AngelFaith
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
I rolled the bones. You for me.
My forgottendreamer[Mo0:12]
Posts: 641
|
Post by AngelFaith on Oct 28, 2010 18:30:21 GMT -5
Alright, I’m going to try to get this out as coherently as possible, but as I can never type fast enough to keep up with my thoughts this may come off a little rambly. Hopefully I will make my point clearly.
OK, so I have always had a problem with the way Buffy/Angel deal with becoming a vampire. Basically we are told (on several occasions) that when you become a vampire YOU die and a demon takes over your body. This demon walks and talks like you and it remembers your life, but it’s not you. OK, this much I can deal with.
HOWEVER this interpretation opens up a lot of questions and a lot of things don’t make sense. For example, when Spike is turned, he immediately wants to turn his mother so that she will be well again. If we follow the “you’re dead, demon takes over your body” rule, why would the demon in William’s body want to turn William’s mother? What possible connection could it have to Anne? Even if it remembers William loving Anne, this is a demon we’re talking about, an evil soulless being, that should not care about William’s mother.
Another scenario that never quite fits with the “you’re dead, demon’s in your body” rule is Wolfram & Hart bringing Darla back in Season 2 of Angel. So, the Darla they bring back remembers her life with Angelus and is fairly murderous and evil at first. However, they brought back human Darla – she should have no memory of her time with Angelus, because she was dead, her soul was gone. The demon Darla would have remembered, but not the human.
Before anyone starts saying things like “But Angel remembers everything Angelus did” I have an explanation (and I little nod to the only time they played it out right) for this. When Angel’s soul is restored, it doesn’t expel Angelus from his body. The demon is still there (Angel even references this a few times) therefore all his memories and feelings are still there for Angel to see/feel. Angel’s soul doesn’t get rid of Angelus, it merely suppresses him. Angel/Angelus is the only vampire who seems to fit the “you’re dead, demon’s in your body” logic. Other than him, they seem to seriously drop the ball when it comes to this.
Whew, long rant. Thoughts, opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Oct 28, 2010 18:46:28 GMT -5
HOWEVER this interpretation opens up a lot of questions and a lot of things don’t make sense. For example, when Spike is turned, he immediately wants to turn his mother so that she will be well again. If we follow the “you’re dead, demon takes over your body” rule, why would the demon in William’s body want to turn William’s mother? What possible connection could it have to Anne? Even if it remembers William loving Anne, this is a demon we’re talking about, an evil soulless being, that should not care about William’s mother. Well, when the demon is "born", it is born with all the thoughts, feelings and memories of the body's previous owner, in this case, William. That's probably all it knows. That would mean it isn't aware that it isn't William. I know some vampires have been shown to know the difference, but I think this can be attributed to mere differences in personality. Another scenario that never quite fits with the “you’re dead, demon’s in your body” rule is Wolfram & Hart bringing Darla back in Season 2 of Angel. So, the Darla they bring back remembers her life with Angelus and is fairly murderous and evil at first. However, they brought back human Darla – she should have no memory of her time with Angelus, because she was dead, her soul was gone. The demon Darla would have remembered, but not the human. I don't think there is any true explanation to this, but vampires get the memories of the humans, so I don't think it's that odd that human gets the memories of the vampire. They're sharing a body, after all. |
|
-'Goldilocks
Potential Slayer
I could eat that word...or a crisp![Mo0:25]
Posts: 144
|
Post by -'Goldilocks on Oct 28, 2010 19:17:44 GMT -5
when Spike is turned, he immediately wants to turn his mother so that she will be well again. If we follow the “you’re dead, demon takes over your body” rule, why would the demon in William’s body want to turn William’s mother? What possible connection could it have to Anne? Perhaps that the connection that William made with his mother was so strong in this case that it changed the normality of the situation. So the love that William had for his was so strong that the feelings did not fade even after the demon took over Williams body and then it loved Anne un-conditionally. Drusilla even states in 'Crush' that vampires are able to love. We are then shown this to be a defonate possibilty when Anne is turned into a vampire. The affection in this case is considerablly lower as she does not care for William after she has been turned, which means that William continuing to love his mother even after the demon took over his body was an anomaly. |
|
|
|
Post by midwesternwatcher on Oct 28, 2010 20:58:22 GMT -5
This is from the script of Crush, 5.14:
DRUSILLA
(through her laughter)
But it's so funny... I knew...
before you did... I knew you loved
the Slayer. The pixies in my head
whispered it to me... I thought they
would fly away...
