Regarding Fred's soul, which theory do you prefer?

[Mathieu]

I know there's already an ongoing dicussion about this in another thread, but I feel very strongly about this so I would like to create a poll to know where everybody stands exactly regarding this issue. I hope this is not against the forum rules.

If you want to cacth up on what's been said so far, go check out the other thread "Can Fred come back?".

slayaliveforums.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=ats&action=display&thread=6482&page=1

Ok, now my question is do you think it's a good idea to say that Fred's soul was not destroyed after all and still is somewhere (maybe in Heaven). Personally I think it cheapens her death.

Her death was very powerful and heartbreaking because, unlike all the other deaths in the Buffyverse, you could not find any sort of comfort thinking she had gone to a better place. Her death was terrible because her soul got wiped off of the Earth, erased from the universe. She went back to nothing. It's the worst thing that can happen to anybody if you believe in the existence of the soul. And the whole soul thing is a bid deal both on BTVS and AtS.

To say that after all her soul is still somewhere, maybe in a happy place, sounds to me like a stupid way to please the fans. Not a good twist. I almost feel cheated, like I shed tears over nothing. I don't want Buffy and Angel to become like Heroes where the characters'deaths don't mean a thing anymore.

So, what do y'all think?

[rebeccaplant]

Great topic, Mathieu.

I personally have chosen to believe her soul was destroyed forever. I agree with everything you said. I think it would cheapen her death to say that her soul "could be" floating around out there somewhere. She's gone. That's that.

I loved Fred. Don't get me wrong. I was absolutely shocked when she died. But death gives live meaning, right? Having everyone resurrected all the time only cheapens thier sacrifice. That's how I felt about Spike's death. Spike is my favorite character, and as much as I loved him in Angel S5, he deserves a more important part than being Angel's snarky sidekick, in my opinion.

What I've always loved about Joss is the fact that he's not afraid to kill off popular characters. He's willing to take risks. Initially, when I finished watching Angel, I was like, "Is this it? Does it really end like that?". Joss wasn't interested in a happy ending for Team Angel. It wasn't like Buffy, where there was closure, a new beginning. Angel was about stressing the idea that it never ends, that life just keeps going on regardless of if you're in it or not. Only the strong survive. I was pretty upset that, in the end, only the demons survived. I was like, way to go Joss, kill off all the girls. I thought about it for a while and it makes sense. The Angelverse is harsh. It's survival of the fittest out there. And I can respect where he was coming from with the message of the show.

[gumgnome]

I've voted in alignment with my arguments from the other thread.

[Mathieu]

Jun 14, 2009 14:54:33 GMT -5 gumgnome said:

I've voted in alignment with my arguments from the other thread.

Yeah sorry about creating a new thread. But I really wanted to make a poll about it and encourage other Slayalivers to weigh in! Thanks for voting!

[gumgnome]

No complaints here dude. Nice idea!

[Mathieu]

Jun 14, 2009 14:45:29 GMT -5 @rebeccaplant said:

Great topic, Mathieu.

I personally have chosen to believe her soul was destroyed forever. I agree with everything you said. I think it would cheapen her death to say that her soul "could be" floating around out there somewhere. She's gone. That's that.

I loved Fred. Don't get me wrong. I was absolutely shocked when she died. But death gives live meaning, right? Having everyone resurrected all the time only cheapens thier sacrifice. That's how I felt about Spike's death. Spike is my favorite character, and as much as I loved him in Angel S5, he deserves a more important part than being Angel's snarky sidekick, in my opinion.

What I've always loved about Joss is the fact that he's not afraid to kill off popular characters. He's willing to take risks. Initially, when I finished watching Angel, I was like, "Is this it? Does it really end like that?". Joss wasn't interested in a happy ending for Team Angel. It wasn't like Buffy, where there was closure, a new beginning. Angel was about stressing the idea that it never ends, that life just keeps going on regardless of if you're in it or not. Only the strong survive. I was pretty upset that, in the end, only the demons survived. I was like, way to go Joss, kill off all the girls. I thought about it for a while and it makes sense. The Angelverse is harsh. It's survival of the fittest out there. And I can respect where he was coming from with the message of the show.

