|
Post by michellebuffyfest on Feb 28, 2009 18:33:00 GMT -5
|
|
Whedon Fan
Ensouled Vampire
Joss Is Boss
Banner & Avatar Made By CBG[Mo0:3][Mo0:3]
Posts: 1,312
|
Post by Whedon Fan on Feb 28, 2009 20:19:29 GMT -5
|
|
Enisy
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 643
|
Post by Enisy on Feb 28, 2009 20:28:25 GMT -5
Agree, Whedon Fan.
Joss Whedon: With Buffy, I needed closure, because she, poor girl, had earned it. Buffy is about growing up. Angel is really about already having grown up, dealing with what you've done, and redemption. Redemption is something you fight for every day, so I wanted him to go out fighting. People kept calling it a cliffhanger. I was like, "Are you mad, sir? Don't you see that that is the final statement?" And then they would say "Shut up."
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 28, 2009 20:30:21 GMT -5
Now that it's clear what Armstrong views, I think there's an important distinction to make here. Armstrong thinks Angel has redeemed himself, but is she writing Angel where he also thinks he's redeemed himself? Because if she is, then I don't think she really understands Angel. And then she truly is contradicting the mission statement Angel passed on to Faith in Orpheus.
Agree, Enisy and Whedon Fan. Angel's story is about fighting for redemption. If Armstrong is writing Angel as fully redeemed, then frankly the story is over for me. This viewpoint is counter to the mission statement of AtS and NFA - the fight goes on for ever.
Angel's need to "make up for it" is his driving motivation. And I don't see how we go from so much darkness in Season 5 (murdered Drogyn, backstabbed Lindsey - both very morally grey acts) to him suddenly having made up for it and redeemed himself? Huh?
|
|
Joe
Wise-cracking Sidekick
Obsessive Paranoid Boob
"Gypsies are filthy people! We shall speak of zem no more!" *spits* -Ilona Costa Bianchi[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,786
|
Post by Joe on Feb 28, 2009 20:33:24 GMT -5
I hope she doesn't have Angel thinking he's redeemed in her arc. That is a world of no. He's never going to be redeemed.. lol you know what I mean. I don't like how she kept putting herself down in the interview. At least a few of her answers had a put-down of some sort to herself.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 28, 2009 20:40:46 GMT -5
I think KingofCretins gave the best insight I have read on the "redeemed" line, regardless of what Kelley has said personally:
Call it fanwank all you want, but I think with what we were given on page, this is the best explanation for it.
Angel is fighting now because it is the right thing to do, not just because he wants to atone for his sins. You gotta respect the man for that.
Good interview though, it sounds like Cordy will probably be coming back in a flashback or something (as I originally guessed). That is all I can think "restricted" would mean.
|
|
|
Post by dragonweaver on Feb 28, 2009 20:57:39 GMT -5
Angel is fighting now because it is the right thing to do, not just because he wants to atone for his sins. You gotta respect the man for that. I can see that, but I think the issue is less about why he is fighting and more about his state of mind. I just can't wrap my head around the idea that Angel believes he has redeemed himself. He has said that multiple times that he can never make up for the horrible things he did. There is no atonement. Doing good, being the hero & saving lives can never undo the damage of killing. Angel shouldn't be walking around like a hero with a clean slate. He's a hero with a dark and wicked past. That's what makes him interesting.
|
|
buffyfest
Potential Slayer
That, and a burning baby fish swimming all around your head.[Mo0:24]
Posts: 133
|
Post by buffyfest on Feb 28, 2009 21:52:39 GMT -5
Didn't Brian say the same thing, though? I mean the end of After the fall had a similar vibe....that Angel's changed a bit. Doesn't men he's not a hero. In fact, and this mirrors what some people are saying in here, it makes him more a hero and a less selfish hero to help the helpless for reasons other than his own guilt.
