he likes subverting Teh Angst. :)

(Oh and River is Spike. I shall prove this when I have more time.)

ETA: Meant to use this icon...

Edited 2011-09-30 13:09 (UTC)

So very much yes to all of that! And it's why I love him so!
\o/ (Those two ought to be mutually exclusive, and yet... Oh Angel! <3)

You're right about how he corrupts those around him though. I hadn't thought about it that way, but very true.
Well that was all Shadowkat, and I had the same reaction.

In a sense it was Spike who was the only one not corrupted by season 5, wasn't it? Wes, Gun, Fred, and my beloved Lorne were all corrupted and none of them came out the other end, though Lorne physically survived. Huh, gonna have to think about that!
I always knew it, but it's nice to have a different angle. I love new angles! :)

Work has been nuts and real life has been busy too. I totally missed that you updated My Immortal; gonna have to catch up tomorrow!
Hope things calm down. *send hugs* And my update is CoE centric & angsty as hell. Just to warn you...

I agree with you about Angel. I like his character, but he isn't a terribly nice person. The foundation (Liam) was a bit rotten when he got turned, and he never had an internalized reason to do the right thing.
I'm always struck by William in FFL, telling Cecily "I'm a good man" with such absolute conviction. No wonder he becomes a champion. But Angel...

What you said re: the corruption of the other characters is something I hadn't thought of before. I mean, you see all of them learn and grow and become something more, particularly over the first couple of seasons. And then it all goes to hell in a hand basket.
Not *my* insight, but brilliant, isn't it? He tries, but he needs someone else to guide him. Except he's useless at letting other people be in control.

Other characters are motivated by internal factors; they genuinely want to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do.
You know, I think he wants that. He can see it. He tries. But because he extrnalises it, he gets it wrong.

Thanks -- great post. I have a problem with people who see themselves as heroic, being consciously heroic, even trying to be heroic. Again: hubris! That's Angel, what he's going for. Spike is just out there giving himself to helping others without thought for heroism. He just cares. Biiiiiiig difference.

I think I know that post off by heart...

And like you say, it pinpoints the difference perfectly.

I agree about avoiding the comics when discussing Angel. Once you add in the comics, things become... difficult.

Basically, when it comes to Angel, then I've come to the conclusion that (IMO) Angel isn't a hero. He looks the part of a hero, and he can play the part, plus he quite likes the part... But it's not really him.

This. I think the thing with Angel is that he wants to be the hero (for many reasons). It's a real and sincere desire, but deep down... that's not where his instincts necessarily lead him.

And it's not that he's inately evil... it's that he's inately arrogant. From the time he was yelling at his Father not to tell him what to do and making cracks about his father not knowing how to use dinnerware, Angel/Liam/Angelus has the overwhelming urge to be the top dog amd maker of all decisions. This urge then often leads to shortsighting and/or overweaning and/or selfish decisions...which then are often revealed to be poor ones. So even as he's trying quite desperately to do good, there are a host of pitfalls for him to fall into because he can't quite escape having an egocentric view of the where where he displays entitlement bias. Similar to Buffy's superior/inferior complex, Angel can't ever escape an inner sense that he's superior (be it in badness or goodness... or broodiness or regretfulness or annoitedness. He's always #1, even as he chooses different categories in which to compete.) The reason he flipped out so badly in Season 5 was that for a moment he had to consider that maybe he wasn't quite as special as he thought he was.

He got over it.

Anyway, Angel may have his fair share of broodiness and regret... but he's never been overly endowed with much humility.

Am running out the door, but just wanted to say that I agree with all of this, I think.

Plus, as Angelus he was top dog for 140 years. That sort of mentality doesn't go away easily.

ETA: The reason he flipped out so badly in Season 5 was that for a moment he had to consider that maybe he wasn't quite as special as he thought he was.

He got over it.
Well the thing is that he spent most of the time on his own show being told, over and over and over again, that he was Special. He was in prophecies. He would hold the fate of the world in his hand. He fathered an impossible child... Really, the list just goes on. It's no wonder his he got big headed.