Thanks for contributing to the debate! I just noticed that you had posted, dunno why I missed your post the ten last times I checked the thread!!

We are absolutely on the same page! I don't have much more to add after you said it all.

I just feel like there are two categories of fans.

Those who are aware that what made BTVS and AtS so great is that Joss Whedon did not hesitate to hurt us with the death of some very beloved characters.

And there are those who keep complaining about the death of some characters they loved, but they probably don't realize that the fact they're still obsessed with it proves these two shows were so good!

If everything had been lalala happy ever after, we would have moved on a long time ago.

[Paul]

My theory on Fred's death (this is borrowed slightly from another member on this board, can't remember who...)

Fred's soul and consciousness were burned up resurrecting Illyria. But they didn't just disappear; they were absorbed and reshaped into Illyria's new form. That's why Illyria, a pure-blood demon, feels human emotions like grief and affection (particularly towards those close to Fred), and is capable of performing good deeds.

So in a sense, "Fred" is still around, her humanity lives on in Illyria. But her soul was still destroyed beyond repair, she is no longer a conscious being and is not living in some heaven dimension with Wesley.

Jun 14, 2009 14:45:29 GMT -5 @rebeccaplant said:

Great topic, Mathieu.

I personally have chosen to believe her soul was destroyed forever. I agree with everything you said. I think it would cheapen her death to say that her soul "could be" floating around out there somewhere. She's gone. That's that.

I loved Fred. Don't get me wrong. I was absolutely shocked when she died. But death gives live meaning, right? Having everyone resurrected all the time only cheapens thier sacrifice. That's how I felt about Spike's death. Spike is my favorite character, and as much as I loved him in Angel S5, he deserves a more important part than being Angel's snarky sidekick, in my opinion.

What I've always loved about Joss is the fact that he's not afraid to kill off popular characters. He's willing to take risks. Initially, when I finished watching Angel, I was like, "Is this it? Does it really end like that?". Joss wasn't interested in a happy ending for Team Angel. It wasn't like Buffy, where there was closure, a new beginning. Angel was about stressing the idea that it never ends, that life just keeps going on regardless of if you're in it or not. Only the strong survive. I was pretty upset that, in the end, only the demons survived. I was like, way to go Joss, kill off all the girls. I thought about it for a while and it makes sense. The Angelverse is harsh. It's survival of the fittest out there. And I can respect where he was coming from with the message of the show.

Karma for this post.

Jun 14, 2009 15:17:13 GMT -5 Mathieu said:

I just feel like there are two categories of fans.

Those who are aware that what made BTVS and AtS so great is that Joss Whedon did not hesitate to hurt us with the death of some very beloved characters.

And there are those who keep complaining about the death of some characters they loved, but they probably don't realize that the fact they're still obsessed with it proves these two shows were so good!

If everything had been lalala happy ever after, we would have moved on a long time ago.

Sign me up for the first category please!

Getting upset over a character you like dying is fine, I've been there with Cordy and Anya. What annoys me are the indignant Tara fans who take personal offense over her death, and seem to think she should have been exempt from the rules of the Buffyverse. People die, why shouldn't she?

[Emmie]

Jun 14, 2009 14:45:29 GMT -5 @rebeccaplant said:

I personally have chosen to believe her soul was destroyed forever. I agree with everything you said. I think it would cheapen her death to say that her soul "could be" floating around out there somewhere. She's gone. That's that.

I loved Fred. Don't get me wrong. I was absolutely shocked when she died. But death gives live meaning, right? Having everyone resurrected all the time only cheapens thier sacrifice. That's how I felt about Spike's death. Spike is my favorite character, and as much as I loved him in Angel S5, he deserves a more important part than being Angel's snarky sidekick, in my opinion.