The redemption thing isn't really bothering me all that much. He seems to relax about it from time to time, but it's never stuck so far so I doubt it will this time either. Still, I don't think he has to suffer for Angelus's deeds forever. What he's done as Angel, perhaps, but even those things are debatable.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Mar 1, 2009 2:32:16 GMT -5
Didn't Brian say the same thing, though? I mean the end of After the fall had a similar vibe....that Angel's changed a bit. Doesn't men he's not a hero. In fact, and this mirrors what some people are saying in here, it makes him more a hero and a less selfish hero to help the helpless for reasons other than his own guilt. Yet how is it not selfish to think you've "made up for" all the rape, torture and murder you've done over two centuries? And Angel with a soul was no saint all the time, either. The problem here is that Armstrong is saying Angel views himself as redeemed as being necessary for him to help others just for the sake of helping others. Angel can still feel guilt for all he's done and still have his primary motivation be his desire to help people - complex reality. This is different from Angel Season 2 and 4. It's frankly only sensible that a souled being would feel guilt for past straight-up evil actions. Angel giving up on making that his primary motivation doesn't mean it should negate his responsibility for what he's done. Angel with a soul has murdered human beings - that should haunt him. The fact that he says he's redeemed when he just condemned all of LA to pyschological torture (many remember being murdered, drank by vampires, perhaps raped)...the fact that he thinks he's redeemed? No. He still has a lot to feel guilty about. Yeah he saved the day. But he saved the day through ending a situation he created along with W&H. He doesn't get to come out of this with a clean slate. Oversimplification of complex psychological and moral issues is my first and foremost complaint about the ANGEL series currently. The central theme of Angel's journey was his constant struggle and how he has a moral darkness within himself that can lead him down a dangerous path. It's a theme that is shouted to the rooftops in NFA both internally and externally - the fight lives on. Forever. The struggle is manifest in Angel's character - a vampire *cursed* with a soul who can never know pure happiness or else become a monster. Yet even with this soul Angel has done horribly questionable actions. Doing right doesn't redeem him fully, it just means he's on the right path. And where does Angel get the arrogance to proclaim himself redeemed? That is another thing I find counter to his character. Arrogance over humility. Arrogance is more suited to the morally grey Angel or straight-up evil Angelus. A humble Angel makes statements in Epiphany about "the smallest act of kindness - is the greatest thing in the world." The beauty of Angel's character was that he struggled with this inner darkness. This darkness led to Angel locking the lawyers in the cellar, nearly smothering Wes to death in Forgiving, doing a dark magic ritual that nearly killed Fred The Price, rejecting Connor (who desperately needed a father's guidance, the lack of which allowed him to be manipulated by Jasmine) because he was jealous that Connor slept with Cordy (who wasn't even really Cordy). His darkness is always at war with his inner light. This is what makes him extraordinary. That in the end, when it truly counts - the light wins. It speaks to the state of this world of a hope of light triumphing over evil in the end. If Angel can triumph over his inner darkness even if he can't truly defeat it, then we too can triumph over the darkness in this world. The call to arms is to keep on fighting. The fight goes on. As in real life, so it is within ANGEL the series, so it is within Angel himself. Take away that metaphor and you're reading a story that's lost it's power, it's thematic and emotional relevance to the reality of the world. Whitewashed. Oversimplified.
|
|
cheryl
Novice Witch
[Mo0:37]
Posts: 246
|
Post by cheryl on Mar 1, 2009 2:50:55 GMT -5
To take this stance, I think you would have to view Angel and Angelus as the same person, imo, they are not. I think that Angel finally came to grips with that very fact, with what he says to Gunn in ATF, feeling guilty for the crimes of Angelus is something he has fought within himself for the entire BTVS and ATS. It was a refreshing change to see Angel finally understand what all the other characters have always known.
The fact that he says he's redeemed when he just condemned all of LA to pyschological torture (many remember being murdered, drank by vampires, perhaps raped)...the fact that he thinks he's redeemed? No. He still has a lot to feel guilty about.
WR&H condemned all of LA to Hell, not Angel and his gang. I've seen Lindsey mentioned, who was evil and who Lorne actually killed, but other than that, what do you believe Angel has to feel guilty about? Angel isn't the monster he has always believed himself to be. That's the curse and why he is such a tragic hero. IF he is finally going to realize that he isn't anymore responsible for his actions than Gunn was for his, I will be pretty happy for him.