And what he did in NFA was actually stop caring about what other people wanted him to be, and just strode out on his own, making other people play his game. Was this ridiculously big headed and arrogant? Oh yes. But I rather cheered him on as he decided not to be a pawn anymore. :)

Edited 2011-09-30 16:48 (UTC)

Interesting....Now, of course, I'll have to go back and rewatch...:-)

\o/

I'm pretty sure one of your reviews is what gave me one of the major keys to the character. :)

Um, yeah. It's all very sensical. (Not a real word, there.) So, I get the feeling this is in response to people saying that Angel in AtS S5 is OOC or something? Because I don't see that. It seems like the natural place the character would go, to me. It's just...I don't like him. The more time I spend with him, the less I like him. He's like the blueprint of "guys I don't like", minus the corrosive misogyny. (His brand of sexism tends toward the patriarchal "I know better" than the vile woman-hating end of the scale, and actually applies equally to men, so maybe it's not even really sexism. Huh. Maybe I'm all of the sudden seeing where they were going with "Billy". Weird.)

So, yeah. Another Angel-ish essay I found enlightening is the one in "Whedonistas" by Catherynne M. Valente about how the story is really just about going to work everyday, and sometimes giving up your dreams, just to get through 'til tomorrow.

Um, yeah. It's all very sensical. (Not a real word, there.
Well it's a word if you say it is! *g*

So, I get the feeling this is in response to people saying that Angel in AtS S5 is OOC or something?
On the something side of things. Not that he was OOC, but that he gave up on redemption and this was bad and they therefore dislike him. (Or... something. It's not a POV I can really get my head around and it was all a while ago, so the details are fuzzy.) ANYWAY, I, too, always thought that NFA was the perfect place for the character to go, and just wanted to show why.

It's just...I don't like him. The more time I spend with him, the less I like him.
Well that's fair enough. I happen to love him to pieces, but I can certainly see where you come from.

Maybe I'm all of the sudden seeing where they were going with "Billy". Weird.
:)

So, yeah. Another Angel-ish essay I found enlightening is the one in "Whedonistas" by Catherynne M. Valente about how the story is really just about going to work everyday, and sometimes giving up your dreams, just to get through 'til tomorrow.
*nods a lot* Liked that one. Or, to quote an old interview with David Fury:

FURY: ...the last beat of the episode would be Angel and whoever was left of his crew about to launch into the apocalypse. My thought on that is, that's the perfect way to end the show. The point of Buffy was always girl power and showing that power. The point of Angel was always that the fight never ends. He'll always fight. It's an eternity of fighting. You can't ever win but the fight is worth fighting. That was a perfect 'going out' scene - you know, the Butch Cassidy/Sundance Kid sort of we're going up against impossible odds and probably die? That's the perfect way to end the series, and anybody who says otherwise is dumb.
[...]
Unlike Buffy who ended up with her three friends and were able to end in that way, in Angel's case, everybody that he's ever been close to dies, which is really Angel's story - that he will always outlive the people he cares about. He has gone on and on, he has seen people he loves die, which is another reason that he and Buffy realized they couldn't be together. [...] But the fact that he was side-by-side with Spike was kind of a wonderful turnaround in the mythology of the series.
Interviewer: There's Butch and Sundance right there.

I wasn't really against the general thought of NFA as a big 'screw you' to the powerful overlords. It's just, poor Angel, even when doing good or when exerting his independence, he can't escape his myopic focus on himself. He had to go all in before allowing anyone else in. So he started the plan, set it into irrevokable motion, and then brought it up for a vote. Psst! Angel, it was too late to vote. Basically it was go along... or kill you, point at your corpse and say "He did it!" Yet again he was committing his allies without consulting said allies. It was most heartbreakingly expressed with Lorne.

And I never for a moment believed that Angel died in that alley because it would be just too easy. He was going to have to deal with having killed Drogyn for his grand plan.

And then there's the hypocrisy of his hit on Lindsey.

So yay, for Angel thumbing his nose at the powers... but he really wasn't running a democracy himself.

So yay, for Angel thumbing his nose at the powers... but he really wasn't running a democracy himself.
Oh absolutely not. I think that's why I like him? He's... so very human, after all. OK, so he had WAY too much power, and became stupidly dangerous, but... He's a big idiot, and he honestly believes his own hype.

i should add that i have always felt that the back half of season five of angel was something of a temper tantrum that joss threw upon his early termination. and, for that matter, although i loved some aspects of dollhouse, i always thought that one was just a little present to eliza dushku. what will he think of next?

i should add that i have always felt that the back half of season five of angel was something of a temper tantrum that joss threw upon his early termination.
*snerk* Yes and no. They did have to wrap stuff up extra quickly, but apparently they'd always planned for that ending, and S6 would have been set in some kind of post-apocalyptic world. Not sure how I feel about that, to be honest.

and, for that matter, although i loved some aspects of dollhouse, i always thought that one was just a little present to eliza dushku.
I've not seen Dollhouse, but yeah, I can understand what you mean. :)

what will he think of next?
Hmmm. A special project for Allyson Hannigan?