I disagree slightly here and it's why I choose to believe Fred's soul still exists. There's a huge difference between being dead-gone and soul-destroyed gone. Destroying Fred's soul (if that is what happened) is arguably the most heinous act in the entire 'verse to happen to a good character. For every other character, there is the hope of an afterlife. To deny Fred the bliss and feeling of completion that Buffy experienced in heaven? I don't understand why anyone would want that. To have Fred be completely and utterly destroyed. I don't see how her soul being in the afterlife would cheapen her death. She's dead. The problem comes from writers always wanting to bring people back. It's why I'm glad Tara wasn't brought back by that silly wish idea in Season 7. It's why I'm disappointed slightly with Cordy in After the Fall and completely disgusted with Cordy's use in Aftermath.

There's a difference between not being afraid to take risks and kill off characters and then also not being afraid to bring them back. The problem with bringing characters back is that it does cheapen their deaths. But the issue of Fred's soul being destroyed is separate from whether she should come back imho. Fred's soul being destroyed most greatly impacts Fred's afterlife destiny, not her destiny here in "life".

I say let her soul be in heaven and let her stay in heaven. It's not that her soul is just "out there". It's that her soul is where it truly belongs. And I hope Wesley is there with her.

Fred's soul being destroyed is completely separate from the idea of cheapening her death to me. One decision doesn't directly influence the other. So I disagree that there's only two kinds of fans either. It's more complicated than that.

[Paul]

Jun 14, 2009 16:10:29 GMT -5 Emmie said:

To deny Fred the bliss and feeling of completion that Buffy experienced in heaven? I don't understand why anyone would want that.

Because it makes for a powerful and tragic storyline. If Fred and Wesley are together, happy, in heaven, then why is the fact that they died such a big deal? Joss was going for the pain and it worked.

I don't really believe in the afterlife anyway, so I don't think what happens to Fred is anymore "heinous" that what happens to everybody in real life. Maybe it depends on your personal beliefs?

[Hallow Thorn]

Jun 14, 2009 16:19:29 GMT -5 Paul said:

Jun 14, 2009 16:10:29 GMT -5 Emmie said:

To deny Fred the bliss and feeling of completion that Buffy experienced in heaven? I don't understand why anyone would want that.

I don't really believe in the afterlife anyway, so I don't think what happens to Fred is anymore "heinous" that what happens to everybody in real life. Maybe it depends on your personal beliefs?

But there is an Afterlife in 'Buffy/Angel' and I think Fred is there, or will be whenever Illyria dies, because I also believe in the "absorbed and reshaped into Illyria's new form" discussion.

[Mathieu]

Jun 14, 2009 16:10:29 GMT -5 Emmie said:

Jun 14, 2009 14:45:29 GMT -5 @rebeccaplant said:

I personally have chosen to believe her soul was destroyed forever. I agree with everything you said. I think it would cheapen her death to say that her soul "could be" floating around out there somewhere. She's gone. That's that.

I loved Fred. Don't get me wrong. I was absolutely shocked when she died. But death gives live meaning, right? Having everyone resurrected all the time only cheapens thier sacrifice. That's how I felt about Spike's death. Spike is my favorite character, and as much as I loved him in Angel S5, he deserves a more important part than being Angel's snarky sidekick, in my opinion.

I disagree slightly here and it's why I choose to believe Fred's soul still exists. There's a huge difference between being dead-gone and soul-destroyed gone. Destroying Fred's soul (if that is what happened) is arguably the most heinous act in the entire 'verse to happen to a good character. For every other character, there is the hope of an afterlife. To deny Fred the bliss and feeling of completion that Buffy experienced in heaven? I don't understand why anyone would want that. To have Fred be completely and utterly destroyed. I don't see how her soul being in the afterlife would cheapen her death. She's dead. The problem comes from writers always wanting to bring people back. It's why I'm glad Tara wasn't brought back by that silly wish idea in Season 7. It's why I'm disappointed slightly with Cordy in After the Fall and completely disgusted with Cordy's use in Aftermath.

There's a difference between not being afraid to take risks and kill off characters and then also not being afraid to bring them back. The problem with bringing characters back is that it does cheapen their deaths. But the issue of Fred's soul being destroyed is separate from whether she should come back imho. Fred's soul being destroyed most greatly impacts Fred's afterlife destiny, not her destiny here in "life".