I don't have any qualms about ATS, ATF or what we've seen so far of Aftermath. I enjoyed this Q&A from KA. I'm glad she will be keeping Brian's themes.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Mar 1, 2009 2:58:50 GMT -5
To say that Angel isn't responsible for LA being sent to hell is to deny that his actions brought about this effect. W&H would have gone on turning their wheels to bring forth Armageddon and likely Buffy/a slayer/a champion alongside other warriors would have fought to stop it in the ultimate battle.
Angel sped up the timetable and this resulted in innocent bystanders of the battle being sent to hell when the "CAPITAL A" Apocalypse would have been fought and likely won by warriors and ultimately depending on which side Angel resided on as the prophecy states.
It's similar to Joss asking FOX to tell them ahead of time if ANGEL season 5 would be renewed. They told him no. Fury later said that if Joss had waited until after sweeps, it probably would have been a yes because ANGEL season 5 had been made under budget and had built a bigger audience.
If Angel had waited (if Joss had waited) the Apocalypse could have been fought by warriors of the good side without nearly 11 million people being sent to hell to experience death, rape, torture and all forms of terror. No. Angel wasn't completely in the right.
I firmly disagree. What's more, so does Angel's character as he completely owns that his decision to fight W&H has led to Hell-A within the text of After the Fall.
Cheryl - Angel murdered Drogyn. He should feel guilty about murdering a righteous warrior for good. He should feel guilt for that action for the rest of his life. Hypothetical: what if Angel had killed Buffy in Graduation Day accidentally by drinking too much and the doctors couldn't save her? Should he not feel guilt for killing her?
|
|
cheryl
Novice Witch
[Mo0:37]
Posts: 246
|
Post by cheryl on Mar 1, 2009 3:51:03 GMT -5
Oh yes, I think all the characters should feel guilty for killing non evil human beings but that doesn't mean I think they can never achieve redemtion. Angel was put into a bad situation and had to make a horrible decision with Drogyn. Damned if you do and damned if you don't type of situation. Even doing the deed, we still knew that Angel was the good guy. Angel was living the reality of Giles message to Buffy in season 7. Sometimes the general has to make decisions that nobody else can make. In a war, there will be innocent people killed. I guess we really just need to weigh the pro's and cons and determine if it's reasonable to assume the character had no other choice or truly felt that they had no other choice.
There are other character, like Giles from The Gift but I don't know of anyone implying that he can not be forgiven, that he hasn't walked on the side of good long enough for us to give him the benefit of the doubt with the intentions of his actions.
Willow has also done some pretty questionable things, as well as Faith. Andrew murdered his best friend in cold blood and by some, is now fully redeemed because he made a choice to stay and fight. Redeemed based on a choice.
Wes went pretty grey there for a while and I don't think anyone even questions that he is with Fred, somewhere pretty good. So in the minds of fans, he was also able to reach atonement. Pretty quickly too.
Seems that Angel lives under a double standard despite the fact that we know his intentions are good and he has made a career of fighting against evil and selflessly sacrificing himself more than once for the cause, or for Buffy.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Mar 1, 2009 4:26:20 GMT -5
Oh yes, I think all the characters should feel guilty for killing non evil human beings but that doesn't mean I think they can never achieve redemtion. There are two pertinent definitions here for what it means to be redeemed. Redemption: the act of being redeemed. Redeem: 1. to free from blame or debt, to free from the consequences of sin 2. 6 a: to atone for : expiate <redeem an error> b (1): to offset the bad effect of If you say that every character should feel guilty, you're saying they aren't fully redeemed. Being fully redeemed means being free of all blame and having offset the bad effect of one's actions. Angel is not fully free of blame nor has he fully offset the bad effects of Hell-A. Angel was put into a bad situation and had to make a horrible decision with Drogyn. Damned if you do and damned if you don't type of situation. Even doing the deed, we still knew that Angel was the good guy. Angel co-created the situation that led to this decision. He damned himself to make that choice and thereby damned Drogyn. Angel was living the reality of Giles message to Buffy in season 7. Sometimes the general has to make decisions that nobody else can make. In a war, there will be innocent people killed. I guess we really just need to weigh the pro's and cons and determine if it's reasonable to assume the character had no other choice or truly felt that they had no other choice. And this is the moral relativism that I find absolutely doesn't ensure Angel being fully forgiven for past sins. One doesn't become fully redeemed by grey action, by perpetuation of the