SPIKE
(to Buffy)
You can't tell me there isn't anything
there between you and me. I know
you feel something.
BUFFY
It's called "revulsion." And
whatever you think you're feeling...
it's not love. You can't love
without a soul.
DRUSILLA
Oh, we can, you know. We can
love quite well...
(looking at Spike bemused)
If not wisely.
SPIKE
(to Buffy)
You still don't believe. Still don't
think I mean it. You want proof?
How's this?
Thanks for reminding me of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by joxerlives on Oct 29, 2010 10:41:36 GMT -5
Alright, I’m going to try to get this out as coherently as possible, but as I can never type fast enough to keep up with my thoughts this may come off a little rambly. Hopefully I will make my point clearly. OK, so I have always had a problem with the way Buffy/ Angel deal with becoming a vampire. Basically we are told (on several occasions) that when you become a vampire YOU die and a demon takes over your body. This demon walks and talks like you and it remembers your life, but it’s not you. OK, this much I can deal with. HOWEVER this interpretation opens up a lot of questions and a lot of things don’t make sense. For example, when Spike is turned, he immediately wants to turn his mother so that she will be well again. If we follow the “you’re dead, demon takes over your body” rule, why would the demon in William’s body want to turn William’s mother? What possible connection could it have to Anne? Even if it remembers William loving Anne, this is a demon we’re talking about, an evil soulless being, that should not care about William’s mother. Another scenario that never quite fits with the “you’re dead, demon’s in your body” rule is Wolfram & Hart bringing Darla back in Season 2 of Angel. So, the Darla they bring back remembers her life with Angelus and is fairly murderous and evil at first. However, they brought back human Darla – she should have no memory of her time with Angelus, because she was dead, her soul was gone. The demon Darla would have remembered, but not the human. Before anyone starts saying things like “But Angel remembers everything Angelus did” I have an explanation (and I little nod to the only time they played it out right) for this. When Angel’s soul is restored, it doesn’t expel Angelus from his body. The demon is still there (Angel even references this a few times) therefore all his memories and feelings are still there for Angel to see/feel. Angel’s soul doesn’t get rid of Angelus, it merely suppresses him. Angel/Angelus is the only vampire who seems to fit the “you’re dead, demon’s in your body” logic. Other than him, they seem to seriously drop the ball when it comes to this. Whew, long rant. Thoughts, opinions? I have this pet theory that Dru is different because she's a seer and has a link to the PTBs. Therefore she exhibits unusually human behaviour for a vamp as do those she sires, including Spike and Darla. As for Angel not remembering what Angelus remembered in Long Day's Journey that was just lame |
|
|
|
Post by arcaneweirdo on Oct 29, 2010 13:23:23 GMT -5
I don't think Dru's visions come from the powers, Angel mentioned in ATF that the creature Gunn drank from would've been cut of from the visions if he got into the wrong hands. Why would they let Drusilla keep hers when she became a vampire?
|
|
|
|
Post by midwesternwatcher on Oct 29, 2010 16:39:22 GMT -5
I've heard it said that Drusilla had a connection to the PTB, but I don't remember where that was said. I agree with the last post that the mere fact that she had visions doesn't prove it. If I missed something, could somebody set me straight?
|
|
Scarygothgirl
Ensouled Vampire
'What are you doing here? This is a naked place!'
~The Truth Will Free My Soul~[Mo0:32]
Posts: 1,230
|
Post by Scarygothgirl on Oct 29, 2010 19:39:07 GMT -5
I suppose the demon in Spike could be a very weak demon, thus overcome by the emotions of the memories of William. Whereas the demon inside Angel is very strong, thus creating a whole different personality from Liam as it breaks free from the memories he holds.