I say let her soul be in heaven and let her stay in heaven. It's not that her soul is just "out there". It's that her soul is where it truly belongs. And I hope Wesley is there with her.

Fred's soul being destroyed is completely separate from the idea of cheapening her death to me. One decision doesn't directly influence the other. So I disagree that there's only two kinds of fans either. It's more complicated than that.

Great post Emmie! Fair and balanced in my view.

I completely understand where you are coming from and I'm glad we agree that bringing characters back after they were killed off kind of cheapens their death.

That said, the soul issue regarding Fred is whole different subject.

However, I do believe that the destruction of her soul makes for a more powerful and meaningful storyline.

It broke my heart that they sent one of the nicest characters on the show back to being absolutely nothing by erasing her soul. But if you tell me she's in heaven with Wes right now, I really don't see what the big deal was. Ok she died, just like other characters before her died.

They made pretty clear her death was different though.

I know it's outrageous. I know this is not something any of us can wish for any character. Even ficticious charcaters. But at the same time, you know what, it's almost beautiful.

It was beautiful because it was so disturbing that it made me question a lot of things in respect to what I personally believe as a human being. Do I believe we have souls? Do I believe in an after life? What would it mean to have our soul destroyed? If there is no God and no after life, do our souls get destroyed too when we die?

It is a wonderful thing to introduce some existentialist questions in a tv show and that's exactly what they did with Fred. It questioned our views about life, about death and ultimately it questioned our own faith.

[Hellbound Hyperion]

I was mostly playing devil's advocate for the other thread, to aid discussion - I loved Fred and her death always moves me (enough to watch A Hole in the World/Shells over and over again... such great episodes) so it would be pretty cheap to bring her back.

[Mathieu]

Jun 14, 2009 18:13:20 GMT -5 Hellbound Hyperion said:

I was mostly playing devil's advocate for the other thread, to aid discussion - I loved Fred and her death always moves me (enough to watch A Hole in the World/Shells over and over again... such great episodes) so it would be pretty cheap to bring her back.

If they brought her back I would be appalled. It's upsetting enough that some people say she's in heaven or something.

PS: keep in mind she's a ficticious character! I would never say this about somebody who died in real life!!

[gumgnome]

Remember though, this thread is not about whether or not she should come back - I think most people here agree that she shouldn't.

This thread is also not about whether Fred deserved to have her soul destroyed or whether any of us want for that to be the case. Again, I think most people here would agree that that is not the case.

What is being addressed here is whether the writers, having told us that Fred's soul has been destroyed completely, should be able to turn that around and say that Knox was lying, or use some other literary mechanism to escape the finality that the statement makes for Fred's character.

We have seen time and time again that people in the Buffyverse can die and return to our screens/pages. This has usually been accounted for by the fact that bodily death is not the end for our characters, and they will live on due to the existence of the soul. Being told that Fred's soul was destroyed is therefore meant to imply that something worse than death has happened to one of our beloved characters and that return will be impossible.

I personally feel that it would be an act of shameful writing to tug on our heart-strings like that and then decide that they can break with the internal logic that they have set and conveniently return Fred to the screen.

[Mathieu]

Jun 15, 2009 5:22:37 GMT -5 gumgnome said:

Remember though, this thread is not about whether or not she should come back - I think most people here agree that she shouldn't.

This thread is also not about whether Fred deserved to have her soul destroyed or whether any of us want for that to be the case. Again, I think most people here would agree that that is not the case.

What is being addressed here is whether the writers, having told us that Fred's soul has been destroyed completely, should be able to turn that around and say that Knox was lying, or use some other literary mechanism to escape the finality that the statement makes for Fred's character.

We have seen time and time again that people in the Buffyverse can die and return to our screens/pages. This has usually been accounted for by the fact that bodily death is not the end for our characters, and they will live on due to the existence of the soul. Being told that Fred's soul was destroyed is therefore meant to imply that something worse than death has happened to one of our beloved characters and that return will be impossible.

I personally feel that it would be an act of shameful writing to tug on our heart-strings like that and then decide that they can break with the internal logic that they have set and conveniently return Fred to the screen.