compromise forced by the dark side of evil. And we always knew Angel was the good guy? That's a viewpoint not shared by the characters within Power Play and NFA. Spike and Lorne are the most vocal about Angel's actions being questionable, even going so far as to wonder if Angel will kill them next in order to prove he's on the inside with the Circle of the Black Thorn. Angel's actions in that episode are undoubtedly, irrevocably grey. And we the audience are not supposed to be okay with that. It's supposed to torment us that Angel is trying to do good by doing evil at times - ultimately, we believe that Angel's good intentions will guide him through to the other side. But that doesn't absolve him from outright murder. And let us not forget that redemption, absolution, forgiveness - ALL are predicated on the sinner being repentant. The simple fact is that Angel never showed guilt for murdering Drogyn - how can he be absolved for something he hasn't been shown to feel guilty for? There are other character, like Giles from The Gift but I don't know of anyone implying that he can not be forgiven, that he hasn't walked on the side of good long enough for us to give him the benefit of the doubt with the intentions of his actions. Willow has also done some pretty questionable things, as well as Faith. Andrew murdered his best friend in cold blood and by some, is now fully redeemed because he made a choice to stay and fight. Redeemed based on a choice. Wes went pretty grey there for a while and I don't think anyone even questions that he is with Fred, somewhere pretty good. So in the minds of fans, he was also able to reach atonement. Pretty quickly too. Yet even these characters pale in comparison to much of what Angel has done (with and without a soul). I believe and hope that Wes went somewhere "pretty good" (as my banner attests). But do I think Wes should have found his actions completely redeemed? No. He was incredibly disturbed by the revelations of what he did when he got his memory back in Origin. And there's also the importance of every good act is redemption. Redemption, seeking redemption is in fact working towards atonement. And it never truly ends because you can never, NEVER, buy back the lives taken. You can never buy back murder. And so atonement goes on. Seems that Angel lives under a double standard despite the fact that we know his intentions are good and he has made a career of fighting against evil and selflessly sacrificing himself more than once for the cause, or for Buffy. No. All the characters you've listed above all have paths of redemption to follow. And all are held accountable for these morally grey actions. That's the whole point of NFFY. Giles tells Faith that because of their past they must work to protect those who aren't as shrouded in grey. Yet Faith takes this lesson and goes even further, evolves it to show that not only must she and Giles atone for their actions but they should try to save those who are drowning in their grey world. Faith and Giles haven't been fully redeemed for their pasts. Especially not in their own minds.
|
|
Hallow Thorn
Bad Ass Wicca
Oh and You're Welcome
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,306
|
Post by Hallow Thorn on Mar 1, 2009 4:49:00 GMT -5
Anonymous wrote: Cordelia Chase is on a cover for #21, so is there is a good chance that she may be appearing again? Are you a fan of her and is there any way you can confirm that she is back without spoiling your work? Thank-you. KA: Mmm. Yes, she will return, but it will be a fairly...restricted return. Yay, thanks (I wish I put my name now lol) the Interview was really cool... I Good interview though, it sounds like Cordy will probably be coming back in a flashback or something (as I originally guessed). That is all I can think "restricted" would mean. I still think it will be a higher being Cordy Cameo...
|
|
Whedon Fan
Ensouled Vampire
Joss Is Boss
Banner & Avatar Made By CBG[Mo0:3][Mo0:3]
Posts: 1,312
|
Post by Whedon Fan on Mar 1, 2009 9:05:58 GMT -5
Ha Thorn when I was reading the interview I knew that it would have been you that asked that question. lol. + 1 Karma just for making me laugh!
|
|
Nina
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 141
|
Post by Nina on Mar 1, 2009 10:40:13 GMT -5
I don't see questioning Angel's redemption as a bad thing, I think that it's an important step in his journey. We can't end his story with him hating himself just as much as he did in the first seasons. Maybe it's a bit sudden and the choice of words could be wrong. But it's a natural development for him to decide that it's time to 'move on', which doesn't mean that he won't feel guilt or forget it. More that he is worthy to live in this world and ready to leave the selfhate behind him. Especially because I think that he is talking about his past as Angelus and not the mistakes he made as a soulled being. Besides Angel was never consistant about this, big chance that he will dwell in his own guilt soon after this. Something I would pity because I see Angel getting over his past as Angelus and dealing with Angel's and Liam's flaws, as an improvement. Soulless vampires are evil, not really something you can blame yourself for.