|
|
|
|
Post by joxerlives on Oct 30, 2010 14:25:21 GMT -5
I don't think Dru's visions come from the powers, Angel mentioned in ATF that the creature Gunn drank from would've been cut of from the visions if he got into the wrong hands. Why would they let Drusilla keep hers when she became a vampire? Dru is a seer before she's sired and continues to have her visions afterwards, maybe it's not something the powers can take away? Or myabe it's their method, she creates Spike, Spike saves the world? |
|
|
|
Post by midwesternwatcher on Oct 30, 2010 22:02:35 GMT -5
So far no one has told me how we know that Drusilla has a connection to the PTB, if she does. That seems to be widely believed, but somehow I missed the memo. A couple more general observations, probably not new to anybody, but it might be good to bring them into the front of our minds. I do not know how the vampire legend originated. This website library.thinkquest.org/28516/pages/vw/vamplegends.htmlists a handful of stories from before 1800, including one from before the common era. It's clear, though, that the modern interest in vampires began with Bram Stoker's Dracula. If you've read that book, you'll see that Stoker was introducing an idea he expected to be new to his readers. Stoker's vampires do not have complete minds or complete personalities. Stoker's Van Helsing says that Dracula has a "child mind," not able to make complex plans or understand complex notions. Van Helsing seems to feel that he can easily anticipate Dracula's actions. Dracula is not a person but an imitation of a person. He's like a robot. As I remember, Stoker never addresses the question of whether vampires have souls or what, if anything, they retain from their former human lives. I do remember, though, that Dracula can speak of the history of his region and their national ideology. The first season of Buffy seems to follow Stoker's model, except for Angel. But as the series continued, the writers introduced more and more vampires and made them more and more human-like. I suppose the Stoker-style vampires just weren't interesting enough. By S6, as I read it, Spike at least has a full personality, as complex as that of any human, and there is a clear continuity between his human life and his vampire unlife. For reference, I'll include this familiar and much-quoted passage from Doppelgangland: Willow: It's horrible. That's me as a vampire? I mean, I'm so evil, and skanky, and I think I'm kind of gay. Buffy: Willow, just remember, a vampire's personality has nothing to do with the person it was. Angel: Well, actually-- [Buffy glares at him.] --that's a good point. How do we explain this change? One way is to leave it unexplained. We can simply forgive the show for its inconsistency. That is always necessary in fictional universes, at least occasionally. If we insist on an explanation, I can think of at least one. Giles, and perhaps Merrick before him, told Buffy less than the full truth. Either the Watchers don't themselves understand the nature of vampires, or they are teaching their slayers a propaganda line designed to eliminate any qualms they might have about killing vampires. As time goes on, the truth comes out. Is this helpful at all? |
|
tkts
Rogue Demon Hunter
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 439
|
Post by tkts on Oct 31, 2010 21:12:08 GMT -5
I don't think the show's description of what a vampire's siring entails is contradicted by any of the characters.
Yes, we do seem to have two depictions that don't quite go together.
On the side of vampires being a demon in a dead body: "You die, and a demon sets up shop in your old house, and it walks, and it talks, and it remembers your life, but it's not you." (Buffy, "Lie to Me.")
On the side of vampires being contiguous entities with the people whose bodies they occupy: "Do you remember the song Mummy used to sing me?" (Drusilla, "Lie to Me.") "I died / So many years ago." (Spike, "Once More With Feeling.") "We went to school together. I let you crib off my Vaclav Havel essay that time. You—you really don't remember me?" (Holden Webster, "Conversations With Dead People.")
But the fact that vampires come into being with the memories of the dead person whose body they occupy can explain this. Having all those memories from the moment of your "birth" has to affect you in some way -- has to make you identify, to a certain extent, with the dead person you replaced.
So there's not really a contradiction. Yes, technically, Spike is wrong when he says "I died" ... because Spike has never died; rather, William died and Spike was born. But because of those memories, Spike sees himself as the continuation of William ... and for all practical purposes, he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by iigreenii on Oct 31, 2010 21:55:28 GMT -5
See this is where I get confused. If a demon "sets up shop" in a person's body when they're turned, why would Spike still love Buffy after he got his soul back? Technically it isn't Spike anymore but William once he's en-souled again. William never got a chance to actually know Buffy because he was supposedly dead and gone.
This makes me question whether or not the council is right about the whole demon taking over a person's body when they're turned. I use think that when a person is turned, THEY become an immortal, soulless demon without a soul/conscience. I always thought it was still them just without a conscience but this theory doesn't apply to Angel.
|
|
|
|
Post by midwesternwatcher on Oct 31, 2010 22:36:32 GMT -5
This is from "The Harvest," 1.2, about 5 minutes in (Giles is speaking):
The books tell that the last Demon to leave this reality fed off a human, mixed their blood. He
was a human form possessed -- infected -- by the Demon's soul. He bit another, and another... and so they walk the earth, feeding. Killing some, mixing their blood with others to make more of
their kind. Waiting for the animals to die out, and the Old Ones to return.