Gumgnome, will you marry me? You are such a wonderful advocate for my cause!

I was shocked indeed when they told us that in the Buffyverse there is something worse than death, and it is to get your soul destroyed... I don't want them to take that away from us. It was a powerful and terrifying message. To take that back would diminish the quality of the show.

[Greer]

Well I'll just weigh in on this topic now!

I voted for the first option, about Fred's soul being destroyed. Don't get me wrong, it killed me when I found out during the episodes that it was gone forever. It was tragic and really broke my heart. But it's tragic and that's what makes for an amazing storyline at the end of Angel. The thing about Joss is that he likes to go for the pain and also to make things as realistic as possible(not saying that this exact situation would happen, obviously). Things don't always get better nor are people who are completely innocent receive justice and a prize at the end of the tunnel. Fred was amazingly innocent, but something horrendous still happened to her.

This topic oft mirrors the tragedy of Tara's death to me, and how it would just cheapen the entire storyline and development of both series if they were brought back. Joss wants to show that life is hard and things may not turn out the way that they should. That's what enthralls me about the show, is that it is different.

...And who really knows if this was the end for her? There's an end to this mortal life and her soul was destroyed, but there's no assurance of her destination. Just because Buffy ended up in a heaven state does not mean that everyone or anyone else at all would go there. It's all a matter of belief and situation in the Whedonverse.

[Mathieu]

Jun 15, 2009 12:55:47 GMT -5 Greer said:

Well I'll just weigh in on this topic now!

I voted for the first option, about Fred's soul being destroyed. Don't get me wrong, it killed me when I found out during the episodes that it was gone forever. It was tragic and really broke my heart. But it's tragic and that's what makes for an amazing storyline at the end of Angel. The thing about Joss is that he likes to go for the pain and also to make things as realistic as possible(not saying that this exact situation would happen, obviously). Things don't always get better nor are people who are completely innocent receive justice and a prize at the end of the tunnel. Fred was amazingly innocent, but something horrendous still happened to her.

This topic oft mirrors the tragedy of Tara's death to me, and how it would just cheapen the entire storyline and development of both series if they were brought back. Joss wants to show that life is hard and things may not turn out the way that they should. That's what enthralls me about the show, is that it is different.

...And who really knows if this was the end for her? There's an end to this mortal life and her soul was destroyed, but there's no assurance of her destination. Just because Buffy ended up in a heaven state does not mean that everyone or anyone else at all would go there. It's all a matter of belief and situation in the Whedonverse.

Thanks for your contribution! I agree with all you said.

Very often will the fans be outraged by the death of the "most innocent" characters. But this is the tragedy of it! This is what happens in real life. Life is not always fair, justice is not a mandatory thing when it comes to who gets to live and who has to die. And the Buffyverse reflects just that.

Tara and Fred's deaths were painful to accept because the two of them would have never hurt a fly.

[henzINNIT]

I vote "Hope", but I'm especially adamant that we don't find out either way. I think in this universe, it's too far to say someone's entire being has been oblitorated. Ambiguity is the way to go. Lynch dealt with it perfectly in ATF.

[Hellbound Hyperion]

Jun 15, 2009 17:32:35 GMT -5 henzINNIT said:

I vote "Hope", but I'm especially adamant that we don't find out either way. I think in this universe, it's too far to say someone's entire being has been oblitorated. Ambiguity is the way to go. Lynch dealt with it perfectly in ATF.

Yeah, I think Lynch did an excellent job of going for the "duality" idea of Fred being completely gone, and yet Illyria not being entirely there. It's curious how little knowledge was involved on both sides - Fred's curiosity overrode her caution, and Illyria's escape plan did not include humans at all, she was genuinely surprised to see humans still walking the earth, much less to be reincarnated in one.

And then there was After the Fall. Absolutely fantastic.

[Mathieu]

Maybe I should read After the Fall to see how Illyria's character is developed in the comics... just a money issue for now

By the way, I'm glad 10 people out of 16 voted for "let Fred's soul be destroyed forever"! I feel like I'm not the only sadist here!