I'm more worried about Cordelia's return. I can only hope that it will be a flashback. I'm not really against the idea that Cordelia is more than just dead, but I don't want her to pop up every arc to save the day.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Mar 1, 2009 12:21:38 GMT -5
I agree Nina. Frankly, Angel has ever right to question his redemption. His plan in #16 single handedly saved their entire existense from being wiped out by Illyria. Plus the fact that he later willingly gave his life in the very hope that L.A. would be saved. If that's not redemption... But this is really a different argument altogether, so I will leave it at that. For those that hated the line, honestly, bad lines happen. Buffy's line about Cordy in #20 still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but it happened and you can either just ignore it or accept it. If you take out the "I've redeemed my past." line from #18 and go to any other page of the comic, Angel will still be the same Angel he was before saying the line, trying to find his way in life. It was four words in one panel, on one page of a 22 page comic.
|
|
buffyfest
Potential Slayer
That, and a burning baby fish swimming all around your head.[Mo0:24]
Posts: 133
|
Post by buffyfest on Mar 1, 2009 12:24:46 GMT -5
Re: Redemption This conversation could go on for years and it certainly has within the Buffyfest group. Personally - Tara's opinion - I don't think Angel should be to blame for Angelus's past and never did. Buffy forgave him for it, so can I. I don't blame Souled Spike for Evil Spike's past (and it seems neither does he, which again is a good thing, imo.) But it doesn't matter what I think b/c Angel himself doesn't agree with me, and so the point of the whole show.
Regardless, I don't think he's saying that he's not responsible any more. I think he's just starting to forgive himself. Forgiveness is allowed while still being held accountable and feeling guilty/sorry for what he did.
[Drogyn is another case all together and I agree that's the worst thing he's ever done besides joining W&H in general...not that he had much choice in the matter. But after Hell-A he clearly has had some sort of clarity and is simply choosing to move on, knowing he's made some really bad mistakes.]
Re: Cordy coming back - I really have no idea what's going to happen and it prolly won't bother me anyway, but it'll annoy the hell out of Michelle.
My biggest sadness is that Lorne's not coming back. I was really surprised at that but I get the reason why.
|
|
Morgan
Innocent Bystander
Did I Leave the Gas On?[Mo0:0]
Posts: 19
|
Post by Morgan on Mar 1, 2009 13:34:09 GMT -5
Seems that Angel lives under a double standard despite the fact that we know his intentions are good and he has made a career of fighting against evil and selflessly sacrificing himself more than once for the cause, or for Buffy. No. All the characters you've listed above all have paths of redemption to follow. And all are held accountable for these morally grey actions. That's the whole point of NFFY. Giles tells Faith that because of their past they must work to protect those who aren't as shrouded in grey. Yet Faith takes this lesson and goes even further, evolves it to show that not only must she and Giles atone for their actions but they should try to save those who are drowning in their grey world. Faith and Giles haven't been fully redeemed for their pasts. Especially not in their own minds. That's what makes Faith & Giles such interesting characters. The other characters have a tendency of deluding themselves into thinking that they have (or have come close to) redeeming themselves. Angel, Buffy, Willow & the others do continue to fight the good fight, but I think Faith & Giles see it as more of their personal "mission" to help those that are starting to fall into the morally grey. It's an up hill battle for them, but they are determined to keep going no matter what.
|
|
buffyfest
Potential Slayer
That, and a burning baby fish swimming all around your head.[Mo0:24]
Posts: 133
|
Post by buffyfest on Mar 1, 2009 14:16:21 GMT -5
Yay, thanks (I wish I put my name now lol) the Interview was really cool... Oh no, thorn! Do you want me to update it to reflect your screen name?
|
|