This is the first theory we hear about vampirism. I know we like to gloss things over, but this refuses to gloss. First of all, Giles clearly speaks of the vampiric demon having a soul, whatever that means. Everywhere else in the Buffyverse, normal vampires have no souls. More important, on this showing, the vampire exists on its own as a demon before it takes over the body of a human, and is not "born" at the moment the person dies. Presumably it would have an identity of its own that is distinct from that of the person it takes over. If it's Spike, for instance, it might know that there was once a William who wrote poetry and had a maudlin attachment to his mother, but he'd be aware that he and William weren't the same. I'm sorry, tkts, but I don't see any reason why the demon would identify with the person it replaced.
The way I see it, the writers just didn't think this out very well. They probably at first envisioned their vampires being pretty much like Bram Stoker's, having certain advantages over humans, but being far less than what humans are. They were not able to stick with that formula as time went on. Rather than try to fudge it, they let me matter be mysterious. Doc in "The Gift": "I don't detect any whiff of a soul about you. I don't understand." (I'm quoting from memory, probably not exact).
LightYears mentioned the matter of the soul, a related but not identical question. This is also confusing. I detect two different and incommensurable theories in the Buffyverse.
One says that a soul is like what we call "the conscience," the moral capacity to identify with other people. Curiously, it seems to be a human moral consciousness and human only. Demons, including vampires, do have their own morality, do they not? It's just that they view humans as prey, not as moral agents. They feel the same way about humans that we feel about cattle.
The other theory has a soul being a human personality conceived of as something separate from the body, that can be extracted from the body and even put into another body. It can be stored in a bottle, scattered in the ether (that is, the air), or gathered together. I know people who insist it is "incorporeal," but I can't imagine why anyone would say that, unless they just like the sound of that word. If it can be stored in a bottle, it's corporeal.
We may as well admit that this story doesn't add up.
|
|
tkts
Rogue Demon Hunter
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 439
|
Post by tkts on Oct 31, 2010 23:39:05 GMT -5
See this is where I get confused. If a demon "sets up shop" in a person's body when they're turned, why would Spike still love Buffy after he got his soul back? Technically it isn't Spike anymore but William once he's en-souled again. William never got a chance to actually know Buffy because he was supposedly dead and gone. I don't think it is William. I think it's still Spike. It's never made entirely clear whether the soul Spike gets at the end of Season 6 is the soul that left William's body when Drusilla killed him or a brand-new soul, but regardless, I don't think there's any indication that getting a soul should cause him to forget his (un)life as Spike and become William. I'm sorry, tkts, but I don't see any reason why the demon would identify with the person it replaced. But it definitely seems to happen that way, doesn't it? How many times do we hear vampires refer in the first person to things "they" did before they died? Spike, Holden, Drusilla, and I think Angel as well all seem to view the humans who preceded them as themselves, not as the body's previous tenants. They certainly talk that way. Would Spike say "I died," would Drusilla reminisce about her mother, would Holden tell stories about high school and college in the first person if it were otherwise? |
|
|
|
Post by iigreenii on Nov 1, 2010 0:17:39 GMT -5
I don't think it is William. I think it's still Spike. It's never made entirely clear whether the soul Spike gets at the end of Season 6 is the soul that left William's body when Drusilla killed him or a brand-new soul, but regardless, I don't think there's any indication that getting a soul should cause him to forget his (un)life as Spike and become William. In the episode Villains, the demon asks Spike "And you want to return to your former self." What former self? We're lead to believe that the demon is born. So my mind went straight to who he was before he was turned into a vampire which would be William. We're pretty much shown that the demon takes a back seat once a vampire gets his soul ( as with Angel). So I don't see why William would be in love with Buffy. I just don't think the writers thought everything through. |
|
leyki
Common Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 90
|
Post by leyki on Nov 1, 2010 1:57:43 GMT -5
The only think that makes some sense to me, is that the watchers either didn't know the truth or they were lying about the "a demon takes your place".
As fas as i'm concerned, a person gets "demonised" when he becomes a vampire, that's why Illyria calls them "half breed".
Now, when it comes to Angel, i think he is just mentally sick, like a multiple personality.
He wants to be a demon, he had this kind of character as a human, as we've seen. When the gypsies cursed him with a soul, he started feeling guilty, not able to handle what he'd done, and where he fits afterwards. That's why even with a soul, he was still able to kill humans in China, just to prove himself so that Darla can take him back.