My issues with AtS S5 were more toward the execution and statements Joss and Co. attempt to make than Angel himself being OOC. A little too much soapboxing about power and so forth and too little time spent making the characters actions fluid rather than out of spite. Like, if Angel is really a moral black hole, he's still the center and you can't say he should get over it, if that makes sense. Sort of like writing God as stupid to make fun of a religion. You're still acknowledging the existence to do that.

Also not a fan of the Fred Fridge Stuffing business, that that's a personal thing. Especially after the Cordy stuff.

Angel himself, I think is a guy who does heroic things because he thinks that's what caped-heroes would do, not because he necessarily believes in it all. He's not evil or stupid, just sort of stuck in a mid-life crisis. It's kind of understandable, really. He needs a finish line to move toward.

A little too much soapboxing about power and so forth and too little time spent making the characters actions fluid rather than out of spite.
I can see that, but it doesn't bother me. (I have other issues that get under my skin...)

Like, if Angel is really a moral black hole, he's still the center and you can't say he should get over it, if that makes sense. Sort of like writing God as stupid to make fun of a religion. You're still acknowledging the existence to do that.
*snerk* You didn't watch Torchwood: Miracle Day by any chance? Anyway, I liked what they did with Angel, in that they took his flaws and explored them beautifully.

Also not a fan of the Fred Fridge Stuffing business, that that's a personal thing. Especially after the Cordy stuff.
Oh LORD the women. /o\ I sort of just blank it out, because if I think about it I get very cross. But then AtS didn't claim to be feminist, so I'm not holding it to Buffy standard...

Angel himself, I think is a guy who does heroic things because he thinks that's what caped-heroes would do, not because he necessarily believes in it all. He's not evil or stupid, just sort of stuck in a mid-life crisis. It's kind of understandable, really. He needs a finish line to move toward.
*nods*

HAHAHA OH MY. But I agree with all of this. :D WE ARE SHOCKED, NO? I promise to play nice, Elisi, I promise. *preemptive hugs*

The only spot I disagree with is that Angel has to kill everyone. For the story, the spiralling descent is absolutely where Angel needed to go. In this regard, I'm on board with AtS. I just see it as a tragedy for Angel how he never learns -- and I just don't believe that people can never learn or grow or change.

Angel's problem is that key difference drawn with Spike: he doesn't believe in his own goodness. You gave him back his soul? Well, that didn't do much when he was human and didn't have a demon in him. Thanks, PTB, thanks. And word -- external forces as motivation. But more than that, Angel also has to find his own goodness in external forces, not only in being the PTB's Champion or Buffy's Love (a Slayer loving a vampire means something -- forgiveness on one level -- at least, it did until it wasn't enough), and then later Angel invests so much of his identity in other people like Cordelia and most especially Connor. All because he can't stand to look inside at the man -- he's never able to get over his father's rejection and judgment. He believes his humanity is rotten -- and this is reflected in how he judges others.

That's why I think saving souls is his redemptive purpose -- because saving someone via acceptance and faith takes more inner grace than crushing skulls and unleashing the violence and co-opting people's free will. Being able to see the goodness and redemptive possibilities in someone like Lindsey or SPIKE would help Angel recognize that goodness in himself. Saving souls by seeking the lost souls and nurturing their goodness would also help Angel affirm his goodness -- but Angel's not so much with the nurturing (he's a classic hero archetype -- ME KILL NOW WIN ALL); he resists this story role even as he seeks it because it makes it ~simpler~, he finds brief moments of nurturing opportunity with Faith, Kate, and even Connor, but the violence drags him back down.

If Angel could find acceptance in his powerlessness, if he could actually find a touchstone to goodness, if he actually believed it deep down -- but it doesn't come naturally to him and like Shadowkat says "he's surrounded by enablers" who reinforce behaviors they need to keep in check and mistakenly direct his sense of goodness by equating it with his ability to wreak violence and destruction. That's his tragedy -- I just don't think it's where he should go (in a Watsonian sense) even if I see how his story led him to this place (in a Doylist sense).

Edited 2011-09-30 23:29 (UTC)

YES to the entirety of the post. And yes, it's why I love the guy, too. Sigh.