He didn't succeed, so he just relapsed, triggered to change behavior whenever he feels guilty or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by midwesternwatcher on Nov 1, 2010 7:31:59 GMT -5
For tkts: I guess I didn't say it quite right. You're correct that vampires in the Buffyverse very often speak in a way that presumes a continuity from the human to the vampire. But that continuity would make no sense if we stuck with the theory Giles puts forth in The Harvest. Every time Spike or Holden speaks in the way you describe, they are refuting the first theory.
Conclusion? The writers switched to another theory, pretty early on, and didn't specifically tell As time goes on, vampires become so "soulful" that it doesn't seem to matter whether they have "souls" or not, as if we knew what a soul was anyway. No wonder there's a vampire rights movement in S8.
LightYears, I'm with you completely. The writers didn't think it through. My guess is that Joss in the beginning took the Bram Stoker type of vampire for granted, and then found it didn't work in the context of such a large-scale story.
Leyki, a question. You say Angel killed humans in China, after he got his soul? I don't remember that. I remember him hanging around with Spike, Darla and Drusilla, pretending to be evil, but never quite had the gumption to commit a murder as his companions expected. I could be wrong about that. Can you point me to a scene where Angel is shown killing somebody?
And one final thing... tkts says "It's never made entirely clear whether the soul Spike gets at the end of Season 6 is the soul that left William's body when Drusilla killed him or a brand-new soul, but regardless, I don't think there's any indication that getting a soul should cause him to forget his (un)life as Spike and become William." But that's exactly what happens in Orpheus when Willow restores his soul, including the forgetting thing (at least partly; remember Angel didn't have all the memories of Angelus, that's why he was "de-souled" in the first place).
I notice that you speak of "the soul" and "a new soul." Apparently you think of a soul as being individual to an individual. Sometimes in the Buffyverse it seems that way, but not always.
|
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Nov 1, 2010 7:47:27 GMT -5
IIRC, Angel was killing "bad" people in China to prove that he was evil again. Except that Darla never actually bought it, and forced him out by offering him a innocent to feed on, which he couldn't do. This was revealed in a flashback on ANGEL, not BtVS.
|
|
leyki
Common Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 90
|
Post by leyki on Nov 1, 2010 11:32:42 GMT -5
Leyki, a question. You say Angel killed humans in China, after he got his soul? I don't remember that. I remember him hanging around with Spike, Darla and Drusilla, pretending to be evil, but never quite had the gumption to commit a murder as his companions expected. I could be wrong about that. Can you point me to a scene where Angel is shown killing somebody? I'll give you the script so you can remember And this is the scene where Angel admits it and says he's done it in front of Darla He's behavior is like he is trying to find where he fits, it's not like he is a new man, Angel and not Angelus. He's been always Angelus, as far as i'm concerned, but over the years that he spent alone suffering he developed a second personality. Basically it's the only thing that explains it. I am not saying it's his fault, and i don't blame him for going back to Darla, she was the only one close to him. Spike did the same thing after having back his soul, he returned to Sunnydale to Buffy, the closest person to him at the moment. Propably Spike was lucky enough that he had somebody who cared for him, who believed in him, and helped him go through his suffering and find a purpose. I am pretty sure that even Spike would have gone mad without Buffy, so i just feel sorry for Angel who didn't have someone to help him and he went mad, developing a second personality to justify his actions as a soulless vampire. |
|
elenasaur
Ensouled Vampire
I am Jack's inflamed sense of rejection.[Mo0:30]
Posts: 1,565
|
Post by elenasaur on Nov 1, 2010 12:20:35 GMT -5
I never thought of it as the demon and the human being separate entities. Rather, I think it is more that becoming a vampire unleashes the demons that are already there, inside your human soul.
For one thing, they don't act as if they are separate people. If the demon were separate, it would have it's own identity. It would probably go by a different name, and have different mannerisms, but from what I've seen, none of the vampires just start out as killing machines right off the bat. They learn to do it.
Sure, that conflicts with the whole idea of restoring souls, but I don't know. I don't even understand what a soul does, or is, and what role it plays. I think it's a nice concept, but it's pretty abstract, so I don't feel bad molding it around my theory.
If I were to run with the generally-accepted mythology of the Buffyverse, I might suggest that personalities lie in the chemical makeup of your body and your brain, so when they first wake up as a vampire, their body is going to react the same way. I'm going to assume that just because you've got a demon in there, your neurons don't stop firing. When William sees his mother for the first time after becoming a vampire, his body automatically sends him the chemical signals that mean "love", so Spike the vampire is going to love her too.
|
|