IKR? It's such a contradiction. *pets his stupid hair*

HAHAHA OH MY. But I agree with all of this. :D WE ARE SHOCKED, NO? I promise to play nice, Elisi, I promise. *preemptive hugs*
*tries not to fall off chair*

That's his tragedy -- I just don't think it's where he should go (in a Watsonian sense) even if I see how his story led him to this place (in a Doylist sense).
Hmmm. I think the term redemption got thrown around too much. Because S1 was really the only season where he tried to selflessly help other people (and even then it was all because the visions). From S2 onwards the show was about family, about Angel's history, and his place within the world as a champion of TPTB etc. Yes he'd be much better off if he just helped other people, because through that he'd help himself, but that's a little bit like saying that Buffy would have been better off staying dead post The Gift, and not have to go through depression and mutually abusive relationships etc. I thin the key thing here is 'should'. I am not a 'should' person. (I am a 'shouldn't EVER' person, but that's something else.) The story went where it went and I was happy to be along for the ride. I found Angel's arc to be in keeping with the character and true to his flaws and strengths. He learned stuff. He forgot. He was stupid. He was brave. And he accepted that Spike was the hero that he could never be, he saved his son (from being a hero), and he chose to do what he was best at. I found that immensely satisfying. The fact that he would have been better off focussing on helping the helpless is sort of beside the point. (Which is sort of what you were saying?) It's early and my head is full of Doctor Who, sorry.

ETA: Actually! Do you know what AtS is like? From S2 onwards it's like S5 of Buffy. Like in S5 Buffy's mission narrows down to protecting Dawn, so Angel's mission narrows down to saving Connor:

GILES: If the ritual starts, then every living creature in this and every other dimension imaginable will suffer unbearable torment and death ... including Dawn.
BUFFY: Then the last thing she'll see is me protecting her.
GILES: You'll fail. You'll die. We all will. (turns away from the table)
BUFFY: I'm sorry.

That's Angel's story. He does save Connor, but the price is everyone else's damnation, himself included. And much as I love Buffy to tiny pieces, I am deeply appreciative of the fact that AtS follows through on the consequences. OK, so his final plan is... drastic, but it's certainly set up right from the start:

FRED: Is this gonna be our lives now? Fighting our own employees, our own clients? Are we really gonna do any good?
ANGEL: Yes, we are. We're gonna change things. We came to Wolfram and Hart because it's a powerful weapon, and we'll figure out how to wield it.
WESLEY: Or kill ourselves with it.

The only way to wield it will also kill them. Bleak, but neat. (Sorry I've been rewatching vids - if you've never seen 'I'm Not Driving Anymore' or 'Cleansed by Fire', then run, don't walk - and my love for AtS S5 is deep and boundless. <3 <3 <3)

Edited 2011-10-01 09:54 (UTC)

dollhouse is worth a watch, i think, but allyson appears to have moved on.

I think I might check out Dollhouse at some point, although yay for AH! :)

Yes.

(Well, i have nothing to add, really. Thinking to much about Angel makes my hair stand up in funny ways...)

LOL! But glad you agree. :)

When AtS started after BtVS 3, of course i started watching it. But after a couple of episodes, i went all "guys, i already read Sophocles when i was 14!"

After that i stopped watching AtS. I started watching again, all the episodes, before AtS 5 to catch up. There are some good episodes, for sure (bound to happen with 110 eps. :P ) but AtS didn't do anything great for me. Sophocles still rules. ;-)

And, well. I just started to pay attention to Angel and AtS in general when i detected online fandom. So it is really people like you who made me think more about the character.

And what you say above, that Angel gets everybody killed - well, it is to be expected, he's a tragic hero. It's what tragic heroes do. Whether they're named Oedipus, Turin Turambar, or Angel.

- the protagonist suffers
- the protagonist stands before a decision
- the protagonist decides in an "unnatural" way, denying personal emotions and urges
- the protagonist endures more than s/he deserves
- the protagonist has a dark/bad fate from the beginning but is unable to accept responsibility for her/his flaws/weaknesses
- the protagonist is of noble descent but in a way that the audience is able to identify
- the protagonist has to see and understand her/his fate as well as understanding that her/his behavior will be her/his doom
- the hero story should combine fear and empathy
- ideally, the protagonist is a king or leader who draws his people into the abyss, too, while they're the witnesses
- the protagonist has to be intelligent and able to learn from mistakes
- tragic virtue

(Friedrich Schiller, 1759 - 1805)

Fits Angel perfectly.

Wow. That's... amazing. Will get back later, but wow.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Angel meta.

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

not really fair of me

Re: not really fair of me

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Re: not really fair of me

Re: not really fair of me

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject