PDA

View Full Version : "Yeah Baby, I'm Back"



kana
26-03-11, 12:00 AM
Ok so I couldn't think of an effective title but this the line is obviously recognisable from the episode Innocence whereby Angel lost his soul and returned to his vampiric family.

He utters those infamous words to Drusilla ad this is really the point of my thread. I wanted to discuss the relationship between Drusilla and Angel(us)

I'm going to post some questions about the rather unique relationship between Angel (either soulled or soulless) and Drusilla.

My interest stems from the fact that Angel is my favourite character and I find Drusilla fascinating.

I'll also mention that in this thread I will mention Spike but only in relation to Dru and Angel. I'm not attempting to incite and Angel vs Spike thread and anyone who knows me, know that I rarely go in for such threads.

Anyway, here we go...

How do you think Dru felt about Angelus?

How do think Angelus felt about Dru?

Why do you think Dru continued to sleeep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?

Now I'm aware of the blurring lines that barely divide Angel and Angelus but to extend the conversation (because I believe Angel having a soul or not having a soul clearly affects his relationships), how do think Dru felt about Angel?

And vice versa, how do think Angel felt about Drusilla?

__________________________________________________ _______________

How do you think Dru felt about Angelus?

Well considering sire/childe relationships aren't particularly dipicted as all that transcendent (apparently there is such a thing as a one bite stand), I'll say that Dru felt affection for her sire. She certainly seems drawn to him openly flirts with him or sleeps with him when he's around. I don't think this is exclusive to Angelus though. I believe her vampiric family mean a lot to her. She talks affectionately about her 'grandmum' Darla, eagerly wanting her to meet William and she goes through a lot of effort to prepare for her 'giving birth' to her as well. She often refers to Angelus as Daddy and talks about giving birth to William as well.

How do think Angelus felt about Dru?

I think he considers her his masterpiece, a constant reminder of the sadism that drives Angelus.


Killing is so merciful at the end, isn't it? The pain has ended.

The consistent picture painted is that he didn't really care about Drusilla. He liked having her around but by the time she wanted to sire William, he seemed to have lost interest and even suggests that Dru finds someone else. When she does, this doesn't stop him from exercising his particular brand of sadism upon William, by taking away the one thing that gave him meaning in his unlife.

He continues this in 1998. His affections seem less focused on Dru and more focused on hurting Spike.


I know Dru gives you pity access,
but you have to admit it's so much easier when I do things for her.

I'd say the only person Angelus indulged was Darla and Angel admitted that even she didn't make him happy. If you consider that Dru was able to sense that Angelus was more preoccupied with Darla and Angel admitted that he didn't love Darla, (which is consistent with the fact that he'd happily give her up to save himself) then it's fair to say that Angelus cared even less for Dru, but didn't mind using her as a tool for his sadistic mind games with Spike.


Why do you think Dru continued slept with Angelus 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?

This is the question that gave me the most hassle. If I'm honest, I'm not really sure, but the possibilities are:

She's simply insane.

I don't really like this explanation because I think Dru is more complex than that. She's also a lot more deliberate in her actions than she appears IMO.

She didn't really love Spike

Angel suggested this in Lover's Walk. I'm not sure if he really believed this or if he was just scoring a cheap shot with Spike. I suppose we could reason that Dru cheated, openly flirted with Angelus in front of Spike, so she can't really be all that fussed with him. However, why would she spend more than 100 years with him, if that were the case? She is clearly affectionate with him and asks for reassurance that he loves her, so this doesn't seem to fit. Although Angelus and Darla spent a longer amount of time together even when, by their own admission they didn't love each other, Dru talked about being able to love without a soul. One assumes we was talking from experience and if she wasn't talking about Spike, whom was she talking about?

It's simply her way, embrace the contradiction

This may sound like a cop-out answer, but the mistake we often make is placing our own ideals of love onto others. In real life and in the Verse love can be subject to the individual and who are we to argue? Dru can be both loving family member and vile villain at the same time. She values love but she also has a greater passion for destruction than her childe (considering her attitude towards apocalypses in Innocence and Becoming compared to Spike's overall attitude). She clearly values the necklace from Spike in BBB but she also beams at Angelus human's heart, then pointedly says that it's Angel who knows how to speak to a girls heart. The problem I have is that either, she's oblivious to Angelus' cruelty towards Spike or she revels in it as sees it as part of the 'game'. She clearly likes the attention from both men, maybe it's because she can understand both their passions. She can love in a way that Angelus can't but she has a passion for evil that Spike doesn't.

Now I'm aware of the blurring lines the barely divide Angel and Angelus but to extend the conversation (because I believe Angel having a soul or not having a soul clearly affects his relationships), how do think Dru felt about Angel?

She seems disappointed that Angelus has a soul. She clearly makes the distinction between Angel and Angelus and her disdain or at least disappointment for his soulled counterpart.


Dru: "Daddy's home.

Dru: "Look what we have for you. (Angel doesn't react) It's not Daddy. It's never Daddy. (Hisses at him) It's the Angel-beast."


This line is especially captivating because of the double meaning.


He's soul-sick. Not even thinking about his own family. (Pulls one of the men over by his hair) Only thinking about them."

Because she could be referring to Angel caring about humans above his own vampiric family because he's sick with his soul, in other words, she sees his soul as affliction. Or she could mean she that he's placing his obsession with W&H above his feelings for his new family, i.e. Angel Investigations and that his soul is sick with the darkness that his obsession gives him. I'd like to think Dru means both and either way she's not happy because these are conflicts that could only arise in Angel, not Angelus.

One thing seems consistent is that Dru is not happy about her family being broken up. She's less than pleased with Angel's attempts to kill Darla and Spike's betrayal of both her and Angelus and what they are trying to acheive in bringing Acathla forth, compel her to attack Spike.

And vice versa, how do think Angel felt about Drusilla?

More than anything, guilt. He considers Dru the worst thing he's ever done. There is a lot of significance in his difficulty in killing Darla and Dru in Reunion and Redefinition and Hollands cites this...


Lilah: "Those two should keep Angel busy for some time."
Lindsey: "Yeah, until he kills them."
Holland: "Oh, I think he'll find that course of action more difficult than even *he* realizes

Both of them represent a failure on his part. He feels he failed to save Darla and he feels Dru is the worst atrocity he's committed as Angelus. In both cases he doesn't simply see them as any random vampire or enemy. He has a personal connection with both of them and a face you recognise his harder to kill than one you don't and this is clear in his fight with both both women in Reunion when he appears to be hesistant when trying to kill Darla. They could have had anyone sire Darla, even any powerful vampire, but boy did they know what they were doing when they got Dru.

In short, his feelings for Dru are complex. What gave Angelus pride, brings Angel shame. As much as he sees her darkness, he can remember her innocence. What makes the scenes on Ats so compelling is that Dru as an opponent seems as menacing as they come. For me it's never been the physical threat but the psychological tortures that get to Angel. As Angelus he's in pain but seem relatively unfazed mentally by Holtz' torture and as Angel he wasn't able to be broken by torture in ITD, but I find his torture at the hands of Dru in WML especially chilling as she knows exactly how to destroy him mentally. It almost seems poetic in a twisted way that Dru was victim of Angelus' cruelty but he then becomes a victim of hers. When she had her soul she was at his mercy and both in WML and The Trial, he was at hers. Her torment becomes his torment.

Ok I've rambled on, but I do find this pair interesting. So what are your thoughts? How do you feel about Dru and Angel(us)? Does anyone even ship them? This is one relationship we rarely talk about in the fandom.

ubi4soft
28-03-11, 02:21 PM
Hi, kana. Excellent post as always.

Actually I don't have anything to add but I found posted on another board a segment from Dear Boy's shooting script so terrifying that it didn't go into the episode. (why aren't AtS shooting scripts collected or are they and I don't know?)

Darla: She's still alive. After what you did to her family and her nunnery?
Angel: Caught her just in time, trying to cut her own throat. What a waste that would have been. You thats a sin Drusilla and that your blood is mine now...
Drusilla: Mummy and Daddy, Sisters of Mercy. all dead, all eaten up in their beds. KILL ME! KILL ME!
Darla: We should oblige her, she's awfully loud..
Angel: Not just yet..

He kisses Darla rather savagely.

Angel: Can you guess whats next?
Darla: We eat her after..
Angel: During my love.
Darla: Kill her during, all right..

Some of their clothes are coming off now.

Angel: I'm not going to kill her. I'm going to make her one of us.

Drusilla's mad eyes watch them.

Darla: One of us? Are you sure thats a good idea?
Drusilla: Toast and tea and maggots for me..

Angel: She's very special, I put a lot of time into her.. and I like the poetry...

As they lie down, virtually on top of Mad Dru:

Darla: But, Dear Boy , she's insane.
Angel: And now she'll be insane forever.

Even Darla is a little taken aback by this idea.

Darla: I guess it's something new..
Angel: Keeps me young.

They kiss hard, clothes coming off Dru's eyes huge with horror.

Angel: Whose thigh is that...?
Drusilla: AAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

MikeB
19-02-12, 10:22 AM
kana

How do you think Dru felt about Angelus?

She considers him her “daddy”. It seems she doesn’t like that he killed her family.

1860 – 1880: We don’t really know. The only flashback we see is them literally like minutes before Drusilla sires William Pratt. She didn’t like that Angelus wasn’t paying much attention to her anymore and that his head was full of ‘grandmother’ – Darla.

1880: William sired his mother. Had he not wanted to do that, who knows if Dru would have ever gone back to Angelus and Darla.

Dru it seems for possibly weeks was having sex with William and not having sex with Angelus. But she didn’t turn Angelus down when he approached her for sex.

1880 – 1898: Drusilla eventually becomes ‘Spike’s girl’ to the point that in 1898 Drusilla and Spike don’t seem to be living with Angelus and Darla.

1900: After Spike killed the Chinese Slayer, it seems Dru pretty much became completely Spike’s. Spike and Dru for over 98 years are ‘two against the world’.

1998: Dru senses and then knows that Spike is in love with Buffy. So, who knows how much of her attraction and feelings for Angel – or at least the displays of attraction and feelings – are to get Spike to focus on her versus actual attraction and feelings for Angel.

AtS season 2: Dru ultimately would have preferred having the Fanged Four back together, but it’s very clear she’d be more than happy if she could get Spike back.


How do think Angelus felt about Dru?

Angel/us loves Dru. But for whatever reason he eventually focuses on Darla to the exclusion of Dru. But Dru siring William makes him jealous. Angel is forever unhappy about Spike ‘taking’ Dru away from him.

As for the ‘masterpiece’ thing: he slept with Dru and is forever jealous and unhappy that she fell for Spike and that Spike ‘took her away’ from him. So, souled Angel may feel bad about what he did to Dru but it also seems that Angel never stopped loving Dru.


Why do you think Dru continued to sleeep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?

1880s: Angelus was with both Darla and her. It’s implied that both Angelus and Spike were with other women but expected Darla and Dru not to cheat on them. It’s implied that Darla and Dru eventually slept together. So, for Dru, it’s kinda a ‘Why not?’ thing. She was attracted to and had feelings for Angelus still.

1998: Spike’s feelings for Buffy. And Dru knew that Angelus wanted to kill Buffy, not be with Buffy.


His affections seem less focused on Dru and more focused on hurting Spike. One of my more controversial opinions is that Season 2 proved that Angel loves Spike more than he loves Buffy. Anyways, “Lie to Me” (2.07) shows that Angel is attracted to Dru. His reaction to her touching him is akin to Buffy’s making out with him in “Forever” (5.17?).

As for Darla, the flashbacks seem to show that Angel did love Darla, but that he wouldn’t exactly risk his life for her.


She didn't really love Spike

Angel suggested this in Lover's Walk. First off, who cares what Angel says. Angel wasn’t around during 100 years that Spike and Dru were together. Secondly, Angel’s talking about Spike’s relationship with Dru simply showed that Angel was still jealous that Spike’s with her.


She clearly values the necklace from Spike in BBB but she also beams at Angelus human's heart, She wore that necklace for one episode. The point of that scene is to depict Spike’s lessened power and that Angel is currently more powerful.


then pointedly says that it's Angel who knows how to speak to a girls heart. No, she says, “Don’t worry Spike. Angel always knows what speaks to a girl’s heart.” She never implied that Spike didn’t.


The problem I have is that either, she's oblivious to Angelus' cruelty towards Spike or she revels in it as sees it as part of the 'game'. All Angel did is flirt with and touch Dru and comment on Spike being in a wheelchair. Something that never seems to be discussed is that Dru never admonished Spike for saying things like they don’t care if Angel burns in the sun, that he prefers the souled Angel to the ‘unhinged’ soulless version, etc.


She seems disappointed that Angelus has a soul. She clearly makes the distinction between Angel and Angelus and her disdain or at least disappointment for his soulled counterpart. Both Spike and Dru consider souled and unsouled Angel to be the same person. It’s just that in Season 2 they prefer the unsouled version because that version is on their side.

Again, Dru would ultimately prefer – well, probably that Angel never killed her family and that she lived her life as a human – to have the Fanged Four back together. But we never see her comment on Darla being dusted, Angel being in hell, etc. We do see her comment on Spike’s feelings for Buffy.


I consider that Holland in “Redefinition” (2.11) was referring to either Angel not being able to actually take on both Drusilla and Darla in a fight and/or that Drusilla had some sort of supernatural protection that would prevent Angel from killing her.

Angel didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla – beyond that Dru would probably win that fight anyways – because if he had killed her, Spike would have killed him. It’s pretty much exactly why Angel destroyed the Gem of Amarra. Spike or some other vampire would have eventually killed Angel to get the Ring. Also, though, Angel didn’t want to kill Drusilla.


They could have had anyone sire Darla, even any powerful vampire, but boy did they know what they were doing when they got Dru. Cleary not as Dru and Darla killed Holland and Co. and left Lindsey and Lilah alive. Lindsey ends up working against Wolfram and Hart and Lilah Morgan ends up falling for Wesley.


as Angel he wasn't able to be broken by torture in ITD, He told Doyle that one more poke and he would have given up anything.


but I find his torture at the hands of Dru in WML especially chilling as she knows exactly how to destroy him mentally. He wasn’t though. He tried to get Spike to dust him.


It almost seems poetic in a twisted way that Dru was victim of Angelus' cruelty but he then becomes a victim of hers. When she had her soul she was at his mercy and both in WML and The Trial, he was at hers. Her torment becomes his torment. That’s interesting. Before he died, she wanted him to know that she’s still upset that he killed her family. She wanted him to see Buffy being killed by the Judge. She looked at him as she sired Darla.

kana
23-02-12, 11:11 PM
kana

How do you think Dru felt about Angelus?

She considers him her “daddy”. It seems she doesn’t like that he killed her family.

I'm still not entirely sure about this her holding onto the memory of Angelus killing her family with disdain, but I'll address that later.


1860 – 1880: We don’t really know. The only flashback we see is them literally like minutes before Drusilla sires William Pratt. She didn’t like that Angelus wasn’t paying much attention to her anymore and that his head was full of ‘grandmother’ – Darla.

I'd be inclined to agree with this somewhat.


1880: William sired his mother.....

Sorry to cut you off there, but in terms of this question, I wanted to focus on how Dru felt about Angelus not Spike.

We can address the Spike/Drusilla/Angelus triangle in the: "Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?" section.


1998: Dru senses and then knows that Spike is in love with Buffy. So, who knows how much of her attraction and feelings for Angel – or at least the displays of attraction and feelings – are to get Spike to focus on her versus actual attraction and feelings for Angel.

As I've said before, we don't know when Drusilla learned of Spike's feelings, or potential feelings.

I'll actually contend something...I'd like to bring your attention to a quote from Spike:


Drusilla was always straightforward. Though never knowing a single buggering clue of what was going on in front of her, but she was straight about it!

Not I'm not saying that we have to agree with him but what I gleen from this is Drusilla tended to be quite straightfoward about her feelings on most matters. Unless we enter the realm of speculation, there is no evidence that Dru hides her feelings. When she's gets a vision, she says so. If she gets angry, does she not vent her feelings?

This is why, at least in my opinion, Dru learned of Spike's feelings after the events of Becoming. In short there is no evidence that her flirting with Angelus had anything to do with jealousy on Dru's part.

How do think Angelus felt about Dru?


Angel/us loves Dru.

This is interesting. The question is what is love?

The problem often becomes that we create our criteria on what constitues love and place it on others, be them fictional or otherwise.

I try to take a somewhat diplomatic approach. It's my view that you can't seperate the love from the lover.

Angel/us seems to be under the impression that he cannot love without a soul. I personally interpret that to mean that he's not capable of the emotions and behaviour that he would associate with love and who am I to disagree? He didn't disagree with Lindsay when he said he didn't love Darla and he said in the episode Earshot that he only love Buffy in all his years (presumably he meant romantically, but we can't be sure I guess). So even if we don't believe him, he's at least being internally consistent. To disagree with him is simply to place one's own view on love upon him, but even then, if one is claim this falls with the realm of objectivity then they would have to qualify it. If I remember, on the other thread discussing whether or not Dru and Angelus slept together, you struggled to determine
using your own framework, whether Ange(lus) loved Dru.


But for whatever reason he eventually focuses on Darla to the exclusion of Dru.

You see already your theorizing is creating more questions than it answers, whereas mine, is at least more internally consistent: He never loved Darla and felt less for Dru, by Dru's own admission.


But Dru siring William makes him jealous. Angel is forever unhappy about Spike ‘taking’ Dru away from him.

I suppose this is where interpretation comes in doesn't it? I honestly didn't see that when I watched Destiny, which I assume is the episode you're using as a reference.

My alternative theory is that Angelus was more than happy for Dru to find someone else (which is why he suggested it), however, another male in the ranks is potentially a rival. We know two things Angelus likes: acts of sadism and being in charge. Spike actually comments on this in Ats Season 5 in the episode Hellbound I believe, well about being in charge.

The problem is, that you're assuming that Angelus sexual interest in Dru is about love. Well it is my opinion that sex can also be a tool of power and corruption, again, two things in which Angelus would revel.

Talking about another rooster in the henhouse is also about the play for sexual dominance which doesn't necessarily imply love.

Let us consider that Angelus sees love as antithetical to his evil. He certainly seems to imply this in Btvs Season 2's IOGEFY, it would be more logical assume that the reason that Angelus shows interest in Dru is sadism and power. This is not to say, he's not attracted to her and likes having her around, but more ignoble reasons for his 'affection' seems more fitting. That said, both theories are valid :).


As for the ‘masterpiece’ thing: he slept with Dru

And is this a sign of love? Dru also willingly had sex with Angelus and flirted with him, does this mean Dru is in love with Angelus? Why does it have to be love with Angelus but not with Dru? Especially when Angelus has shown a disdain of love?


and is forever jealous and unhappy that she fell for Spike and that Spike ‘took her away’ from him. So, souled Angel may feel bad about what he did to Dru but it also seems that Angel never stopped loving Dru.

Like I said, this is one theory. Another is that Angel(us) wasn't that bothered but liked to have sex with her for the fun of it, because he knew he could. Again, power and sadism are seriously contenders here, at least how I read it.



Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?

1880s: Angelus was with both Darla and her. It’s implied that both Angelus and Spike were with other women but expected Darla and Dru not to cheat on them. It’s implied that Darla and Dru eventually slept together. So, for Dru, it’s kinda a ‘Why not?’ thing. She was attracted to and had feelings for Angelus still.

My issue however is that it hurt Spike. Like, I said, either Dru doesn't know this, or she doesn't care. Now I'll admit, I'm sliding towards placing my own view of romantic love on Dru, but I was always curious how Dru views love and whether she simply mixed love and pain together in her mind.


1998: Spike’s feelings for Buffy. And Dru knew that Angelus wanted to kill Buffy, not be with Buffy.

Like I said, we still haven't proven that Dru knew of Spike's feelings prior to the events of Becoming. Your best argument before was a so-called 'expression' in Halloween, which is at best, just your interpretation. You've even admitted in this very thread that you couldn't confirm if Dru's flirting had anything to do with Spike's feelings for Buffy. All we know for sure, is that she knew after the events of Becoming. Technically, anything else is just speculation.


One of my more controversial opinions is that Season 2 proved that Angel loves Spike more than he loves Buffy.

Somewhere, a Spangel's head just exploded ;).


Anyways, “Lie to Me” (2.07) shows that Angel is attracted to Dru. His reaction to her touching him is akin to Buffy’s making out with him in “Forever” (5.17?).

I'm not doubting that Angel(us) is attracted to Dru, but I don't know if that equates to love. I mean, are you in love with everyone you're attracted to, I'm not.


As for Darla, the flashbacks seem to show that Angel did love Darla, but that he wouldn’t exactly risk his life for her.

See above about trying to objectively define love...


First off, who cares what Angel says.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not taking what Angel says as law, I'm merely talking about the general opinion that Dru couldn't love Spike all that much if she doesn't mind seeing his heart break....


Angel wasn’t around during 100 years that Spike and Dru were together.

Well this was partly one of my arguments, coupled with Dru's own perception on love.


Secondly, Angel’s talking about Spike’s relationship with Dru simply showed that Angel was still jealous that Spike’s with her.

Not necessarily. There are many fans who come to that conclusion without having a ship preference that has anything to do with Dru or Spike. It's possible that Angel, from what he observed, came to that conclusion. I'm not saying he's right, but him saying it, in itself, doesn't prove his jealousy.


She wore that necklace for one episode. The point of that scene is to depict Spike’s lessened power and that Angel is currently more powerful.

But let's go deeper than that. She didn't seem more enamoured with Spike's gift, than Angelus'. The display, as you observe, is clearly a competition between the two men, so why doesn't Dru discourage Angelus? Is she oblivious to how it would make Spike feel, or did she not care? I know Dru's jealousy is your pet theory, but it's still dependent on conditions that you cannot technically prove, other than your own subjective interpretation of certain scenes, so with this in mind, how do we address this issue?


No, she says, “Don’t worry Spike. Angel always knows what speaks to a girl’s heart.” She never implied that Spike didn’t.

It struck me as somewhat insensitive though, maybe that was just me. In the context of the scene it seemed, to me at least, as though she was 'choosing' Angelus' gift. However, I have an alternative theory...

Now this is just me theorizing, so forgive me for my indulgences...I saw Spike's gift as a more conventional display of affection at least in human terms. It was a sign of love and devotion, pure and simple and Dru seemed to appreciate that.

Angelus' however was a display of 'twisted affection'. Hearts and flowers is what people expect on Valentines day but he perverts this both with Buffy and Dru. Angelus' gift to Dru is steeped in evil intent and she seems to appreciate this. She also understands this evil as his passion and trusts that this display of passion is the perfect way to unsettle Buffy. This is just my interepretation of the scene.

In short, she seems to appreciate Spike's love and devotion but also Angelus' evil.


All Angel did is flirt with and touch Dru and comment on Spike being in a wheelchair.

Regardless of how minor you believe her infraction to be, or even if you consider it an infraction, it still hurt Spike. I'm trying to figure out whether Dru knew what she was doing, or not and if she did, why she didn't seem to care.


Something that never seems to be discussed is that Dru never admonished Spike for saying things like they don’t care if Angel burns in the sun, that he prefers the souled Angel to the ‘unhinged’ soulless version, etc.

For the purpose of the discussion, I don't see how that's relevent. Angelus didn't seem to care about what Spike said or did. He seemed relatively happy, so there would be no need for Dru to be concerned. Conversely Spike both in the 1800s and 1998, seemed upset about whatever was going on between Angelus and Dru.


Both Spike and Dru consider souled and unsouled Angel to be the same person. It’s just that in Season 2 they prefer the unsouled version because that version is on their side.

Possibly, but as I've quoted, Dru also seems to make the distinction betwenn the Angel and Angelus. Referring to Angelus as Daddy and Angel as the AngeBeast. Even if he does think of them as the same entity, she doesn't necessarily believe he has the same moral identity.


Again, Dru would ultimately prefer – well, probably that Angel never killed her family and that she lived her life as a human –

Admittedly I'm not sure if you're referencing the comics as I'm not that up to date but there is no evidence on the show that Dru regrets her life as a vampire. It also doesn't seem that Dru holds onto the pain of her family's death. As I said before, it seems more likely Dru is more straight foward about how she feels. Even the scenes in WML doesn't prove she's upset about it. If I recall Dru doesn't actually comment about she feels about it. She's simply reminding him as his past sins. She could easily be doing it 'for the evulz'


to have the Fanged Four back together. But we never see her comment on Darla being dusted, Angel being in hell, etc. We do see her comment on Spike’s feelings for Buffy.

The problem is, with Dru's prescience, we don't know what she knows and when she learns it. We have no idea if she knew Angel was going to be released from hell. She also seemed to know that she was going to be Darla's 'mummy' and we don't know if, how and when she learned of Darla's second vampire death, so we cannot judge so readily on what we don't see. It makes more sense to comment on what we do see.


I consider that Holland in “Redefinition” (2.11) was referring to either Angel not being able to actually take on both Drusilla and Darla in a fight and/or that Drusilla had some sort of supernatural protection that would prevent Angel from killing her.

Nope, all he said is that it would be a course of action more difficult than even he realizes. In conjunction with the subsequent episode, the emotional inhibiting factors could also be what Holland meant.


Angel didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla – beyond that Dru would probably win that fight anyways – because if he had killed her, Spike would have killed him.

This is utter speculation. If it wasn't for Darla picking up the hammer, Angel would have dusted them. Even if you use the argument that Angel left the hammer there on purpose, they could have panicked or not got there in time or Spike may have killed Angel for the attempt. As far I'm concerned there is literally no evidence that Angel gave a rats arse about Dru, Darla or Spike's reprisal.


It’s pretty much exactly why Angel destroyed the Gem of Amarra. Spike or some other vampire would have eventually killed Angel to get the Ring. Also, though, Angel didn’t want to kill Drusilla.

Where are you getting this idea that Angel is so afraid of Spike? Angel's not invincible, I'm aware of that, but neither is Dru or Spike.


Cleary not as Dru and Darla killed Holland and Co. and left Lindsey and Lilah alive. Lindsey ends up working against Wolfram and Hart and Lilah Morgan ends up falling for Wesley.

Yes, lol, as I've said before, they was seriously arrogant when it came to Dru and Darla. So yes, fair point!!


He told Doyle that one more poke and he would have given up anything.

I was more rambling at this point, but I'm not sure how serious Angel was when he said this. He also said, he'd give up Doyle's mother, which I hope was tastless joke. I'm sure it was hard for him but either way, he wasn't broken. I'm sure he was tempted, but if it actually came down to it, I'm not sure if Angel would have folded.


He wasn’t though. He tried to get Spike to dust him.

Ok, Angel wasn't 'broken' per se but at least in my humble opinion, Dru's torture got to him. I just personally find that scene chilling. Angel was always tormented by his past and for Dru to replay that so vividly for him, shows her 'demonic brilliance'.


That’s interesting. Before he died, she wanted him to know that she’s still upset that he killed her family.

As far as I'm concerned, the jury's still out on this one.


She wanted him to see Buffy being killed by the Judge. She looked at him as she sired Darla.

A few of the many reasons why Dru scares me...:err:

MikeB
29-03-12, 09:51 AM
For the thread, these posts for me take well over an hour to do because of the arguments involved. But other posters don’t have to respond to everything in these posts if they want to discuss more general things or just certain aspects. My posting style in Buffyverse Boards is to discuss or debate things said in posts that I disagree with, but the posts are intended to be read by anyone. I do love such conversations though since Drusilla – and Spike/Drusilla – isn’t as explored by BuffyBoard posters as other characters are.



The torture stuff is interesting:

“What’s My Line Part II” (2.10?): Spike and Dru are about to kill Angel in order to ‘regenerate’ (I’m really tired and couldn’t think of a better word) and before that happens Dru decides to torture Angel with Holy Water and to remind him of how evil he is and what he did to her family, which she tells him she hasn’t forgiven him for.

“Surprise” (2.13): Before Angel is killed, Dru wants the Judge to kill Buffy so that Angel can see Buffy die. As a sidenote to this thread, she wants the Judge to kill Buffy while Spike watches Buffy die.

“The Trial” (A 2.09): Angel doesn’t want to vamp Darla, Darla doesn’t want to be vamped; Dru knows both things. So, she casually vamps Darla while Angel’s looking and she looks at Angel while she’s doing it. And she cuts herself in the same way that Darla cut herself when Darla vamped Angel.

After Angel sired Dru pretty much the only bad thing he ever did to her was set her afire in “Redefinition” (A 2.11).


kana


I'm still not entirely sure about this her holding onto the memory of Angelus killing her family with disdain, Angel and Faith further made that canon.


My quote: 1880: William sired his mother.....

Sorry to cut you off there, but in terms of this question, I wanted to focus on how Dru felt about Angelus not Spike. I include that because we don’t know what Dru would have done had William Pratt not wanted to and then did sire his mother. We also don’t know what would have happened had William not had to kill Anne Pratt.


we don't know when Drusilla learned of Spike's feelings [for Buffy], or potential feelings. They were during Season 2. It really doesn’t even make any sense if she only first knew of them after they left Sunnydale.


Drusilla wasn’t “always straightforward” regarding her feelings. Drusilla didn’t even tell William about Angel and Darla: He found out when she brought him home to them. Dru didn’t tell Spike in “Lie to Me” (2.07) that she saw Angel. And Dru didn’t initially tell Spike why she was cheating on him.

As for the Buffy thing, Dru is not Xander. She wanted Spike to not want Buffy. Even in “Crush” (5.14), she wanted Spike to kill Buffy. And when Spike chose Buffy over Dru, Dru left town and didn’t come back to Spike.


Angel/us seems to be under the impression that he cannot love without a soul. The uncursed version of Angel is simply disgusted with the idea of love, but he obviously loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike.


he said in the episode Earshot that he only love Buffy in all his years (presumably he meant romantically, but we can't be sure I guess). He was trying to butter Buffy up, but maybe he actually didn’t love anyone when he was a human.


If I remember, on the other thread discussing whether or not Dru and Angelus slept together, you struggled to determine using your own framework, whether Ange(lus) loved Dru. No, I not only have always said that Angel was in love with Dru, I’ve also said that Season 2 proved that perhaps Angel loved Spike more than Angel loved Buffy.


My quote: But for whatever reason he eventually focuses on Darla to the exclusion of Dru.

You see already your theorizing is creating more questions than it answers, That’s not “theorizing”: Dru says this. And it’s not a problem if such a thing “creates more questions than it answers” because most and possibly almost all of the Darla-Angel-Dru dynamic is a mystery. As I said, the only flashback there is is one that happened literally minutes before Dru sires William Pratt.


whereas mine, is at least more internally consistent: He never loved Darla and felt less for Dru, by Dru's own admission. Dru never said that Angel didn’t love them.


My quote: But Dru siring William makes him jealous. Angel is forever unhappy about Spike ‘taking’ Dru away from him.

I suppose this is where interpretation comes in doesn't it? I honestly didn't see that when I watched Destiny, which I assume is the episode you're using as a reference. I use Season 2 to “Destiny” (A 5.08) as references.


My alternative theory is that Angelus was more than happy for Dru to find someone else (which is why he suggested it), “Destiny” (A 5.08) states otherwise.


The problem is, that you're assuming that Angelus sexual interest in Dru is about love. And attraction.


Talking about another rooster in the henhouse is also about the play for sexual dominance which doesn't necessarily imply love. Huh? Angel was unhappy that Dru sired someone. There was never any indication that Angel was “playing for sexual dominance” with Spike. Angel simply didn’t like that William was being so sentimental about Drusilla and that William seemed to consider Dru William’s girl.


it would be more logical assume that the reason that Angelus shows interest in Dru is sadism and power. When was Angel sadistic with Dru and when did he exert power over her?


Dru also willingly had sex with Angelus and flirted with him, does this mean Dru is in love with Angelus? Drusilla loves Angel and possibly still does in Angel and Faith


Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike? My issue however is that it hurt Spike. For the 1800s stuff the added layer is that William days after Dru sires him he sires his mother. Until Angel had sex with her in that flashback in “Destiny” (A 5.08), Dru wasn’t having sex with Angel. Dru also didn’t know that William considered her ‘his destiny’. It’s implied that soon after that incident that William left Drusilla and Angel and that perhaps the Coal Mine flashback is the first time William – now Spike – meets them again.

Anyway, first off, we don’t know when the moment was that Dru loved Spike more than she loved Angel. We know that in 1896, Angel and Darla were coupled, Spike and Dru were coupled, and that both men were still having sex with both girls. We do know that even in 1898, Dru it seems considered Angel the alpha-male. We know that Drusilla and Spike left Angel and Darla in 1900 and that Dru was ‘dressed more like Spike’ as opposed to how she dressed ‘like Angel’ in the Coal Mine scene.


My quote: As for Darla, the flashbacks seem to show that Angel did love Darla, but that he wouldn’t exactly risk his life for her.

See above about trying to objectively define love... By definition of the word love , Angel loved Darla and Drusilla. It’s the phrase “in love” that there’s no concrete definition for.


I'm merely talking about the general opinion that Dru couldn't love Spike all that much if she doesn't mind seeing his heart break.... So, did Buffy not love Angel all that much when she was dancing with Xander in “When She Was Bad” (2.01)? Also, I’m not sure heartbreak is the right term. He wasn’t happy about Dru having sex with Angel and with the stuff in Season 2. Something that hasn’t been mentioned is how possessive Spike is. Spike didn’t want Dru having any feelings for anyone else. And the same with Buffy. It’s kinda implied that Spike didn’t allow Dru to wear short skirts or anything revealing. And he’s the same way with Buffy. So, for Dru, it may have been normal to continue to be with Angel as well, but for Spike, he actually considered Dru HIS girl. Angel acted like Darla’s pet but after Dru sired Spike, Spike considered Dru his girl and not the other way around.


She didn't really love Spike (was said in your earlier post)

There are many fans who come to that conclusion without having a ship preference that has anything to do with Dru or Spike. It’s absolute canon that Drusilla loved Spike and was in love with Spike. The TV shows state that, Joss states that, Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem With Vampires” states that, all the After the Fall stuff states that. It’s never been implied or suggested that Dru didn’t love Spike or that she wasn’t in love with Spike. So, again, Angel saying things in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) like, “Seems like a lot of trouble for someone who doesn’t even love you.” And “I mean, she is kinda fickle” were things said to merely goad Spike. And because Angel’s still sore that Spike took Dru away from Angel. Remember that Angel is saying this stuff with Buffy right there. In those moments the Spike/Dru relationship is Angel’s concern, not Angel’s relationship with Buffy.


My quote: She wore that necklace for one episode. The point of that scene is to depict Spike’s lessened power and that Angel is currently more powerful.

But let's go deeper than that. She didn't seem more enamoured with Spike's gift, than Angelus'. She was enamored with Angel’s gift? She was enamored with Spike’s gift. Angel’s gift made her ‘hungry’.


The display, as you observe, is clearly a competition between the two men, It’s Angel trying to goad Spike.


so why doesn't Dru discourage Angelus? She likes the idea of both men fighting over her and she likes that Spike is focused on her and not on Buffy.


I know Dru's jealousy is your pet theory, but it's still dependent on conditions that you cannot technically prove, other than your own subjective interpretation of certain scenes, so with this in mind, how do we address this issue? Huh? Maybe I need to say that your interpretations and are merely speculations at-best. “Pet theory”, “cannot technically prove”, “subjective interpretations”. If things were absolute fact and absolute canon, I’d say as such and we wouldn’t need to be debating those things at all. But it makes no sense that Dru would only sense after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Spike was into Buffy.


My quote: No, she says, “Don’t worry Spike. Angel always knows what speaks to a girl’s heart.” She never implied that Spike didn’t.

It struck me as somewhat insensitive though, Perhaps. Although she said that the necklace was “beautiful” and she wore it that episode. Plus, she was saying that Angel could get to Buffy emotionally.


In the context of the scene it seemed, to me at least, as though she was 'choosing' Angelus' gift. Maybe. She had different reactions to them. She found Spike’s gift sweet and didn’t say anything bad about it even though it seems obvious that it’s a much crappier gift than she would get from him if he weren’t wheelchair-bound. She has a visceral reaction to Angel’s gift.


I saw Spike's gift as a more conventional display of affection at least in human terms. It was a sign of love and devotion, pure and simple and Dru seemed to appreciate that.

Angelus' however was a display of 'twisted affection'. Hearts and flowers is what people expect on Valentines day but he perverts this both with Buffy and Dru. Angelus' gift to Dru is steeped in evil intent and she seems to appreciate this. She also understands this evil as his passion and trusts that this display of passion is the perfect way to unsettle Buffy. This is just my interepretation of the scene.

In short, she seems to appreciate Spike's love and devotion but also Angelus' evil. Spike in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) told Buffy and Angel that he gave Dru “beautiful dresses, beautiful jewels, with beautiful girls inside them”. The scene it seems is simply showing Spike’s reduced power and that Angel can rip a heart out of a girl.


My quote: All Angel did is flirt with and touch Dru and comment on Spike being in a wheelchair.

Regardless of how minor you believe her infraction to be, or even if you consider it an infraction, it still hurt Spike. I'm trying to figure out whether Dru knew what she was doing, or not and if she did, why she didn't seem to care. Your seeming to refuse to even consider that Dru knew that Spike was into Buffy really hampers this discussion.

An interesting discussion would be: What would Dru have done in Season 2 with Angelus if Spike wasn’t into Buffy and if Spike wasn’t handicapped. As-is, what should Dru have done? Angelus was a useful ally and Angelus wanted to kill Buffy. Responding to Angel’s flirtation – when did Dru flirt with Angel? – made Spike focus on her. Angel said in “Passion” (2.17?) – which was after “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” (2.16) – that Dru was giving Spike “pity access” and Angel said in “I Only Have Eyes For You” (2.19) that Spike and Dru could always use “another pair of hands”. So, it seems its canon that Dru was having sexual relations with Spike still. But other than allowing Angel to touch her in Spike’s presence thus making Spike jealous, we don’t get any indication that anything is going on between Dru and Angel. Marti Noxon on the DVDs says that nothing happened, the line in Douglas Petrie’s original script about Angel in Season 2 having shagged Dru was taken out, etc. Also, given that Spike was originally going to be killed by Angel as Angel’s first ‘act of evil’ after reverting to Angelus and that Angel and Drusilla were going to be boyfriend and girlfriend, it seems telling that nothing has been shown of Season 2 that shows Angel and Drusilla even kissing. Although – to be fair – they never showed any Xander fantasy of Buffy and Xander even kissing.


My quote: Something that never seems to be discussed is that Dru never admonished Spike for saying things like they don’t care if Angel burns in the sun, that he prefers the souled Angel to the ‘unhinged’ soulless version, etc.

For the purpose of the discussion, I don't see how that's relevent. This thread is about “the relationship between Drusilla and Angel(us)”, so, of course it’s relevant.


Angelus didn't seem to care about what Spike said or did. This was never true in Season 2.


He seemed relatively happy, so there would be no need for Dru to be concerned. Huh? So you’re saying that Angel was “relatively happy” and that’d be good enough for Dru? And you’re saying that Dru wouldn’t think Angel would care that Dru was continuing to have sexual relations with Spike?


Conversely Spike both in the 1800s and 1998, seemed upset about whatever was going on between Angelus and Dru. There is no conversely . Its canon that Angel was initially upset that Dru sired Spike, it seems it’s canon that Angel was initially upset about what Spike felt about Dru. It seems it’s canon that Angel in Season 2 was still attracted to Dru. It seems it’s canon that in Season 2 Angel didn’t want to watch Spike and Dru making out.


My quote: Again, Dru would ultimately prefer – well, probably that Angel never killed her family and that she lived her life as a human

there is no evidence on the show that Dru regrets her life as a vampire. I’m going to be discussing things in Angel and Faith (1.01 – 1.07). Dru does say that she prefers her life as a vampire to what she would have lived as a nun, but she’s saying this when she’s trying to assuage Angel’s guilt over what he did to her, so there’s still no definitive answer on this.


It also doesn't seem that Dru holds onto the pain of her family's death. Angel and Faith 1.07 seems to further make this canon. Dru’s trying to get Angel to let go of his emotional pain and so it doesn’t really make sense that she would lie about having lived all this time with the emotional pain of Angel killing her family and such.


Even the scenes in WML doesn't prove she's upset about it. In her last moments with Angel before Spike and she kills him, she decides to remind him that he killed her family and how that makes her feel.


If I recall Dru doesn't actually comment about she feels about it. The whole thing is her commenting on it. She’s not thanking him for what he did.


My quote: we never see her comment on Darla being dusted, Angel being in hell, etc. We do see her comment on Spike’s feelings for Buffy.

The problem is, with Dru's prescience, we don't know what she knows and when she learns it. We also never saw Dru after 1900 talking about Darla or Angel or being upset that they weren’t around. My point is that Spike was her priority and her concern. Spike never mentions Dru being into Angel. We never see a flashback after 1900 of Dru mourning Darla and/or Angel not being around.


My quote: I consider that Holland in “Redefinition” (2.11) was referring to either Angel not being able to actually take on both Drusilla and Darla in a fight and/or that Drusilla had some sort of supernatural protection that would prevent Angel from killing her.

Nope, all he said is that it would be a course of action more difficult than even he realizes. Where does that “Nope” come from?


In conjunction with the subsequent episode, the emotional inhibiting factors could also be what Holland meant. You earlier implied (if I remember correctly) that Holland did some spell that would emotionally prevent Angel from killing them.

They would know that Angel killed Darla before. It seems it’s more likely that Holland was discussing that Angel couldn’t relatively easily kill Drusilla.


My quote: Angel didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla – beyond that Dru would probably win that fight anyways – because if he had killed her, Spike would have killed him.

If it wasn't for Darla picking up the hammer, Angel would have dusted them. So your argument is that Angel planned to set them afire and didn’t bother to scope out the area to see if there was any way that they could survive that being set afire. And that he was so confident that they would be dusted that he didn’t even bother to see them dusted.


Even if you use the argument that Angel left the hammer there on purpose, they could have panicked or not got there in time Because Angel considered that Darla and Drusilla have terrible survival instincts? He knows Dru said that sunlight could be “hurtful”. He knows that when Buffy showed up in “Passion” (2.17) that Dru wheelchaired Spike outta there. And why would Angel consider that Drusilla would be dusted within a few seconds of being on fire when he talked her up to his Fang Gang as such: “Drusilla's insane, deadly, not in a good mood.” http://buffyworld.com/angel/transcripts/032_tran.html and Angel himself survived being in the sunlight for around that time.


there is literally no evidence that Angel gave a rats arse about Dru, Darla or Spike's reprisal. Other than he didn’t try to actually Drusilla.


Where are you getting this idea that Angel is so afraid of Spike? Why wouldn’t he be? It’s not even known if Angel knows that Spike is chipped at this time. Spike did things like the Judge, The Order of Taraka, that torture vampire.


My quote: He told Doyle that one more poke and he would have given up anything.

I'm not sure how serious Angel was when he said this. He also said, he'd give up Doyle's mother, which I hope was tastless joke. Doyle is his link to and guide from the Powers That Be and Angel’s telling him that one more poke and Angel would have given up anything. That’s not something that Angel would lie about. And even in The Trial, falling on some crosses and dipping his hand in Holy Water resulted in him being barely able to stand. Angel’s not someone who can take a lot of torture.

For the topic, Spike in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) tells Buffy that he’s going to tie Dru up and torture her until she likes him again. And, obviously, that Holy Water that Dru used on Angel in “What’s My Line Part II” (2.10?) was pretty much the Spike/Dru equivalent of hot candle wax.

kana
02-04-12, 02:30 PM
Not feeling too well at the moment so forgive me if this isn't all that coherent.






kana

Angel and Faith further made that canon.

I think I'll need to read the comic books to further my understanding of your point.


I include that because we don’t know what Dru would have done had William Pratt not wanted to and then did sire his mother. We also don’t know what would have happened had William not had to kill Anne Pratt.


The problem is that we're speculating on top of speculation. We have no idea that Dru sleeping with Angelus was motivated by William wanting to sire his mother. In any respect, the question was how Dru felt about Angelus, so my point still stands.


They were during Season 2. It really doesn’t even make any sense if she only first knew of them after they left Sunnydale.

Why? She must have found out some way. If she has psychic powers, she could have had a vision at anytime. She always seems to mention her visions whenever they occur, so considering she never mentions Spike's feelings for Buffy during Season 2 and only mentions it after the events of season 2. All we know for sure is that she knew of Spike's feelings before he did.


Drusilla wasn’t “always straightforward” regarding her feelings. Drusilla didn’t even tell William about Angel and Darla: He found out when she brought him home to them. Dru didn’t tell Spike in “Lie to Me” (2.07) that she saw Angel.

These aren't examples of Dru feeling something and keeping quiet about it. If she was always going to have William meet Angelus and Darla, it wasn't a big deal that she didn't tell him right away. Maybe she wanted it to be a surprise.


And Dru didn’t initially tell Spike why she was cheating on him.

Did she not? By the time they had the conversation about the Chaos demon, Spike mentioned that Dru kept bringing her up. He never mentioned that he didn't know why she cheated, more that he couldn't understand how she came the conclusion that he had feelings for Buffy.


As for the Buffy thing, Dru is not Xander. She wanted Spike to not want Buffy. Even in “Crush” (5.14), she wanted Spike to kill Buffy. And when Spike chose Buffy over Dru, Dru left town and didn’t come back to Spike.

This is your explanation for Dru's behaviour. As for Crush? Well of course she'd want Spike (or herself) to kill Buffy and run off into the sunset (metaphorically speaking of course), but two concepts aren't diametrically opposed. She seemed happy about Spike killing the Chinese Slayer, it doesn't mean her enthusiasm has anything to do with jealousy. Nor does her subsequently being jealous of Buffy prove that when she initially wanted Buffy dead, it was about her not wanting Spike to have feelings for Buffy.


The uncursed version of Angel is simply disgusted with the idea of love, but he obviously loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike.

It depends on one's definition of love. Angel at least has some authority of his own feelings. Love means different things for different people. Under his own definition of love, he never loved anyone (at least romantically) before Buffy.


He was trying to butter Buffy up, but maybe he actually didn’t love anyone when he was a human.

However all the dialogue supports that. He said it to Lindsay, implied to Darla that she didn't make him happy in the same way Buffy did. Elizabeth said he knows neither love nor poetry to which Angelus and Darla didn't disagree. Nothing contradicts what Angel says here, so by saying "no but he did love them" is merely placing your own ideas of love onto Angel(us), which I'm reluctant to do. My personal rule is I tend to believe said characters unless, I have reason to believe otherwise. That is to say, unless, I have reason believe the character is deliberately lying, then I'd hold that the character does (or doesn't) love the person in question under their perception of what they believe love to be.


No, I not only have always said that Angel was in love with Dru, I’ve also said that Season 2 proved that perhaps Angel loved Spike more than Angel loved Buffy.


I agree that it’s harder to define Angelus’s sacrifices for Dru.

Sacrifice was one of the crition for your definition of love and you couldn't even make Angelus fit the mould. Feelings, even feelings of jealousy don't necessarily equate to everyone's definition of love. I'd only hold that Angelus loved Dru under your definition of love.


That’s not “theorizing”: Dru says this. And it’s not a problem if such a thing “creates more questions than it answers” because most and possibly almost all of the Darla-Angel-Dru dynamic is a mystery. As I said, the only flashback there is is one that happened literally minutes before Dru sires William Pratt.

But under my theory, there are no contradictions and no complications. You said "for whatever reason...". Under my theory, Angelus didn't love Darla (no dialogue that denies this and plenty that supports this) and Dru imples that Angelus was more preoccupied with Darla then Dru. (again, nothing that contradicts this). As for the 'rules of play' I agree, it isn't made clear, but it goes back to point about placing our own ideas of love and relationship onto the characters when such ideas don't necessarily apply.


Dru never said that Angel didn’t love them.

No I meant that Dru implied that Angelus was more preoccupied with Darla. Incidently Dru never said that Angelus loved them either.


I use Season 2 to “Destiny” (A 5.08) as references.

Which doesn't contradict that it is your intepretations of such scenes that you are using.


“Destiny” (A 5.08) states otherwise.

Which makes your theory all the more complicated. In your theory, he literally suggests that Dru finds a lover of her own and then suddenly gets jealous doesn't want them to be together, even though he has a lover of his own for whom, Dru implies, he feels more!!!!

We'll look into this in more detail below.


And attraction.

That's fine, I never said Angelus wasn't attracted to Dru.


Huh? Angel was unhappy that Dru sired someone.

He never mentions this outright, that was only your interpretation of the scene.


There was never any indication that Angel was “playing for sexual dominance” with Spike. Angel simply didn’t like that William was being so sentimental about Drusilla and that William seemed to consider Dru William’s girl.

But my theory is more consistent with Angelus' character. He was doing what he was doing, because he's a sadist and somone who likes to be in charge and on top (so to speak). My theory also doesn't make Angelus' behaviour inconsistent. One minute saying 'find someone else' then next saying 'Oh no, don't find someone else!'.


When was Angel sadistic with Dru and when did he exert power over her?]

Well initially, we know that to be the case, because Angelus says so when he talks about eternal torment. I would have thought that it would be less of stretch to say his continuing to sleep with Dru once she'd sired William was about sadism as well (towards William of course.) What could be more cruel than taking away the one thing that defines his existence? All his words in Destiny are completely focused on William. Attempting to twist him, mentor him and make him like a secondary version of him (such as getting him to copy him, at least that's how I read it). For me, personally, Destiny was mostly about Angel and Spike. Dru, Buffy, the Shanshu prophecy were more points of contention, between the two.

Dru asks if Angelus is cross that she made William into a vampire. At first he seems to be, but the scene seems to change when he becomes curious about him and what it would be like to share the slaughter of innocence with another man, but I will agree on one thing, I believe Angelus saw William as a threat. He clearly doesn't mind the company, but seen as Spike has always mention that Angel(us) likes to be in charge, it makes sense that sadism and power are the motivating factors when it comes to sleeping with Dru. That's not say he doesn't enjoy it, but it's not as in he's need of her, he's with Darla and he suggested Dru siring someone in the first place, but this new person has to know the rules and if he can have the chance to be a bastard in the meantime, all the better.


Drusilla loves Angel and possibly still does in Angel and Faith

When I get the chance I'll read it and comment.


Dru also didn’t know that William considered her ‘his destiny’.

When she did find out she still didn't seem as moved as one might have hoped and laughed along with Angelus when he mocked the sentiment.


It’s implied that soon after that incident that William left Drusilla and Angel and that perhaps the Coal Mine flashback is the first time William – now Spike – meets them again.

How is this implied?


By definition of the word love , Angel loved Darla and Drusilla. It’s the phrase “in love” that there’s no concrete definition for.

Actually love in general is a subjective term. We tend to associate it with feelings we have and place conventions on them to make sense of it. By your defintion, anyone in a relationship is in love, or anyone with a relative feels love, but I think while many in these situations would claim to feel love it's not a given that they feel love or are in love.


So, did Buffy not love Angel all that much when she was dancing with Xander in “When She Was Bad” (2.01)?

For one thing that was an isolated incident which was indicative that her behaviour was atypical. She didn't spend a whole season flirting with Xander in front of Angel, so this is not the best of examples.


Also, I’m not sure heartbreak is the right term. He wasn’t happy about Dru having sex with Angel and with the stuff in Season 2.

Without getting too bogged down with semantics, let's just agree that Spike was hurt by Dru's behaviour.


Something that hasn’t been mentioned is how possessive Spike is.

I don't think Spike is particularly possessive. Many people would feel hurt if the person they love flirts or indeed sleeps with someone else.


Spike didn’t want Dru having any feelings for anyone else.

Which isn't uncommon for people who are in love.


And the same with Buffy.

See above.


It’s kinda implied that Spike didn’t allow Dru to wear short skirts or anything revealing. And he’s the same way with Buffy.

When is this implied?


So, for Dru, it may have been normal to continue to be with Angel as well, but for Spike, he actually considered Dru HIS girl. Angel acted like Darla’s pet but after Dru sired Spike, Spike considered Dru his girl and not the other way around.

One thing on which I would agree is that it's possible that Dru and Spike may have different views on love.



It’s absolute canon that Drusilla loved Spike and was in love with Spike. The TV shows state that, Joss states that, Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem With Vampires” states that, all the After the Fall stuff states that.

Oh don't get me wrong I believe that she loved him, but I can understand that from her behaviour alone, people may be confused. One minute she's affectionate, the next she doesn't mind hurting his feelings.


It’s never been implied or suggested that Dru didn’t love Spike or that she wasn’t in love with Spike. So, again, Angel saying things in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) like, “Seems like a lot of trouble for someone who doesn’t even love you.” And “I mean, she is kinda fickle” were things said to merely goad Spike.

Or he could have simply come to that conclusion, or maybe it's a bit of both. I can understand that Angel might come to that conclusion, due to the fact that whenever we see him show sexual interest in Dru, she responds positively. I'm not saying he's right, but I can understand that he would think that.


And because Angel’s still sore that Spike took Dru away from Angel.

Something that you've yet to prove.


Remember that Angel is saying this stuff with Buffy right there. In those moments the Spike/Dru relationship is Angel’s concern, not Angel’s relationship with Buffy.

I don't really know what you're trying to imply here.


She was enamored with Angel’s gift? She was enamored with Spike’s gift. Angel’s gift made her ‘hungry’.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean. Contextually, let's look at this. Dru obviously knows Angelus is presenting her with a Valentine's day gift, so her reaction and saying that he knows what speaks to a girls heart, while being a play on words seems to imply liked the gift for what it was.


It’s Angel trying to goad Spike.

I'm not disagreeing with that, but I was more speculating the meaning behind the gift and significance of it.


She likes the idea of both men fighting over her and she likes that Spike is focused on her and not on Buffy.

The first part of that sentence I believe is true, the second part is your speculation.


Huh? Maybe I need to say that your interpretations and are merely speculations at-best. “Pet theory”, “cannot technically prove”, “subjective interpretations”. If things were absolute fact and absolute canon, I’d say as such and we wouldn’t need to be debating those things at all.

But I at least like to qualify my statements. If I'm merely speculating I'll try and say so and admit to doing so. If not, I'd at least look at quotes and character consisency to make sense of the more ambiguous elements of the story.


But it makes no sense that Dru would only sense after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Spike was into Buffy.

Technically we only know that Dru knew afer the events of Becoming. The rest is speculation.


Perhaps. Although she said that the necklace was “beautiful” and she wore it that episode. Plus, she was saying that Angel could get to Buffy emotionally.

Which I always saw as Dru taking Angelus side in the argument, but it is more my opinion that she can understand both Spike and Angelus, probably more than Spike and Angelus can understand each other, at least in that season, but that's just my feeling.


Maybe. She had different reactions to them. She found Spike’s gift sweet and didn’t say anything bad about it even though it seems obvious that it’s a much crappier gift than she would get from him if he weren’t wheelchair-bound. She has a visceral reaction to Angel’s gift.

I think her reaction to his gift was more to do with the moment, but I don't believe it's telling of her feelings towards Angelus in general. My personal feeling is that she was never in love with him like she was with Spike.


Spike in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) told Buffy and Angel that he gave Dru “beautiful dresses, beautiful jewels, with beautiful girls inside them”. The scene it seems is simply showing Spike’s reduced power and that Angel can rip a heart out of a girl.

I think that is one of the things depicted in that scene, absolutely. Angelus also adds insult to injury, by putting on the necklace, again, attempting to undermine Spike further.


Your seeming to refuse to even consider that Dru knew that Spike was into Buffy really hampers this discussion.

As I said, it assumes too much. I don't mind a bit a speculation, but you're speculating then speculating on top of that speculation. We don't know when Dru learned of his feelings and we don't know that Dru flirting with Angelus has anything to do with that. We don't know that Dru sleeping with Angelus had anything to do with William siring his mother.



An interesting discussion would be: What would Dru have done in Season 2 with Angelus if Spike wasn’t into Buffy and if Spike wasn’t handicapped. As-is, what should Dru have done?

I have no idea as I don't know if Dru's behaviour is related at all to Spike being into Buffy or if Spike being handicapped had anything to do with her responding to Angelus' attention so readily, aside from Spike being able to do little about it.


Angelus was a useful ally and Angelus wanted to kill Buffy.

Again, speculation. We have no idea that, that's the reason she was flirting with him.


Responding to Angel’s flirtation – when did Dru flirt with Angel? – made Spike focus on her.

Well Spike seemed to think Dru at least acted differently when Angelus was around her and we don't know if Dru was thinking that Spike would focus his attention on her, if she were to share a flirtation with Angelus. This is a complete hyopthetical on your part and you have little in the way of dialogue to support this.


Angel said in “Passion” (2.17?) – which was after “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” (2.16) – that Dru was giving Spike “pity access” and Angel said in “I Only Have Eyes For You” (2.19) that Spike and Dru could always use “another pair of hands”. So, it seems its canon that Dru was having sexual relations with Spike still.

So? Many people can flirt with others or even sleep with others, even if they are getting sex from their partner, so I fail to understand what your point is.


But other than allowing Angel to touch her in Spike’s presence thus making Spike jealous, we don’t get any indication that anything is going on between Dru and Angel. Marti Noxon on the DVDs says that nothing happened, the line in Douglas Petrie’s original script about Angel in Season 2 having shagged Dru was taken out, etc. Also, given that Spike was originally going to be killed by Angel as Angel’s first ‘act of evil’ after reverting to Angelus and that Angel and Drusilla were going to be boyfriend and girlfriend, it seems telling that nothing has been shown of Season 2 that shows Angel and Drusilla even kissing. Although – to be fair – they never showed any Xander fantasy of Buffy and Xander even kissing.

Even if that's the case it doesn't prove that her actions are only to do with getting Spike to focus on her and not on Buffy. We don't even know if Angelus attempted to have sex with Dru and she refused. In short, we don't know that them not sleeping together was to do with Dru not wanting to or Angelus never going that far.


This thread is about “the relationship between Drusilla and Angel(us)”, so, of course it’s relevant.

You took what I said out of context. I meant it wasn't relevant, because Angelus doesn't seem to react or seem hurt by Spike saying such things.


This was never true in Season 2.

I can't remember Angelus being hurt or even that bothered by Spike's words, examples?


Huh? So you’re saying that Angel was “relatively happy” and that’d be good enough for Dru? And you’re saying that Dru wouldn’t think Angel would care that Dru was continuing to have sexual relations with Spike?

Yes, prove otherwise.


There is no conversely . Its canon that Angel was initially upset that Dru sired Spike, it seems it’s canon that Angel was initially upset about what Spike felt about Dru.

100% no! This is your personal interpretation. You cannot come up with one direct quote that proves this. I gave an alternative interpretation, which you rejected without explaning why even though my theory is more consistent with Angelus' character.


It seems it’s canon that Angel in Season 2 was still attracted to Dru.

I never said he wasn't attracted to her.


It seems it’s canon that in Season 2 Angel didn’t want to watch Spike and Dru making out.

I suppose you mean the scene in WML. I don't suppose many people would want to watch someone kissing right in front of them and Angel seemed more annoyed that his plan didn't work.


I’m going to be discussing things in Angel and Faith (1.01 – 1.07). Dru does say that she prefers her life as a vampire to what she would have lived as a nun, but she’s saying this when she’s trying to assuage Angel’s guilt over what he did to her, so there’s still no definitive answer on this.

Again, I'll read it and come to my own conclusion when I get the chance.


Angel and Faith 1.07 seems to further make this canon. Dru’s trying to get Angel to let go of his emotional pain and so it doesn’t really make sense that she would lie about having lived all this time with the emotional pain of Angel killing her family and such.

As above, but...

If Dru wanted Angel to let go of his emotional pain, this doesn't prove that she was holding on to the pain of what he did. In season 2 she seemed happy to watch Angel suffer by watching Buffy di, but now she cares about his feelings? Either way she's changed her attitude, so one doesn't necessarily prove the other.


In her last moments with Angel before Spike and she kills him, she decides to remind him that he killed her family and how that makes her feel.

We'll chalk this up to 'agree to disagree.', because we're never going to find a resolution to this.


The whole thing is her commenting on it. She’s not thanking him for what he did.

No. She never actually comments on how she feels about it.


We also never saw Dru after 1900 talking about Darla or Angel or being upset that they weren’t around. My point is that Spike was her priority and her concern.

I'm not saying that he wasn't, but I don't comment on what I don't see, I comment on what I do see. We do see Drusilla wanting to bring Angel and Darla into the fold. We do see Drusilla upset when Darla initially appears to reject her.

We have almost 97 odd years of Dru and Spike that's undocumented on the show, much less about what Dru was thinking. All I'm saying is that Dru wanted to put her family, back together which is something she said.


Spike never mentions Dru being into Angel. We never see a flashback after 1900 of Dru mourning Darla and/or Angel not being around.

Maybe Dru always knew she'd sire Darla again who knows, but my point still stands, we don't know what her reaction to Darla was initially.


Where does that “Nope” come from?

Holland never mentioned Dru's precognition being a factor nor did he specify it would find it difficult to kill them was about him being physically able to take them in a fight.


They would know that Angel killed Darla before. It seems it’s more likely that Holland was discussing that Angel couldn’t relatively easily kill Drusilla.

This is why I said in conjuncture with the subsequent episode. Angel kept going on about how he was too close to Darla, emotionally. Yes he killed Darla before, but then he bonded with her when she as human. Even Dru talks about this emotional bond. "He remembers when you were warm". So I'd argue that it's more about Darla than anything else, who lest we forget Angel only killed when she directly threatened Buffy's life.


You earlier implied (if I remember correctly) that Holland did some spell that would emotionally prevent Angel from killing them.

Not once did I imply that.




So your argument is that Angel planned to set them afire and didn’t bother to scope out the area to see if there was any way that they could survive that being set afire. And that he was so confident that they would be dusted that he didn’t even bother to see them dusted.

In short yes. The main issue is that he couldn't get close enough to dust them anyway. It wasn't logic that was dictating his actions, but emotion.


Because Angel considered that Darla and Drusilla have terrible survival instincts? He knows Dru said that sunlight could be “hurtful”. He knows that when Buffy showed up in “Passion” (2.17) that Dru wheelchaired Spike outta there. And why would Angel consider that Drusilla would be dusted within a few seconds of being on fire when he talked her up to his Fang Gang as such: “Drusilla's insane, deadly, not in a good mood.” [url]

Like I said, all we know is that he couldn't get too close to dust them face to face, presumably that superseded his determination to ge the job done...



Other than he didn’t try to actually Drusilla.

yes, but one could argue that they would have got revenge on Angel for the attempt. Again, even more speculation on your part.


Why wouldn’t he be? It’s not even known if Angel knows that Spike is chipped at this time. Spike did things like the Judge, The Order of Taraka, that torture vampire.

Incidently, it's unlikely that Spike being chipped would stop him from going attacking Angel without pain, secondly, Spike being dangerous does not mean that Angel would be afraid of him. Angel's in danger every day and wasn't afraid of a powerful multi-dimensional law firm. Regardless of how badass Spike is, Angel's never given any sign that's he's afraid of him. This is yet more fanon.


Doyle is his link to and guide from the Powers That Be and Angel’s telling him that one more poke and Angel would have given up anything. That’s not something that Angel would lie about.

I'm not saying he's lying per se, but it's more a figure of speech. As I said, I doubt he'd admit he would have given up Doyle's mother.


And even in The Trial, falling on some crosses and dipping his hand in Holy Water resulted in him being barely able to stand. Angel’s not someone who can take a lot of torture.

Yet he still completed the trials successfully, didn't give up the ring, and survived a hell dimension that Giles stated that only someone with great character could with any semblence of self. I'm not saying Angel's the strongest character, but nothing suggests he's generally weaker than most others. In any respect, Angel never demonstrates he's afraid of Spike. Frankly, I wont accept anything less the quote on this from now on.


For the topic, Spike in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) tells Buffy that he’s going to tie Dru up and torture her until she likes him again. And, obviously, that Holy Water that Dru used on Angel in “What’s My Line Part II” (2.10?) was pretty much the Spike/Dru equivalent of hot candle wax.


We've never seen Dru's reaction to Holy Water. In terms of bondage,torture and such, we have little idea of Dru's threshold.

TimeTravellingBunny
02-04-12, 03:21 PM
For the purpose of the discussion, I don't see how that's relevent. Angelus didn't seem to care about what Spike said or did.



This was never true in Season 2.



I can't remember Angelus being hurt or even that bothered by Spike's words, examples?

I don't know what MikeB meant, but Angelus was obviously upset and angry in Innocence when Spike said he used to be "Slayer's lapdog", even though he ends up kissing Spike instead of hitting him or whatever, and they all end up laughing, which looked to me like Angelus composing himself and deciding to pretend he's not bothered (and he has ways to get back at Spike, which he goes on to do in the subsequent episodes).

In the original script:


SPIKE
I gotta tell you, it made me sick
to my stomach seeing you being
the Slayer's lapdog -

Angel grabs his throat suddenly, brings his face close to Spike's. And then kisses his forehead. Lets him go.
In the episode (from a transcript):


Spike: I've got to tell you, it made me sick to my stomach seeing you
being the Slayer's lapdog.

Angelus growls and grabs Spike by the shirt. Then he kisses him on the
forehead and steps back. Spike busts up laughing. Angelus and Drusilla
join in.

kana
02-04-12, 03:47 PM
I don't know what MikeB meant, but Angelus was obviously upset and angry in Innocence when Spike said he used to be "Slayer's lapdog", even though he ends up kissing Spike instead of hitting him or whatever, and they all end up laughing, which looked to me like Angelus composing himself and deciding to pretend he's not bothered (and he has ways to get back at Spike, which he goes on to do in the subsequent episodes).

In the original script:

In the episode (from a transcript):

I understand, but clearly Angelus behaviour was a lot more hurtful to Spike than the other way around.

Comments about him preferring the 'Buffywhipped Angelus' didn't seem to annoy him that much. I would have thought that Angelus flirting with Drusilla, the woman he loved would be a lot worse, but Dru didn't seem to care or was oblivious to how much it was hurting Spike, and that was my original point.

TimeTravellingBunny
02-04-12, 05:00 PM
I understand, but clearly Angelus behaviour was a lot more hurtful to Spike than the other way around.

Comments about him preferring the 'Buffywhipped Angelus' didn't seem to annoy him that much. I would have thought that Angelus flirting with Drusilla, the woman he loved would be a lot worse, but Dru didn't seem to care or was oblivious to how much it was hurting Spike, and that was my original point.
Yes, it was worse, but I think t Spike's comments did annoy him a lot, as the scene I quoted showed - he hated the fact that he loved Buffy so much when he had a soul and how he behaved, he thinks about it as a weakness, and Buffy was his weakness - and as Willow observed, he was still obsessed with her; the feelings didn't disappear, but they turned from love into something else, which manifested in his desire to hurt her. He hates love, he sees it as a weakness, and Spike's words hit right where it hurts. All the more reason to use Spike's biggest weakness - Drusilla - to hurt and humiliate him. Angelus flirting with Drusilla was just a part of his mind games and rivalry with Spike.

No argument about Dru - I was talking about the relationship between Angelus and Spike.

kana
02-04-12, 05:22 PM
Yes, it was worse, but I think t Spike's comments did annoy him a lot, as the scene I quoted showed - he hated the fact that he loved Buffy so much when he had a soul and how he behaved, he thinks about it as a weakness, and Buffy was his weakness - and as Willow observed, he was still obsessed with her; the feelings didn't disappear, but they turned from love into something else, which manifested in his desire to hurt her. He hates love, he sees it as a weakness, and Spike's words hit right where it hurts.

Agreed, although it's worth noticing that Spike didn't appear to be trying to get at Angelus at that point, but I agree that Angelus was clearly disgusted by the feelings of love.


All the more reason to use Spike's biggest weakness - Drusilla - to hurt and humiliate him. Angelus flirting with Drusilla was just a part of his mind games and rivalry with Spike.

I'm more than certain, it's about power and pain (Spike's pain). So I'd agree going after Dru was more about Spike (both in the 1880s and 1998) than it was about Dru, although I'm sure he didn't mind that in itself.


No argument about Dru - I was talking about the relationship between Angelus and Spike.

No probs, agreed. :)

MikeB
14-05-12, 07:46 AM
As for when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy: We should probably agree to disagree. I consider that that Dru in “Halloween” (2.06) walks in on Spike watching ‘Buffy porn’ and that she then gets insecure and feels the need to ask him: “Do you love my insides, the parts you can’t see?” The gist is that “Halloween” (2.06) was at-latest when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy. You not agreeing with that means we have different contexts for Season 2 Spike/Dru and Season 2 Angel-Dru.

Regarding the Season 2 Angel-Dru stuff: Dru did allow and was at least somewhat ‘responsive’ to Angel’s flirting and touching her. But we don’t know why. Is it because she was still into Angel? Was it because of her knowing that Spike was into Buffy and Dru wanted Spike’s focus on Dru and not Buffy? Was it a combo? If Spike weren’t wheelchair-bound, what would the dynamic between Spike, Dru, and Angelus be? Angel in “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” (2.16) says that Dru is still having sexual relations with Spike. Never in the Buffyverse is it said that Angel had sex with Dru in Season 2.




kana



We have no idea that Dru sleeping with Angelus was motivated by William wanting to sire his mother. I didn’t say that. It’s possible that Drusilla wouldn’t have even gone back to Angel and Darla had Spike wanted it to him and Dru (meaning not him, Dru, and his mother).

And what we do know is that for at least possibly weeks after William met Angel, Dru wasn’t having sex with Angel.


In any respect, the question was how Dru felt about Angelus, so my point still stands. What point? Anyway, when Spike’s in the picture, it’s not just about Drusilla feelings for Angel.


All we know for sure is that she knew of Spike's feelings [for Buffy] before he did. I agree with this only because I consider that she knew in “School Hard” (2.03) that Spike was going to fall for Buffy and that’s why – or at least a reason why – she was so desperate for Spike to kill Buffy.


My quote: And Dru didn’t initially tell Spike why she was cheating on him.

Did she not? By the time they had the conversation about the Chaos demon, Spike mentioned that Dru kept bringing her up. He never mentioned that he didn't know why she cheated, more that he couldn't understand how she came the conclusion that he had feelings for Buffy. I’m going off of Spike’s words from “Lovers Walk” (3.08). He was talking about how Dru thought he had gone soft. It’s possible that Dru told him right away that he was in love with Buffy and that’s why she was cheating. But the first time this is made definitive is her conversation with him after he finds her there with the Chaos Demon.


Under his own definition of love, he never loved anyone (at least romantically) before Buffy. No, that’s merely something he said to Buffy in “Earshot” (3.18?) Seeing the flashbacks, he obviously loved Darla romantically and he loved Drusilla and Spike at least in some way.


Elizabeth said he knows neither love nor poetry to which Angelus and Darla didn't disagree. Well, certainly Angel and Darla weren’t lovey dovey to the extent that James and Elizabeth are.

Angel is a liar. Angel had Buffy believing that he was a nobleman who dated noblewomen. Angel had Buffy believing that since being cursed, he hadn’t killed any humans or caused the death of any humans. So, one shouldn’t simply take Angel at his word that he hadn’t loved anyone before Buffy. Maybe Angel believes that he never loved Darla, but the flashbacks prove that he did love Darla.


Sacrifice was one of the crition for your definition of love and you couldn't even make Angelus fit the mould. Angel did the Judge thing and did the Acathla thing and those are things that Dru wanted done. In A&F 1.09 It’s strongly implied that Angel still loves Dru. Not maybe in a romantic way, but love nonetheless.


Feelings, even feelings of jealousy don't necessarily equate to everyone's definition of love. I'd only hold that Angelus loved Dru under your definition of love. That’s enough for me. :) I consider that Angel was simply in denial that he was in love with Darla. I consider that Angel loved Dru and Spike and that he knew that. I consider that for whatever reason he liked to put his love for Buffy in a special category but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t love Darla or Dru.


Under my theory, Angelus didn't love Darla I’ve already mentioned the flashbacks so… do you consider that the ‘present-day’ Angel/Darla stuff in AtS was because of Jasmine?


My quote: “Destiny” (A 5.08) states otherwise.

Which makes your theory all the more complicated. These relationships are complicated.


In your theory, he literally suggests that Dru finds a lover of her own Huh? That’s not a theory. That’s canon.


and then suddenly gets jealous doesn't want them to be together, That “suddenly gets jealous” when he sees that she sired William is also canon. I never said that Angel didn’t want Dru to be with William. He’s initially jealous but then he quickly sees William as his possible new BFF.


even though he has a lover of his own for whom, Dru implies, he feels more!!!! So, merely because he was with Darla as well that somehow means that Angel would be okay that Dru has sired herself a lover/‘mate’?

My quote: Angel was unhappy that Dru sired someone.

I should have said “initially unhappy”.


My quote: There was never any indication that Angel was “playing for sexual dominance” with Spike. Angel simply didn’t like that William was being so sentimental about Drusilla and that William seemed to consider Dru William’s girl.

But my theory is more consistent with Angelus' character. He was doing what he was doing, because he's a sadist and somone who likes to be in charge and on top (so to speak). Angel was Darla’s puppy dog. And what does Angel being a sadist have to do with Angel “playing for sexual dominance” with Spike?


My quote: When was Angel sadistic with Dru and when did he exert power over her?

Well initially, we know that to be the case, because Angelus says so when he talks about eternal torment. I obviously was referring to Drusilla after she is a vampire.


I would have thought that it would be less of stretch to say his continuing to sleep with Dru once she'd sired William was about sadism as well (towards William of course.) Maybe the initial time. But, again, Angel only did this after he sees William talking about Dru as his destiny and William clearly considering Dru his girl and not both Angel’s and his girl. We don’t know the exact history. William at some point left Angel, Dru (and Darla?) which is why Angel didn’t know that William had changed his accent and such. And the next flashback we see of them (1896 C.E.) after the mine shaft flashback has Angel and Darla coupled and Spike and Dru coupled and by then the boys were both having sex with both girls.


What could be more cruel than taking away the one thing that defines his existence? What is this “taking away the one thing” referring to? Because Angel didn’t take away Dru.


All his words in Destiny are completely focused on William. Attempting to twist him, mentor him and make him like a secondary version of him (such as getting him to copy him, at least that's how I read it). Are you referring to both the flashbacks and the present-day stuff?


For me, personally, Destiny was mostly about Angel and Spike. Dru, Buffy, the Shanshu prophecy were more points of contention, between the two. It was about Angel wanting to see Spike as ‘lower’ or ‘not as good’ – meaning in both ways – as himself and Spike knowing that he is better than Angel and Spike taking the opportunity to tell Angel that and kick his ass. It was also about Spike knowing that Buffy still has feelings for Angel and that being enough to not have Spike go back to Buffy.


I believe Angelus saw William as a threat. Only in is his ability to take Dru away from him.


it makes sense that sadism and power are the motivating factors when it comes to sleeping with Dru. Angel made Penn to be like him. He was annoyed with the way James acted. Angel tried to make William like him. Angel didn’t like how William was talking about Dru. William at the time already looked up to Angel and seemed to regard him as his BFF and possibly an older brother or father figure. And Angel wanted to be BFFs with William. At its core, Angel had sex with Dru because Angel considered her “our Drusilla” and Angel didn’t like how William was describing William’s relationship with Dru in such a sentimental and lovey dovey way.


My quote: Dru also didn’t know that William considered her ‘his destiny’.

Oops, I meant the part about him saying “We’re forever, Dru and me.”


My quote: By definition of the word love , Angel loved Darla and Drusilla. It’s the phrase “in love” that there’s no concrete definition for.

Actually love in general is a subjective term. There is a definition for the word. “In love” is the subjective phrase.


By your defintion, anyone in a relationship is in love, or anyone with a relative feels love, I never said either of these things.


I don't think Spike is particularly possessive. Really?


My quote: It’s kinda implied that Spike didn’t allow Dru to wear short skirts or anything revealing. And he’s the same way with Buffy.

When is this implied? “Something Blue” (4.09) with Spike’s comment that if he sees Buffy wearing that skirt, he’s calling off the wedding.


One thing on which I would agree is that it's possible that Dru and Spike may have different views on love. I never said such a thing.


Oh don't get me wrong I believe that she loved him, but I can understand that from her behaviour alone, people may be confused. One minute she's affectionate, the next she doesn't mind hurting his feelings. First off, it shouldn’t be “I believe”, it should be “I know”. Dru being in love with Spike isn’t debatable: its fact. Spike hurt Dru’s feelings as well. Dru was hurt by Spike being in love with Buffy. That doesn’t suggest that Spike didn’t love Dru. Dru allowing Angel to flirt with her and touch her and liking that Spike was getting jealous because of that doesn’t suggest that Dru didn’t love Spike.

My quote: It’s never been implied or suggested that Dru didn’t love Spike or that she wasn’t in love with Spike. So, again, Angel saying things in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) like, “Seems like a lot of trouble for someone who doesn’t even love you.” And “I mean, she is kinda fickle” were things said to merely goad Spike.

Angel in “Destiny” (A 5.08) never implied that Dru didn’t love Spike or that Dru wasn’t Spike’s girl. That’s a main reason why Angel focused on Spike’s relationship with Buffy.


My quote: And because Angel’s still sore that Spike took Dru away from Angel.

Something that you've yet to prove. Why otherwise would Angel in “Destiny” (A 5.08) even bring up Dru?


My quote: Remember that Angel is saying this stuff with Buffy right there. In those moments the Spike/Dru relationship is Angel’s concern, not Angel’s relationship with Buffy.

I don't really know what you're trying to imply here. What I said. At that moment, a pis)sing match between Angel and Spike about Spike/Dru was more important to him than Angel’s relationship with Buffy.


My quote: She was enamored with Angel’s gift? She was enamored with Spike’s gift. Angel’s gift made her ‘hungry’.

Dru obviously knows Angelus is presenting her with a Valentine's day gift, so her reaction and saying that he knows what speaks to a girls heart, while being a play on words seems to imply liked the gift for what it was. Huh? What is the “for what it was”? She wasn’t enamored with Angel’s gift; she was enamored with Spike’s gift. She found Angel’s gift more ‘potent’.


But I at least like to qualify my statements. If something is absolute canon, I’ll say so and consider it not debatable. Everything said on this Board that is debatable we argue and debate those things using our analysis, considerations, reasoning, interpretations, etc.


If I'm merely speculating I'll try and say so and admit to doing so. Speculating is guessing based on incomplete facts or information. I try to avoid speculating when discussing the Buffyverse and try to simply say things like “We don’t really know about Angel/Dru was like from 1860 – 1880 because the first flashback we see is the one that took place literally minutes before Dru sired William Pratt.


My quote: Perhaps. Although she said that the necklace was “beautiful” and she wore it that episode. Plus, she was saying that Angel could get to Buffy emotionally.

Which I always saw as Dru taking Angelus side in the argument, Perhaps. But why? I consider that Spike and Dru didn’t believe that Angel could simply go fight Buffy and kill her. So, Dru could have simply reasoned that Angel needed to rely on his ‘mind games’ and whatever in order to emotionally hurt Buffy in order to have a chance of being able to kill Buffy.


but it is more my opinion that she can understand both Spike and Angelus, probably more than Spike and Angelus can understand each other, at least in that season, but that's just my feeling. Huh? What are you saying?


My personal feeling is that [Dru] was never in love with [Angel] like she was with Spike. I assume you mean she was never in love with Angel to the extent that she was in love with Spike. In A&F, we see that Dru was glad that Angel sired her because otherwise she would have lived a boring life as a nun but that she was forever traumatized by what Angel did to her before he sired her. So, Dru loves Angel as her ‘daddy’, but she was always resentful about what Angel did to her before he became her ‘daddy’. We never see 1860-1880, so, we don’t actually know how much Dru was in love with Angel during that time. It seems that after Spike killed the Chinese Slayer that she certainly loves Spike more than she loves Angel and that since then she has never loved Angel more than she has loved Spike. But we don’t know when from 1880 to 1900 was the moment or time that she loved Spike more than she loved Angel.


My quote: Angelus was a useful ally and Angelus wanted to kill Buffy.

We have no idea that, that's the reason she was flirting with him. Not sure what I said before, but my point is is that this is a reason why Dru would want Angel ‘on her team’. I consider that Dru didn’t think that Spike would dump her over her actions with Angel in Season 2, so her responding to Angel’s flirting only resulted in Spike being jealous.


My quote: when did Dru flirt with Angel?

“Well Spike seemed to think Dru at least acted differently when Angelus was around her” and “she were to share a flirtation with Angelus” So, you agree that she was merely responding to Angel’s flirting and that she wasn’t ‘flirting with Angel’?


I can't remember Angelus being hurt or even that bothered by Spike's words, examples? “Innocence” (2.14): Spike calling Angel “the Slayer’s lapdog”. “Passion” (2.17): Spike saying that he likes the cursed Angel better because non-cursed Angel is acting crazy and irrational and his actions are only going to result in a “brassed off Slayer”.


My quote: So you’re saying that Angel was “relatively happy” and that’d be good enough for Dru? And you’re saying that Dru wouldn’t think Angel would care that Dru was continuing to have sexual relations with Spike?

Yes, prove otherwise. Where do you get the idea that in Season 2 non-cursed Angel was “relatively happy”?

For the latter stuff, I consider that Dru didn’t have sex with Angel in Season 2, so, it’s a moot point.


My quote: It seems it’s canon that in Season 2 Angel didn’t want to watch Spike and Dru making out.

I suppose you mean the scene in WML. I don't suppose many people would want to watch someone kissing right in front of them and Angel seemed more annoyed that his plan didn't work . Annoyed? Upset or devastated it seems better fit. What does Angel’s plan not working have to do with Angel not wanting to see Spike making out with Dru?


She never actually comments on how she feels about it. This is regarding Dru in “What’s My Line Part II” (2.10?) torturing Angel and reminding him about what he did to her family: Do you actually need to her say, “I don’t like that you murdered my family”? Well, she does that in A&F .


All I'm saying is that Dru wanted to put her family, back together which is something she said. Actually, it’s not a given that in Season 2 she actually wanted that or in AtS s3 that she wanted that. What is a given is that she wanted Spike in love with her and wanting to be with her and that she didn’t want him in love with Buffy and wanting to be with Buffy. We never see Dru being upset that Angel was in a hell dimension. We see her upset that Spike’s been thinking about Buffy. We see Dru dumping Darla off with Lindsey and not going back to Los Angeles after she sees that Spike for the time being is lost to her because he prefers to be with Buffy.


Holland never mentioned Dru's precognition being a factor nor did he specify it would find it difficult to kill them was about him being physically able to take them in a fight. We don’t know what Holland meant by his saying, “I think he’ll find that course of action more difficult than even he realizes.”


So I'd argue that it's more about Darla than anything else, who lest we forget Angel only killed when she directly threatened Buffy's life. But Angel did threaten to kill her. And he seemed to psyche himself up for that. In Season 2, Spike was in town with Dru. Angel knows that Spike can kill Slayers. And yet Angel in Season 2 never tried anything against Spike or Dru.


My quote: So your argument is that Angel planned to set them afire and didn’t bother to scope out the area to see if there was any way that they could survive that being set afire. And that he was so confident that they would be dusted that he didn’t even bother to see them dusted.

In short yes. The main issue is that he couldn't get close enough to dust them anyway. It wasn't logic that was dictating his actions, but emotion. So, Angel’s emotions made him not scope out the place and made him not make sure that they were actually dusted: that’s your argument? That doesn’t reconcile with Angel being able to plan that whole ‘trap’. He was cold an collected, not emotional.


all we know is that he couldn't get too close to dust them face to face, presumably that superseded his determination to ge the job done... So, he didn’t mind if they weren’t actually dusted?


My quote: he didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla

yes, Are you agreeing that Angel “didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla”?


but one could argue that they would have got revenge on Angel for the attempt. Causing healable burns is far different from actually dusting her.


Regardless of how badass Spike is, Angel's never given any sign that's he's afraid of him. He destroyed the Gem of Amarra. Angel may like his chances against Spike in a one-on-one fight (because he’s in denial about Spike’s ability to beat him up). But Spike did things like the Order of Taraka, hired a torture demon, etc.


My quote: Doyle is his link to and guide from the Powers That Be and Angel’s telling him that one more poke and Angel would have given up anything. That’s not something that Angel would lie about.

I'm not saying he's lying per se, but it's more a figure of speech. Or, he meant it. How is that possibly a figure of speech?


My quote: And even in The Trial, falling on some crosses and dipping his hand in Holy Water resulted in him being barely able to stand. Angel’s not someone who can take a lot of torture.

Yet he still completed the trials successfully, I didn’t say he failed them.


didn't give up the ring, Angel said one more poker…


and survived a hell dimension that Giles stated that only someone with great character could with any semblence of self. No, Giles wasn’t discussing one’s ability to survive the dimension. The discussion was about how Angel would return from such a place.


Frankly, I wont accept anything less the quote on this from now on. I always say that one cannot know the Buffyverse by reading transcripts on Buffyworld.com.

Unless Angel completely forgot about the Order of Taraka thing and the torture demon thing or Angel now believed that Spike no longer cared at all for Dru, it’s completely unreasonable to think that Angel wouldn’t consider Spike’s reaction if he found out that Angel had dusted Dru.


We've never seen Dru's reaction to Holy Water. In terms of bondage,torture and such, we have little idea of Dru's threshold. Dru had the Holy Water there already. Why would it be there if not for sex play between Spike and her?

________________________________________________


clearly Angelus behaviour was a lot more hurtful to Spike than the other way around. Sure, but Spike was wheelchair-bound. And only Angel’s flirting with Drusilla was hurtful to Spike. It doesn’t seem that Spike was affected by Angel’s talking about him being wheelchair-bound. Angel meanwhile was affected by Spike’s words.


Comments about him preferring the 'Buffywhipped Angelus' didn't seem to annoy him that much. I consider upset is a better word for it.


I would have thought that Angelus flirting with Drusilla, the woman he loved would be a lot worse, but Dru didn't seem to care or was oblivious to how much it was hurting Spike, and that was my original point. But your points are based off of Dru not knowing about Spike’s interest in Buffy until after they had already left Sunnydale.

__________________________________________________ _


going after Dru was more about Spike (both in the 1880s and 1998) than it was about Dru, although I'm sure he didn't mind that in itself. From 1880 to 1898, Angel wanted Spike as his BFF. Dru was about Angel considering Dru both of theirs and not only Spike’s. In 1998, if anything, it was about Spike’s mocking of Angel and his talking down to Angel. Angel couldn’t kill Spike, calling Spike “sit and spin” and the like didn’t affect Spike. But Angel could ‘get back at’ Spike by flirting with Dru.



TimeTravellingBunny


All the more reason to use Spike's biggest weakness - Drusilla - to hurt and humiliate him. Angelus flirting with Drusilla was just a part of his mind games and rivalry with Spike. I’d agree that – at this time – Dru is Spike’s emotional weakness, but she’s not a weakness otherwise.

kana
21-05-12, 01:29 AM
As for when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy: We should probably agree to disagree. I consider that that Dru in “Halloween” (2.06) walks in on Spike watching ‘Buffy porn’ and that she then gets insecure and feels the need to ask him: “Do you love my insides, the parts you can’t see?” The gist is that “Halloween” (2.06) was at-latest when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy. You not agreeing with that means we have different contexts for Season 2 Spike/Dru and Season 2 Angel-Dru.

I think agreeing to disagree might be the best option in this instance. Such matters are always going to be open to interpretation and very little indicates to me personally that Dru's words were anything other than he looking for attention in general from Spike, rather than saying it as reaction to Spike watching a video of Buffy, especially when we don't even see a shot of Dru looking at Spike watching the video before she says the line.


Regarding the Season 2 Angel-Dru stuff: Dru did allow and was at least somewhat ‘responsive’ to Angel’s flirting and touching her. But we don’t know why. Is it because she was still into Angel? Was it because of her knowing that Spike was into Buffy and Dru wanted Spike’s focus on Dru and not Buffy? Was it a combo?

I agree in that it's played ambiguously hence the thread. However my rule of the thumb when making such analysis is looking at quotes and studying character history and dynamics. We know that Dru had at least a sexual history with Angelus, we don't know when however Dru found out about Spike's potential feelings for Buffy, so we have to make the assumption that she knew before Angel lost his soul without any strong indication and then subsequently assume that it's the cause of Dru's response to Angelus' flirting. So we have one unfounded assumption on top on another. Now I cannot prove that this isn't the case, but if someone is making an argument for the validation of Dru's jealousy being the cause of her response to Angelus' flirting, the burden of proof should be upon them.


If Spike weren’t wheelchair-bound, what would the dynamic between Spike, Dru, and Angelus be? Angel in “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” (2.16) says that Dru is still having sexual relations with Spike. Never in the Buffyverse is it said that Angel had sex with Dru in Season 2.

I speculated as to whether Dru and Angelus had sex in Season 2 but I never stated it happened outright, but in any case what is the significance of Spike and Dru continuing to have sex? Do we know that Angelus made sexual advances but Dru turned them down in favour of Spike? Do we know what would happen if Angelus had asked Drusilla for sex? I can't answer that but without this information, I can't comment on the significance of Dru and Spike continuing to have sex. It certainly doesn't contradict my views on Dru and Spike's relationship.


kana


I didn’t say that. It’s possible that Drusilla wouldn’t have even gone back to Angel and Darla had Spike wanted it to him and Dru (meaning not him, Dru, and his mother).

Well it's possible but there is no support for this view. We know that Drusilla liked the idea of Darla meeting William and she seemed to have affection for her vampiric family. So I consider it utter speculation that she wouldn't have returned to them if William hadn't have sired his mother. Dru's initial confusion about the 'Three of us comment' wasn't to do with her wanting it to be just the two of them, it was because as far as William knew it was supposed to be just the two of them as he knew nothing about Darla and Angelus. It doesn't necessarily indicate she was never going to return to them.


And what we do know is that for at least possibly weeks after William met Angel, Dru wasn’t having sex with Angel.

A) We don't know that, the flashbacks don't indicate the space of time that has elapsed between them and B) even if that is the case, what is the significance of it? I don't even know what point you're trying to make.


What point? Anyway, when Spike’s in the picture, it’s not just about Drusilla feelings for Angel.

I asked seperate questions. A couple to address how Dru and Angel(us) felt about each other and another to address how Spike is relevent.


I agree with this only because I consider that she knew in “School Hard” (2.03) that Spike was going to fall for Buffy and that’s why – or at least a reason why – she was so desperate for Spike to kill Buffy.

Well as I said before, we're merely talking in terms of intepretation. Without proof that Dru knew of Spike's potential feelings at this time, then the argument falls down, so the construction of your point of view is built on shaky ground from the start.


I’m going off of Spike’s words from “Lovers Walk” (3.08). He was talking about how Dru thought he had gone soft. It’s possible that Dru told him right away that he was in love with Buffy and that’s why she was cheating. But the first time this is made definitive is her conversation with him after he finds her there with the Chaos Demon.

Ok, there are a few things to discuss here. For one the flashbacks would always trump any second hand account of events. Secondly you stated that Dru never told Spike why she was cheating on him as part of your 'proof' about Drusilla not being straightfoward. Considering that the flashbacks in FFL don't prove this, would you now concede that this, in itself, is not a valid argument.


No, that’s merely something he said to Buffy in “Earshot” (3.18?) Seeing the flashbacks, he obviously loved Darla romantically and he loved Drusilla and Spike at least in some way.

Well, certainly Angel and Darla weren’t lovey dovey to the extent that James and Elizabeth are.

The problem here is that you're fully qualifying your argument. You're more or less saying "It's obvious that Angel(us) loved Darla, because I say so."
You fail to define what love is and how it differs from simply having romantic feelings for someone, (if of course you do believe there is a difference). If you believe there is a difference, then why is it so unfathomable that he might have had strong feelings for Darla, but was only, at that point, in love with Buffy. If Angel dichotomized what he felt for Darla from what Elizabeth and James had stated to Lindsay he didn't love Darla and stated to Buffy he only loved her, so there is no contradiction as such. The only contradiction is you forcing your concept on love on Angel.


Angel is a liar. Angel had Buffy believing that he was a nobleman who dated noblewomen. Angel had Buffy believing that since being cursed, he hadn’t killed any humans or caused the death of any humans. So, one shouldn’t simply take Angel at his word that he hadn’t loved anyone before Buffy. Maybe Angel believes that he never loved Darla, but the flashbacks prove that he did love Darla.

The problem is that love is a not a provable phenomom. Yes we can state categorically that Angel had killed after he regained his soul and that lied to Buffy about that fact, but we cannot qualify that he was lying about loving no one else but Buffy. He never said he was never in a relationship with anyone, nor even that he didn't have feelings for anyone else. If it is a lie that he loved no one else before Buffy, then it's consistent one, but it cannot be proven one way or the other.
Angel is the sole witness of the experience of which he spoke so to claim he was lying merely placing your own defintion of love onto Angel.


Angel did the Judge thing and did the Acathla thing and those are things that Dru wanted done. In A&F 1.09 It’s strongly implied that Angel still loves Dru. Not maybe in a romantic way, but love nonetheless.

As I've always maintained, I don't think these can categorized as sacrifices unless it's proven that Angelus didn't want to do those things. He seemed more than happy for The Judge to destroy humanity and he was the main drive behind Acathla when he found out it was an option. That Dru wanted to these things to happen does not mean his actions are motivated by pleasing Dru. If nothing else, this was never stated.


That’s enough for me. :) I consider that Angel was simply in denial that he was in love with Darla. I consider that Angel loved Dru and Spike and that he knew that. I consider that for whatever reason he liked to put his love for Buffy in a special category but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t love Darla or Dru.

Well it's possible but unless we get some sort of objective qualification for such, then it leaves us with little to work with. I'm not saying we have to believe Angel, but it's pointless to say "Yes he loved Darla" without any proof, if indeed such a thing can be proven. If you say you believe it was love by your definition of the word, fine, but it doesn't mean it's love by Angel's definition.


I’ve already mentioned the flashbacks so… do you consider that the ‘present-day’ Angel/Darla stuff in AtS was because of Jasmine?

Well the flashbacks are not proof. Also what I'm saying is consistent with what Angel's saying. We don't have to believe him, that's true, but his 'story' is at least consistent.

As for Angel and Darla's relationship in AtS? Well I don't see the contradiction with what I originally said. I never stated he never had feelings for Darla and I believe there was more to Angel's relationship with Darla that season than simple romantic love. He also talks about saving himself through saving Darla as well, on top of the fact that he was obsesessed with why W&H, his enemy, would bring her back. Was it because of Jasmine? Well that's another story all in itself.


These relationships are complicated.

That's not an adequate answer for the apparent contradiction in Angelus' behaviour.


Huh? That’s not a theory. That’s canon.

Ok you split up what I wrote.
This:


In your theory, he literally suggests that Dru finds a lover of her own

and this




and then suddenly gets jealous doesn't want them to be together,

Were meant to go together as I was addressing the contradiction. I know that Angelus suggested that Dru find a lover of her own, but what is not clear is whether or not he was jealous about Dru and William.




That “suddenly gets jealous” when he sees that she sired William is also canon.
Again, you must look at the difference between intepretation and fact. Who stated that Angelus was jealous?

I never said that Angel didn’t want Dru to be with William. He’s initially jealous but then he quickly sees William as his possible new BFF.
Or he was never jealous at all, and simply wanted to be a class A jerk. This interpretation is at least consistent with character history.


So, merely because he was with Darla as well that somehow means that Angel would be okay that Dru has sired herself a lover/‘mate’?

Admittedly, it doesn't mean he wouldn't be jealous, but it seems to me that he was more preoccupied with Darla. In any respect, we don't that he wasn't ok with Dru siring a lover and a mate, especially as he suggested it. There is more to suggest, based upon what was said and character history, that Angelus was just getting on hurting William.


My quote: Angel was unhappy that Dru sired someone.

I should have said “initially unhappy”.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I suppose the only indication that might imply he was unhappy was in the carriage when William was describing his feelings for Dru, but that could easily be interpreted as Angelus concentrating and taking what he's saying in for future use. Seen as neither intepretation can be proven or disproven, I suppose we'll leave it at that.


Angel was Darla’s puppy dog.

Hardly and in any respect, I'm talking about Angelus likes to think he's in charge. Whether or not that's true is another matter.


And what does Angel being a sadist have to do with Angel “playing for sexual dominance” with Spike?

I didn't say one had anything to do with the other. I merely suggested that they are both possible reasons for Angelus' actions. Again, I'm going to character history.


I obviously was referring to Drusilla after she is a vampire.

Whether it turned out that way, Angelus' initial reason for turning her into a vampire was 'eternal torment'.


Maybe the initial time. But, again, Angel only did this after he sees William talking about Dru as his destiny and William clearly considering Dru his girl and not both Angel’s and his girl.
Under my theory, it makes sense that he'd sleep with Drusilla once he knew how much it would hurt William anyway.


We don’t know the exact history. William at some point left Angel, Dru (and Darla?) which is why Angel didn’t know that William had changed his accent and such.
For all we know William could have changed his accent over night, so we can't make any assumptions about such things. It seems that they were togther as they were commenting that his behaviour had already changed, for a while now. Maybe the accent was the final change and again, this could have happen overnight for all we know.


And the next flashback we see of them (1896 C.E.) after the mine shaft flashback has Angel and Darla coupled and Spike and Dru coupled and by then the boys were both having sex with both girls.
Or we know is that Angelus slept with both girls, not that Spike had sex with Darla. This simply was not explicit. All we know that Darla didn't allow threesomes, that's all. Seen as Angelus was addressing Darla at the time, it also means it's possible the 'us' could also include Drusilla, when he said "You never let us do that". Either way it's never explicitly stated that Spike had sex with Darla.


What is this “taking away the one thing” referring to? Because Angel didn’t take away Dru.
The 'one thing' is the idea that Drusilla is his destiny. I'm saying Angelus succeeded but keep in mind we are talking about Angelus' intentions.


Are you referring to both the flashbacks and the present-day stuff?
Sorry, I thought it was inplicit that I was talking about flashbacks, as I referred to Spike as 'William'.


It was about Angel wanting to see Spike as ‘lower’ or ‘not as good’ – meaning in both ways – as himself and Spike knowing that he is better than Angel and Spike taking the opportunity to tell Angel that and kick his ass. It was also about Spike knowing that Buffy still has feelings for Angel and that being enough to not have Spike go back to Buffy.
I'm not entirely sure why saying all this, as my point was that Destiny was about issues, between Angel and Spike.


Only in is his ability to take Dru away from him.
Well, says you, but I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree here.


Angel made Penn to be like him. He was annoyed with the way James acted. Angel tried to make William like him.


Angel didn’t like how William was talking about Dru. William at the time already looked up to Angel and seemed to regard him as his BFF and possibly an older brother or father figure. And Angel wanted to be BFFs with William.
Angelus wanting to have William around wasn't a concept diametrically opposed to hurting him emotionally. Under my theory, mentoring William, sleeping Dru were all part of the same excercise, pleasure, power and pain (William's of course). In any event, wanting to cause him pain is at least consistent with his character. Do you not think that trying to emotionally torture someone who obviously looks up to him wouldn't be something Angelus would do? He was 'in it for the evil' remember?


At its core, Angel had sex with Dru because Angel considered her “our Drusilla” and Angel didn’t like how William was describing William’s relationship with Dru in such a sentimental and lovey dovey way.
It's possible but character history for me, always beats out speculation, so I'll go with sadism.



My quote: Dru also didn’t know that William considered her ‘his destiny’.

Oops, I meant the part about him saying “We’re forever, Dru and me.”

Again, I'm not sure what you're talking about. You said that Dru didn't know that William considered Dru his destiny, but my confusion was that Dru didn't seem all that bothered by that judging from her laughing along with Angelus when she found out. What is the significance of the line you quoted?


There is a definition for the word. “In love” is the subjective phrase.
Some elementary school dictionary definition of the word 'love' does not fully account for the subjective phenomenom that one experiences when they say the words "I love you" and that's talking romantically or otherwise.

By your defintion, anyone in a relationship is in love, or anyone with a relative feels love,[QUOTE]

[QUOTE=MikeB] I never said either of these things.
Well I was still unsure as to what your qualification for the word love was. I was at least basing my analysis on what the character actually say, so at least there is some basis for my reasoning. When you somewhat dogmatically say "Yes that person is in love" without any qualification, then we can easily make line and reasoning and place said words in the character's mouths.

I don't think Spike is particularly possessive.


Really?
Well, yes really. Again, it depends on definitions. I mean can he get jealous? Of course. Is he unsually jealous or possessive? I don't really see how.


“Something Blue” (4.09) with Spike’s comment that if he sees Buffy wearing that skirt, he’s calling off the wedding.
Was that played all that seriously? In any respect that was just one occasion. Anyone can make a throw away comment like that but we don't see Spike generally stopping Buffy or Dru wearing what they want.


I never said such a thing.
Ok then we won't agree on that. :).


First off, it shouldn’t be “I believe”, it should be “I know”. Dru being in love with Spike isn’t debatable: its fact. Spike hurt Dru’s feelings as well. Dru was hurt by Spike being in love with Buffy. That doesn’t suggest that Spike didn’t love Dru. Dru allowing Angel to flirt with her and touch her and liking that Spike was getting jealous because of that doesn’t suggest that Dru didn’t love Spike.
Again, on such matters how do we prove it? The only indications to go on are the words and actions of the characters and even then it's up to interpretation and personal definitions. That's why I'll say, of any character, when it comes to love: "I believe character X loves character Y, as much as such things could be known". It's not a science is it? However if a character says the love someone, I'd be inclined to believe them, unless there is indication otherwise. In any respect, it's never going to be provable one way or the other.


My quote: It’s never been implied or suggested that Dru didn’t love Spike or that she wasn’t in love with Spike. So, again, Angel saying things in “Lovers Walk” (3.08) like, “Seems like a lot of trouble for someone who doesn’t even love you.” And “I mean, she is kinda fickle” were things said to merely goad Spike.
It wasn't just Angel who suggested it. Buffy implied that Dru was a 'big ho' and she doesn't even know that she slept with Angelus when she was sired William to be her lover, so it's more than possible it's simply Angel's opinion.


Angel in “Destiny” (A 5.08) never implied that Dru didn’t love Spike or that Dru wasn’t Spike’s girl. That’s a main reason why Angel focused on Spike’s relationship with Buffy.
Or it could be because he believed Spike was more into Buffy. The last time Angel looked in, Dru dumped Spike and he didn't know that Buffy might be the reason behind it at least not to the extent that we see in FFL. Also there is little evidence that Angel knew that Dru went back for Spike after the events of Redefinition, so as far as he knew Dru dumped him and that was that, unless you have quote that indicates otherwise.

Why otherwise would Angel in “Destiny” (A 5.08) even bring up Dru?br
He never mentioned anything about Dru in Destiny.

What I said. At that moment, a pis)sing match between Angel and Spike about Spike/Dru was more important to him than Angel’s relationship with Buffy.
The problem is you're assuming that Angel brought it because it a sore point. He may have been simply winding Spike up, but it doesn't mean he was jealous or Spike when it came to Dru. Without this, what I can only call pretty baseless assumption, then the argument falls down. He could just be chiming in with his two cents worth, the same way Buffy did when she called Dru a ho.


Huh? What is the “for what it was”?
What was it? A valentine day's gift.

She wasn’t enamored with Angel’s gift; she was enamored with Spike’s gift. She found Angel’s gift more ‘potent’.
Depending on what you're trying to say, your interpretation on the scene may not be a million miles away from mine. She seemed to appreciate both gifts, but in different ways. It seems significant that she says Angelus knows what speaks to a girl's heart, when she looked at his gift.


If something is absolute canon, I’ll say so and consider it not debatable. Everything said on this Board that is debatable we argue and debate those things using our analysis, considerations, reasoning, interpretations, etc.
I'm totally ok with different interpretations, but as long as we say there are interpretations. If someone says "This is true" I'll ask that person to qualify their statement, but if they merely say that they personally believe something to be true.


Speculating is guessing based on incomplete facts or information. I try to avoid speculating when discussing the Buffyverse and try to simply say things like “We don’t really know about Angel/Dru was like from 1860 – 1880 because the first flashback we see is the one that took place literally minutes before Dru sired William Pratt.
But when make comments such as "we don't know what would happened if William hadn't sired his mother," then you're implying that it had some bearing on whether Dru decided to go back to Angelus and Darla, when there is no indication of such.


Perhaps. But why? I consider that Spike and Dru didn’t believe that Angel could simply go fight Buffy and kill her. So, Dru could have simply reasoned that Angel needed to rely on his ‘mind games’ and whatever in order to emotionally hurt Buffy in order to have a chance of being able to kill Buffy.
If this is you're theory, then fine, but you're still making the assumption that Angelus campaign against Buffy, which is something he wanted to do anyway is somehow part of Dru's master plan. Again, I'll certainly chalk this down to being your intepretation.


Huh? What are you saying?
Well I did say 'this is just my feeling' but I was analyzing the possible subtext in the necklace scene. She doesn't state outright that she prefers either gift and she seems to appreciate both gifts. I've always personally interpreted the gifts as symbolic of what is in the heart of both men at the time. For Spike it's love, for Angelus it's evil. I've always seen Dru to appreciate both of these things.


I assume you mean she was never in love with Angel to the extent that she was in love with Spike.
Well, yeah, I mean I've never said otherwise. I do believe she's drawn to Angelus, but she's clearly more concerned about Spike as seen in Passion, when her first priority is to get Spike out of the factory.


In A&F, we see that Dru was glad that Angel sired her because otherwise she would have lived a boring life as a nun but that she was forever traumatized by what Angel did to her before he sired her. So, Dru loves Angel as her ‘daddy’, but she was always resentful about what Angel did to her before he became her ‘daddy’. We never see 1860-1880, so, we don’t actually know how much Dru was in love with Angel during that time. It seems that after Spike killed the Chinese Slayer that she certainly loves Spike more than she loves Angel and that since then she has never loved Angel more than she has loved Spike. But we don’t know when from 1880 to 1900 was the moment or time that she loved Spike more than she loved Angel.
Those periods were certainly played ambiguously, but we can both agree overall she seemed more invested in Spike.


Not sure what I said before, but my point is is that this is a reason why Dru would want Angel ‘on her team’. I consider that Dru didn’t think that Spike would dump her over her actions with Angel in Season 2, so her responding to Angel’s flirting only resulted in Spike being jealous.
Well it's a possible reason but it's not the only possibility. I'd say it's fair that Dru wouldn't believe that her responding to Angelus' flirting would result in the two of them breaking up, but I was always curious as to why she didn't seem to mind that it was hurting Spike's feelings.


So, you agree that she was merely responding to Angel’s flirting and that she wasn’t ‘flirting with Angel’?
Who initiated the flirting doesn't concern me so much as her general behaviour around Angelus.


“Innocence” (2.14): Spike calling Angel “the Slayer’s lapdog”. “Passion” (2.17): Spike saying that he likes the cursed Angel better because non-cursed Angel is acting crazy and irrational and his actions are only going to result in a “brassed off Slayer”.
Again, I maintain my original point. When Spike called him the Slayer's lapdog, he did grab him and growl but then he merely, playfully kissed him on the forehead and he barely reacted to what he said about preferring Angel to Angelus.


Where do you get the idea that in Season 2 non-cursed Angel was “relatively happy”?
Where would you get the idea that he was relatively unhappy. Compared to Spike I'd say Angelus was having the time of his life.

For the latter stuff, I consider that Dru didn’t have sex with Angel in Season 2, so, it’s a moot point.
This has no connection with what you said earlier. You implied that Angel might be bothered that Spike and Drusilla were sleeping together, so again, what are you trying to say?


Annoyed? Upset or devastated it seems better fit. What does Angel’s plan not working have to do with Angel not wanting to see Spike making out with Dru?
Well I meant those would be two likely reasons why he was looking away. Number 1, many people don't like looking people making out right in front of them and the reason why Angel was huffing and puffing is because his plan didn't work and Dru was going to be restored and cause havoc.


This is regarding Dru in “What’s My Line Part II” (2.10?) torturing Angel and reminding him about what he did to her family: Do you actually need to her say, “I don’t like that you murdered my family”? Well, she does that in A&F .
Well it depends. I've always said that Dru is a bit of mystery so what we think would be the obvious answer may not be in her case. Many vampire's no longer hold on to the same pain that riddled them when they were human and Dru also seemed confounded by the idea that William would want to sire his mother. We know she has disdain for Angelus being soulled (as referenced in Reunion when she calls him the AngelBeast.) so it makes sense that she uses the memory of what he did to her to get to him emotionally, knowing it haunts him more than it hurts her. Well at least that's the way I read it.
As for her saying it in A&F, have you got a quote?

Actually, it’s not a given that in Season 2 she actually wanted that or in AtS s3 that she wanted that.
Well that's what she said. She may have been lying but then you'd have to make up a reason for her lying, so again we'd have this same problem of constructing theories to fit our assumptions.


What is a given is that she wanted Spike in love with her and wanting to be with her and that she didn’t want him in love with Buffy and wanting to be with Buffy.
It's not a given that she knew of his feelings or potential feelings in Btvs Season 2 and what would her actions in AtS season 2 have to do with Spike. She could have skipped all that and gone straight to Spike.

We never see Dru being upset that Angel was in a hell dimension.
I tend to comment on what I do see rather than what I don't see. She may have known Angel would eventually be released from hell (being psychic) or she may have simply been ok with it or she didn't know the implications of the ritual being reversed right away. This is the problem with commenting on things we don't see. We do see her happy that her Daddy's back and Spike does say that Dru and Darla were working on turning Angel into Angelus.

We see her upset that Spike’s been thinking about Buffy. We see Dru dumping Darla off with Lindsey and not going back to Los Angeles after she sees that Spike for the time being is lost to her because he prefers to be with Buffy.
We have no idea what happened off screen with Darla and Dru. As I said, this doesn't contradict what I said earlier about her being more invested in Spike.


We don’t know what Holland meant by his saying, “I think he’ll find that course of action more difficult than even he realizes.”
This is true but we do know in the subsequent episode the main thing holding him back is his personal connection with Darla.


But Angel did threaten to kill her. And he seemed to psyche himself up for that.
Well that was the whole point. He felt too close to kill them up close and even though he threatened to kill her in Reprise, he still lets her go.

In Season 2, Spike was in town with Dru. Angel knows that Spike can kill Slayers. And yet Angel in Season 2 never tried anything against Spike or Dru.
We can only speculate the reason for this. Is it because of his ambivalent feelings towards his vampire family?


So, Angel’s emotions made him not scope out the place and made him not make sure that they were actually dusted: that’s your argument? That doesn’t reconcile with Angel being able to plan that whole ‘trap’. He was cold an collected, not emotional.
What I meant is that under my theory, he couldn't get up close and personal to stake them, because of the feelings that kept creeping up, so his best bet was to kill them from a distance. This would explain why he didn't scope the area. Even if he did find them still alive, he'd find it hard to stake them anyway, not up close.


So, he didn’t mind if they weren’t actually dusted?
That's not what I was implying. I was saying that despite knowing that they were a danger, he still couldn't find it in him to dust them. He doesn't even try to dust Darla in Epiphany.

Are you agreeing that Angel “didn’t try to actually kill Drusilla”?
No that was my mistake, I meant he didn't successfully kill Dru. I'd say that setting them on fire consitutes an attempt at killing them. If not then it was at least a warning.


Causing healable burns is far different from actually dusting her.
Again you're being far too speculative. You saying that Angel deliberately knew that neither Spike nor Dru would get revenge for the setting her on fire, but feared Spike would get revenge on her being dusted, so pointlessly set them on fire knowing they'll be ok???? To what end?


He destroyed the Gem of Amarra. Angel may like his chances against Spike in a one-on-one fight (because he’s in denial about Spike’s ability to beat him up). But Spike did things like the Order of Taraka, hired a torture demon, etc.
There could have been many reasons other than Spike as to why he destroyed the ring and it's not like other demons or humans wouldn't have the resources to do what Spike did.


Or, he meant it. How is that possibly a figure of speech?
He also said he'd give over Doyle's mother, so clearly it was a throw away comment.


I didn’t say he failed them.
The point is, that Angel has shown he take enough torture to get the job done. To be honest, I don't know how this turned into a thread about deprecating Angel's character all of a sudden. The point still remains that Angel has never shown fear from Spike or what he might do. You seem to think Angel thinks that Spike is the most powerful creature in the Buffyverse? Without a quote, I'm simply putting this part of the discussion to rest.
I've ignored subsquent comments on this, because frankly it's pointless. If you're stating that Angel is afraid of what Spike might do, even though he's never shown that level of fear on his own show, then you're going to have to prove it. When has Angel ever said "I'm not going to do that because the bad guys might torture me" on his own show (not including when he was young Angelus in the flashbacks)?


I always say that one cannot know the Buffyverse by reading transcripts on Buffyworld.com.
I'm aware of that but people have different intepretations of certain scenes. Quotes can be a way of clearing up some of the ambiguity. If we can't agree on the intepretation of a scene or someone's actions, we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Unless Angel completely forgot about the Order of Taraka thing and the torture demon thing or Angel now believed that Spike no longer cared at all for Dru, it’s completely unreasonable to think that Angel wouldn’t consider Spike’s reaction if he found out that Angel had dusted Dru.
It's not about what Spike would do, it's about Angel being afraid about what Spike would do. He's never shown any fear about what Spike would do to him, I consider this to be more speculation and biased speculation at that.


Dru had the Holy Water there already. Why would it be there if not for sex play between Spike and her?
Maybe it was to torture other vampires as punishment, again. In any respect we still don't know of Dru's threshold.

________________________________________________


Sure, but Spike was wheelchair-bound. And only Angel’s flirting with Drusilla was hurtful to Spike. It doesn’t seem that Spike was affected by Angel’s talking about him being wheelchair-bound. Angel meanwhile was affected by Spike’s words.
It was more his flirting with Dru to which I was referring.


I consider upset is a better word for it.
I wouldn't, but since we can't prove it one way or the other I think we should leave it.


But your points are based off of Dru not knowing about Spike’s interest in Buffy until after they had already left Sunnydale.
See above making assumptions or speculating on top of speculation.

__________________________________________________ _


From 1880 to 1898, Angel wanted Spike as his BFF.
Which makes his actions all the more evil. Angelus was cruel but it wasn't stated that his victims had to be human.

Dru was about Angel considering Dru both of theirs and not only Spike’s. In 1998, if anything, it was about Spike’s mocking of Angel and his talking down to Angel. Angel couldn’t kill Spike, calling Spike “sit and spin” and the like didn’t affect Spike. But Angel could ‘get back at’ Spike by flirting with Dru.
Again Angelus didn't seem that bothered by Spike's comments. He was mildly irritated at best.

MikeB
03-06-12, 12:33 AM
Okay, first off, there is a Spike/Dru discussion thread ( http://www.buffyforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17099 ), and this thread is about the relationship between Angel and Dru. This is also not an Angel/Darla thread – and anyway I consider ‘present-day’ Angel/Darla stuff – at least from Angel’s end – to be because of Jasmine. This is also not a thread on the Angel-Spike relationship.


* Given that William sired his mother and given Drusilla’s negative reaction to his wanting to do that, it’s at least somewhat ambiguous why she later continued having sex with Angel. It’s also somewhat ambiguous whether or not if Spike hadn’t done that, whether she would have returned to Angel and Darla in the first place.

* Angel seemed to love Darla, Drusilla, and Spike. His not saying so doesn’t mean that he didn’t. And even if he considered it not love, that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t love.




kana

* Why do you consider that Dru in Brazil was focused on Spike’s feelings for Buffy and that her reaction to Angel being in hell is not mentioned?

* I should repeat this: “As for when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy: We should probably agree to disagree. I consider that that Dru in “Halloween” (2.06) walks in on Spike watching ‘Buffy porn’ and that she then gets insecure and feels the need to ask him: “Do you love my insides, the parts you can’t see?” The gist is that “Halloween” (2.06) was at-latest when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy. You not agreeing with that means we have different contexts for Season 2 Spike/Dru and Season 2 Angel-Dru.”

And the notion that during Season 2 Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy is not “built on shaky ground”. The idea that she only first knew sometime after “Becoming” (2.22) seems unreasonable and illogical. So, when do you believe she knew?


what is the significance of Spike and Dru continuing to have sex? That it seems canon that they were. That Dru didn’t ‘dump’ Spike in favor of Angel. And that it’s never stated that Dru in Season 2 had sex with Angel.

* Again, this means that I consider that she was flirting with Angel – aside from still having at least some feelings for Angel – in order to get Spike’s attention on her and away from Buffy.

* Dru only first had sex with Angel in that flashback in “Destiny” (A 5.08): nothing suggests otherwise. This means that she didn’t immediately start having sex with Angel again.

* You seem to imply that the only reason Angel was continuing to have sex with Dru after 1880 was to emotionally hurt Spike.


Secondly you stated that Dru never told Spike why she was cheating on him as part of your 'proof' about Drusilla not being straightfoward. If I ever said that then that was an obvious typo on my end.


The problem is that love is a not a provable phenomom. Huh? Angel was going to be dusted merely to allow Darla to live. Unless Angel was incredibly suicidal or unless he pretty much 100% believed that he wasn’t going to be dusted, what else but “love” can one reasonably call that. More generally, that idea “love is a not a provable phenomom” is simply silly.


My quote: That “suddenly gets jealous” when he sees that she sired William is also canon.

Again, you must look at the difference between intepretation and fact. Who stated that Angelus was jealous? Angelus. “Another rooster in the henhouse.” What do you think he was referring to?


This interpretation is at least consistent with character history. Angel doesn’t have a consistent character history. That’s a whole other topic.


In any respect, we don't that he wasn't ok with Dru siring a lover and a mate, We know that his first reaction was negative.


I suppose the only indication that might imply he was unhappy was in the carriage when William was describing his feelings for Dru, but that could easily be interpreted as Angelus concentrating and taking what he's saying in for future use. Angel wanted William to be his BFF. But Angel didn’t like the way William was describing Dru and William’s relationship with Dru. Angel didn’t like how sentimental William was being. Nothing suggests that upon first seeing William, Angel wanted to emotionally hurt him.


I'm talking about Angelus likes to think he's in charge. I’m not even sure if this is true. He clearly seemed to subordinate himself to Darla. He’s treated as a ‘guest’ by Spike until they move into the mansion.


Angelus' initial reason for turning her into a vampire was 'eternal torment'. Or he was in love with Dru. Darla realized that he was creating a new ‘eternal lover’ – at the least – for himself.

My quote: And the next flashback we see of them (1896 C.E.) after the mine shaft flashback has Angel and Darla coupled and Spike and Dru coupled and by then the boys were both having sex with both girls.

Angel and Spike discovered that the Immortal had a threesome with Darla and Dru, something that they didn’t do with either Angel or Spike. Unless Angel somehow got a case of horrible grammar, he was referring to both himself and Spike.


The 'one thing' is the idea that Drusilla is his destiny. This wasn’t taken away from Spike. Spike was with Dru for 18 years when they were still with Darla and Angel, he was with Dru 100 years after that, and he believed that Dru was his literal “soulmate”. The only reason his resolve that Dru was his destiny was shaken is because Spike fell in love with Buffy and eventually – because of the chip and other things – preferred Buffy over Dru.


Angelus wanting to have William around wasn't a concept diametrically opposed to hurting him emotionally. Angel had sex with Drusilla because he still wanted to have sex with Drusilla, he still wanted to be with Drusilla, and he wanted Spike to know that Drusilla wasn’t exclusively Spike’s. Spike was hurt because Angel betrayed the ‘bro code’. The next flashback we see of them has Angel being irked – and possibly peeved – that Spike’s antics are putting the Fanged Four in danger. The next flashback has not only Angel and Spike being BFFs but Angel pretty much treating Spike as his equal.

That’s for the flashbacks. Uncursed Angel in Season 2 – aside from doing things like the Judge and Acathla – decided to entertain himself by trying to emotionally hurt Buffy and Spike. But given “Lie to Me” (2.07) – he reacts to her touch much like he reacted to Buffy’s ‘heavy’ kissing in “Forever” (5.17) – Angel in Season 2 was still – at least – attracted to her.


Under my theory, mentoring William, sleeping Dru were all part of the same excercise, pleasure, power and pain (William's of course). Aside from possibly that one flashback in “Destiny” (A 5.08), there’s no evidence of this. Spike was Angel’s BFF and possibly son/brother/whatever, not Angel’s punching bag.

My quote: Dru being in love with Spike isn’t debatable: its fact.

You seem to not agree with this. And if you don’t even agree with this, then to me it’s pointless to discuss with you whether or not Angel loved Darla, Dru, and Spike. And it’s pointless to discuss this thread topic with you given that the first flashback we see of vampire Drusilla is literally minutes before she sires William Pratt.


Buffy implied that Dru was a 'big ho' First off, we don’t know what Buffy even meant by the word “ho”. Spike never said that Dru was sleeping with Angel, merely that Dru still seemed – at least somewhat – attracted to Angel.

My quote: Angel in “Destiny” (A 5.08) never implied that Dru didn’t love Spike or that Dru wasn’t Spike’s girl.

You didn’t seem to argue against this; so, do you agree with this?


[Angel] never mentioned anything about Dru in Destiny. He mentioned the “Willie” thing, which was an obvious reference.


But when make comments such as "we don't know what would happened if William hadn't sired his mother," then you're implying that it had some bearing on whether Dru decided to go back to Angelus and Darla, when there is no indication of such. No, I’m considering that it could have. I’m not stating that it did.


* In Season 2, Dru wanted Buffy dead. Spike was wheelchair-bound and Angelus seemed to want to kill Dru. Dru didn’t seem to consider that Angel could beat Buffy in a straight-up fight. And she didn’t care how Buffy was killed. Nothing suggests that she liked Angel’s idea of using mind games on Buffy over Spike’s directly trying to kill her in a straight-up fight or sending the Order of Taraka after her.


* In “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” (2.16), Angel literally gave his heart to Dru. Interpret that how you want.


You implied that Angel might be bothered that Spike and Drusilla were sleeping together, so again, what are you trying to say? Angel still had feelings for Dru. Angel in A&F still has feelings for Dru .


My quote: We don’t know what Holland meant by his saying, “I think he’ll find that course of action more difficult than even he realizes.”

This is true but we do know in the subsequent episode the main thing holding him back is his personal connection with Darla. No, that’d merely be something holding him back from killing Darla (and that reason could be because of Jasmine).


My quote: In Season 2, Spike was in town with Dru. Angel knows that Spike can kill Slayers. And yet Angel in Season 2 never tried anything against Spike or Dru.

We can only speculate the reason for this. Is it because of his ambivalent feelings towards his vampire family? They aren’t ambivalent. Angel killed Darla because Darla was shooting at Buffy. Angel continues to have feelings for Dru and Spike.

My quote: So, in “Redefinition” (A 2.11?) Angel’s emotions made him not scope out the place and made him not make sure that they were actually dusted: that’s your argument? That doesn’t reconcile with Angel being able to plan that whole ‘trap’. He was cold an collected, not emotional.

What I meant is that under my theory, he couldn't get up close and personal to stake them, because of the feelings that kept creeping up, so his best bet was to kill them from a distance. This would explain why he didn't scope the area. [/quote] How so? He set that whole thing up in a cold and collected way and yet his emotions made him not scope out the place?


I was saying that despite knowing that they were a danger, he still couldn't find it in him to dust them. This implies that setting them aflame wasn’t meant to dust them.


I'd say that setting them on fire consitutes an attempt at killing them. If not then it was at least a warning. You just said that “he still couldn't find it in him to dust them”.


My quote: Causing healable burns is far different from actually dusting her.

Again you're being far too speculative. You saying that Angel deliberately knew that neither Spike nor Dru would get revenge for the setting her on fire, but feared Spike would get revenge on her being dusted, so pointlessly set them on fire knowing they'll be ok???? To what end? No, I said it’d be far less likely that Spike would seek revenge. As for why he set them aflame, I don’t know.


There could have been many reasons other than Spike as to why he destroyed the ring and it's not like other demons or humans wouldn't have the resources to do what Spike did. I never set that Angel was just concerned about Spike.

For the thread topic, if you don’t consider that one of the reasons Angel didn’t try to actually dust Dru is because of Spike’s revenge, then all that’s left is that Angel simply didn’t want to try to actually dust Dru.


My quote: I always say that one cannot know the Buffyverse by reading transcripts on Buffyworld.com.

Quotes can be a way of clearing up some of the ambiguity. Quotes are only useful if they are true and what a character actually means. The problem with using quotes from Angel is that Angel is a known liar.


Angelus was cruel but it wasn't stated that his victims had to be human. There’s no indication that Angel mentally tortured Penn, James, or William (aside from possibly that one “Destiny” (A 5.08) and Angel flirting with Dru in Season 2).

kana
05-06-12, 11:03 PM
* I should repeat this: “As for when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy: We should probably agree to disagree. I consider that that Dru in “Halloween” (2.06) walks in on Spike watching ‘Buffy porn’ and that she then gets insecure and feels the need to ask him: “Do you love my insides, the parts you can’t see?” The gist is that “Halloween” (2.06) was at-latest when Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy. You not agreeing with that means we have different contexts for Season 2 Spike/Dru and Season 2 Angel-Dru.”
Agreed. I mean I agree about agreeing to disagree. I personally didn't see it and to take that leap in logic or intuition, simply because you say so, is pretty pointless as I see it. I look below at your arguments that are contingent on this assumption and deal with them accordingly.


And the notion that during Season 2 Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy is not “built on shaky ground”.
It's an assumption, with no other basis other than your personal interpretation.


The idea that she only first knew sometime after “Becoming” (2.22# seems unreasonable and illogical. So, when do you believe she knew?
She could have known at any moment, she's psychic remember. My point of view is not based upon when she knew because I'm not making an assumption either way. Your argument depends on something you cannot prove, mine isn't.


That it seems canon that they were.
I never said it wasn't.

That Dru didn’t ‘dump’ Spike in favor of Angel. And that it’s never stated that Dru in Season 2 had sex with Angel.
I never said it was stated they actually did. In this thread, I only said they flirted.


* Again, this means that I consider that she was flirting with Angel – aside from still having at least some feelings for Angel – in order to get Spike’s attention on her and away from Buffy.
How is the fact they were flirting with each other but not necessarily sleeping together prove that she was only flirting with him for that reason or even if that reason factored into it. This still assumes Buffy had anything to do with it.


* Dru only first had sex with Angel in that flashback in “Destiny” #A 5.08): nothing suggests otherwise. This means that she didn’t immediately start having sex with Angel again.
Which implies what exactly?


* You seem to imply that the only reason Angel was continuing to have sex with Dru after 1880 was to emotionally hurt Spike.
I do think he was attracted to her, but it doesn't mean he loved her, unless you think that sex=love. I can tell you that not everyone holds this view.


Huh? Angel was going to be dusted merely to allow Darla to live. Unless Angel was incredibly suicidal or unless he pretty much 100% believed that he wasn’t going to be dusted, what else but “love” can one reasonably call that. More generally, that idea “love is a not a provable phenomom” is simply silly.
Behaviours can be observable but the feelings behind them are what we experience alone. We can describe them and try to relate to one another about such feelings, but one's definition love, like values, vary from person to person.
Angel's actions may conform with your idea of love, but perhaps not his. Feelings and emotions can be complex and we have both the right and ability to dichotomize our feelings. There were also other feelings the played a part in Angel's decision such as a want to redeem himself through his sire. He clearly felt what most would consider compassion, but someone can show compassion and even sacrifice to someone who they don't love romantically. In the same way Angel demonstrated compassion towards Faith, it doesn't mean he loved her. He did however identify with her. Similarly, he can connect with Darla, because he understands what she's going through.
If one is to be mora diplomatic, it can be seen as a kind of love, a different kind of love from perhaps what he felt for Buffy. Also considering this happened after when Angel said Buffy, is the only person he's loved, it still fits our mould.


Angelus. “Another rooster in the henhouse.” What do you think he was referring to?
Roosters can be territorial, so this fits the concept of power and dominance. Angelus was also playful in that scene. It doesn't mean he was deeply jealous, just trying to show that his dominance, by sleeping with Dru as he pleases. Again, we may have to agree to disagree.


Angel doesn’t have a consistent character history. That’s a whole other topic.
It depends. You often have different character interpretations, so it may be you read his scenes differently.


We know that his first reaction was negative.
He never demonstrated anger or disdain, or if he did it was certainly was heavily tempered. By the end of the scene, they were laughing.


Angel wanted William to be his BFF. But Angel didn’t like the way William was describing Dru and William’s relationship with Dru. Angel didn’t like how sentimental William was being. Nothing suggests that upon first seeing William, Angel wanted to emotionally hurt him.
Well we see this in Season 2. He clearly doesn't mind hurting him but yet he still comments that he likes having him around, like old times. My point about Angelus hurting, him? Well Angel said, he didn't always hate his victims and he simply enjoyed hurting them. It's possible that enjoying his company doesn't mean he wouldn't get pleasure from hurting him.


I’m not even sure if this is true. He clearly seemed to subordinate himself to Darla. He’s treated as a ‘guest’ by Spike until they move into the mansion.
I said he liked to think he's in charge. Spike said as such.


Or he was in love with Dru. Darla realized that he was creating a new ‘eternal lover’ – at the least – for himself.
Well these are the reasons he gave. You can believe it or not and then construct a reason why he's lying. Or we can just believe him as seen as consistent with how he's desribed.


My quote: And the next flashback we see of them (1896 C.E.# after the mine shaft flashback has Angel and Darla coupled and Spike and Dru coupled and by then the boys were both having sex with both girls.

Angel and Spike discovered that the Immortal had a threesome with Darla and Dru, something that they didn’t do with either Angel or Spike. Unless Angel somehow got a case of horrible grammar, he was referring to both himself and Spike.
If Angelus was addressing Darla, then it could mean that Darla didn't allow threesomes in the group #the 'us' referring to the rest of the group# Again, we might as well drop this, it was never stated that Spike slept with Darla. I can't even remember the point of this? For me, the main point is that whenever Angelus made any sort of romantic move towards Dru and Dru responded, Spike didn't seem to like it.


This wasn’t taken away from Spike...
Whoa, calm down! I meant he tried, I not that he succeeded. I was talking about his motivations.


Angel had sex with Drusilla because he still wanted to have sex with Drusilla, he still wanted to be with Drusilla,
I do think he wanted to have sex with her, but I'm not sure if he wanted to 'be with her' or was upset that Dru found someone else. Angelus specifically said there is no belonging and no one belongs with anyone. By having sex with Dru is merely showing that he can if he wants.

and he wanted Spike to know that Drusilla wasn’t exclusively Spike’s.
Well I agree with that, but it's possible that it wasn't deep personal jealousy that motivating him to do that.

Spike was hurt because Angel betrayed the ‘bro code’. The next flashback we see of them has Angel being irked – and possibly peeved – that Spike’s antics are putting the Fanged Four in danger. The next flashback has not only Angel and Spike being BFFs but Angel pretty much treating Spike as his equal.
This doesn't really contradict my theory. You're assuming that Angelus having Spike as his protege, brother type etc, means that he's off limits to Angelus' sadism.


That’s for the flashbacks. Uncursed Angel in Season 2 – aside from doing things like the Judge and Acathla – decided to entertain himself by trying to emotionally hurt Buffy and Spike.
Agreed, but yet he still said he liked having him around, so again, this makes consistence sense.


But given “Lie to Me” #2.07# – he reacts to her touch much like he reacted to Buffy’s ‘heavy’ kissing in “Forever” #5.17# – Angel in Season 2 was still – at least – attracted to her.
Oh, I think we can agree on that. Don't mistake me, i think he's drawn to Dru, but I don't necessarily think he's particularly bothered by Dru being with Spike.


Aside from possibly that one flashback in “Destiny” #A 5.08#, there’s no evidence of this. Spike was Angel’s BFF and possibly son/brother/whatever, not Angel’s punching bag.
Well see it happening both in Season 2 and in Destiny, so it's in the mix. As I said before, we know from what we see that Angelus doesn't mind hurting Spike and enjoys it. It doesn't mean he did it all the time. Back in the day he may have been more preoccupied with Darla.


My quote: Dru being in love with Spike isn’t debatable: its fact.

You seem to not agree with this. And if you don’t even agree with this, then to me it’s pointless to discuss with you whether or not Angel loved Darla, Dru, and Spike. And it’s pointless to discuss this thread topic with you given that the first flashback we see of vampire Drusilla is literally minutes before she sires William Pratt.
Well it's as much of 'fact' as any when it comes to love. I'd say the same of any character. I did say that I believe they loved each other. That's my highest grade on such matters.


First off, we don’t know what Buffy even meant by the word “ho”. Spike never said that Dru was sleeping with Angel, merely that Dru still seemed – at least somewhat – attracted to Angel.
I don't believe she meant that Dru was a faithful individual, but my original point is that Angel may simply be of the opinion that Dru didn't care for Spike, based upon her behaviour and that she was fickle. Buffy also implied Dru's potential for promiscuity as well, so we can't assume that Angel came to that conclusion because he's jealous. We don't even know that he is jealous at that point.


My quote: Angel in “Destiny” #A 5.08# never implied that Dru didn’t love Spike or that Dru wasn’t Spike’s girl.

You didn’t seem to argue against this; so, do you agree with this?
In Destiny, he didn't imply one way or the other about how Dru felt about Spike, so for all we know, he hasn't changed his opinion from Lover's Walk.


He mentioned the “Willie” thing, which was an obvious reference.
As I said before, it may have been a nickname that William didn't like. It just happened to be a nickname that Dru gave.


No, I’m considering that it could have. I’m not stating that it did.
Ok. If that's your intepretation, that's fine. As with any of these theories, it's a possibility.



* In Season 2, Dru wanted Buffy dead. Spike was wheelchair-bound and Angelus seemed to want to kill Dru. Dru didn’t seem to consider that Angel could beat Buffy in a straight-up fight. And she didn’t care how Buffy was killed. Nothing suggests that she liked Angel’s idea of using mind games on Buffy over Spike’s directly trying to kill her in a straight-up fight or sending the Order of Taraka after her.
I'm not sure to what you're referring. In any respect, I don't think there is necessarily a connection between Buffy and Dru's feelings towards Angelus.



* In “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” #2.16#, Angel literally gave his heart to Dru. Interpret that how you want.
Well I gave my interpretation above. I suppose there are so many different ways to read it :


Angel still had feelings for Dru. Angel in A&F still has feelings for Dru .

I'd say he cared but I also think guilt is a strong emotion that can be added to the mix. I believe when he looks at her, he sees the innocence that he stole from her.


No, that’d merely be something holding him back from killing Darla #and that reason could be because of Jasmine#.

If he still remembers Dru's innocence And I heard that it's implied that he does, this could also be an inhibiting factor.


They aren’t ambivalent. Angel killed Darla because Darla was shooting at Buffy. Angel continues to have feelings for Dru and Spike.
However, with a soul he knows that they are going to go on to kill people. He has a personal connection with them but at the same time they are the enemy. Well, until Spike gets a soul and Darla turns up pregnant.


My quote: So, in “Redefinition” #A 2.11?# Angel’s emotions made him not scope out the place and made him not make sure that they were actually dusted: that’s your argument? That doesn’t reconcile with Angel being able to plan that whole ‘trap’. He was cold an collected, not emotional.
Well this is kind of my point. He could be that way because he was at a distance. Staking them up close was the problem.


How so? He set that whole thing up in a cold and collected way and yet his emotions made him not scope out the place?
My point is that when he tried to get close, he couldn't do it. So he set up the trap so he could do it at a distance. My point is, if he was unable to stake them up close then it would be pointless to scope the area as he'd be unable to finish the job anyway. Angel being calm and collected on the surface doesn't mean he feels that way underneath. It's kind of his specialty : D.




This implies that setting them aflame wasn’t meant to dust them.
Sorry, I meant stake up close.


No, I said it’d be far less likely that Spike would seek revenge. As for why he set them aflame, I don’t know.
Well we have no idea this thought process went through his mind. In any event, I think we should drop this as Angel has never shown to fear what Spike might do to him.


I never set that Angel was just concerned about Spike.
That's if he specifically concerned about Spike at all.


For the thread topic, if you don’t consider that one of the reasons Angel didn’t try to actually dust Dru is because of Spike’s revenge, then all that’s left is that Angel simply didn’t want to try to actually dust Dru.
I think he wanted to but couldn't do it up close, like with Darla. It's also possible he at least wanted to send them a message to leave his town. The whole set up of the episode was about fighting an enemy at a distance. I believe it was Darla who picked up the hammer, while Dru was panicing in pain. It's possible had they both reacted like that, they could have been dust.


Quotes are only useful if they are true and what a character actually means. The problem with using quotes from Angel is that Angel is a known liar.
I still believe it's better than making up motivations and placing it character's mouths.


There’s no indication that Angel mentally tortured Penn, James, or William #aside from possibly that one “Destiny” #A 5.08# and Angel flirting with Dru in Season 2#.
I didn't say he did. I just meant that his progeny or vampire peers were not necessarily off limits when it came to his sadism.

MikeB
20-09-12, 07:21 AM
This isn’t a thread about Angel’s relationship with Spike. That’s another thread topic. Or, really, it’s a very simple topic. Angel and Spike are BFFs and the only thing that ‘separates’ them is that Spike fell for Drusilla and Buffy. If Spike hadn’t gotten with Buffy, and if Angel didn’t think that Buffy was in love with Spike, they’d be BFFs in AtS s5.



kana

So, you believe that it’s only after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy?

And agreeing to disagree is not in a later post saying “It's an assumption, with no other basis other than your personal interpretation.” and any other such statements. “Agreeing to disagree” (at least for me) is pretty much a nice way of saying “We should stop wasting time arguing over this.” and then stop arguing that subject with each other. And not arguing that subject (at least for me) also includes not arguing subjects based on that subject.

We should also agree to disagree over whether Angel loved Darla, Dru, and Spike.



My quote: Dru only first had sex with Angel in that flashback in “Destiny” #A 5.08): nothing suggests otherwise. This means that she didn’t immediately start having sex with Angel again.

Which implies what exactly? That “she didn’t immediately start having sex with Angel again.”


* I consider about the entire Angel/Darla (current stuff) in AtS to be because of Jasmine. So, I don’t really need to discuss why Angel was risking being dusted in order to save Darla. My point is that if it wasn’t because of Jasmine, the only other reasonable explanation is that Angel loved Darla. And saying it was because of redemption or anything implies that Angel would consider that by saving Darla he was going to fully and completely redeem himself.


* It is canon that Angel initially was jealous that Dru brought William home.


* Angel doesn’t have a consistent character history. In “Becoming Part I” (2.21) we learn that Angel’s been like a homeless bum for like 90 years.


My quote: I’m not even sure if this is true. He clearly seemed to subordinate himself to Darla. He’s treated as a ‘guest’ by Spike until they move into the mansion.

I said he liked to think he's in charge. Spike said as such. Spike wasn’t around for most of Angel’s relationship with Darla.


* My quote: Or he was in love with Dru. Darla realized that he was creating a new ‘eternal lover’ – at the least – for himself.

Even from just what he described in “Lie to Me” (2.07), Buffy seemed to conclude that Angel had been (and maybe still was?) in love with Dru.


If Angelus was addressing Darla, He wasn’t. He was addressing both Darla and Dru. Even “Fool For Love” (5.07) has Darla saying, “Our boys are about to fight!” That could be clue that they were already all sleeping together.


My quote: But given “Lie to Me” #2.07# – he reacts to her touch much like he reacted to Buffy’s ‘heavy’ kissing in “Forever” #5.17# – Angel in Season 2 was still – at least – attracted to her.

Oh, I think we can agree on that. Don't mistake me, i think he's drawn to Dru, but I don't necessarily think he's particularly bothered by Dru being with Spike. Wow, not many acknowledge that “Lie to Me” (2.07) and “Forever” (5.17) link. I consider it incongruous to consider that he reacted to Dru like that but wasn’t particularly bothered by Dru being with Spike. It’s almost like saying that Angel wouldn’t have been particularly bothered had Buffy gotten with Spike sometime after “Forever” (5.17). And, a light touch produced the same reaction as heavy kissing from Buffy. (Of course, Angel had likely not even seen Dru for around 98 years, so there’s a time difference).


* Drusilla being in love with Spike is canon. And, again, it seems you still haven’t read Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem With Vampires”.


* It’s rather baseless speculation to say that Dru in BtVS S2 ever had sex with Angel. And, again, Angel saying something doesn’t make it true.


* I strongly feel that if someone has not read a comic, that someone shouldn’t comment on the comic. I consider it’s about the same as someone not having seen an episode commenting on that episode.


if he was unable to stake them up close then it would be pointless to scope the area as he'd be unable to finish the job anyway. Regarding “Redefinition” (A 2.??). No, he’d be seeing if they could survive the being set aflame.


Angel has never shown to fear what Spike might do to him. Again, he either was concerned about Spike’s reaction, he didn’t actually want to kill Dru, or both.


I believe it was Darla who picked up the hammer, while Dru was panicing in pain. This is insulting to Dru. Darla was the one closest to the Hammer when they ran by. And they BOTH were running toward the fire hydrant.


My quote: Quotes are only useful if they are true and what a character actually means. The problem with using quotes from Angel is that Angel is a known liar.

I still believe it's better than making up motivations and placing it character's mouths. I’m awfully tired of your saying such nonsense. I spend sometimes hours each week responding to such posts of yours that pretty much involve only a debate between you and me. I like debating the Buffyverse and put in the time to try to respond to every post and every poster on this Board. But I already commented – I think more than once – about your saying such stuff about my “making up motivations”.

TimeTravellingBunny
20-09-12, 09:57 PM
This isn’t a thread about Angel’s relationship with Spike. That’s another thread topic. Or, really, it’s a very simple topic. Angel and Spike are BFFs and the only thing that ‘separates’ them is that Spike fell for Drusilla and Buffy. If Spike hadn’t gotten with Buffy, and if Angel didn’t think that Buffy was in love with Spike, they’d be BFFs in AtS s5.

Or not. This is all speculation. What would have happened if...? and other people might see things differently. Personally, I think that Spike and Angel were always going to butt heads and, if there were no Dru, it would've been something else, especially since 1) I don't believe Angel was ever in love with Dru, and 2) I don't believe that he would've been that interested in Buffy in AtS season 5, even with Cordelia in a coma, if it weren't for the fact Spike was there and he had learned about Spike's relationship with Buffy, and, at least as importantly, Buffy's decision to pick Spike as her champion and Spike's heroic sacrifice. Angel was initially jealous/curious/alarmed/interested not because Dru had someone, but because there was another male in his vampire family. The first time there's tension between them after Angel loses his soul and comes back to the fold in season 2, it's not over Dru - it's when Spike criticizes/mocks Angel's tactics and mentions Angel having been "Slayer's lapdog", which obviously infuriates Angel, though he pretends he's OK with it. Before he goes on to use Dru to drive Spike mad and humiliate him. He may find her attractive, no doubt about that, but he sure seemed far more interested in making Spike suffer.

In season 5 of AtS, Buffy was IMO just a part of Angel's overall issues/rivalry with Spike, which was really about Angel's issues with himself, his feeling that he's lost his purpose and his heroism and that Spike might be a better hero and champion than him, and Buffy's love was just one of the mystical prizes that he saw himself competing for as the ultimate proof of his worth, together with the Shanshu.

I tend to think that Angel and Spike would've always found something to argue and compete over.

MikeB
24-10-12, 08:40 AM
TimeTravellingBunny

My quote: Angel and Spike are BFFs and the only thing that ‘separates’ them is that Spike fell for Drusilla and Buffy. If Spike hadn’t gotten with Buffy, and if Angel didn’t think that Buffy was in love with Spike, they’d be BFFs in AtS s5.

This isn’t speculation: this is simple reasoning based on the Buffyverse.

Or maybe you’re right. William Pratt had already fallen for Dru and Dru picked William for a reason, so that part of the Angel-Spike relationship wasn’t going to change. If Spike hadn’t fallen for Buffy, Buffy would have died in “Crush” (5.14). And Spike may have simply went to Los Angeles with Drusilla and killed Angel simply because he set Dru aflame. If Spike weren’t preoccupied with feelings for Buffy, he probably would have reacted more strongly to Angel hurting Dru. That would have resulted in Wolfram and Hart no longer having Angel for their Prophecy, Spike no longer getting a soul, and Spike would have lived with Dru for at least hundreds of more years. The First Evil wouldn’t have been a problem and Angel likely would have been dead before AtS s5. And, sure, Dru didn’t want Angel to die, but she more wanted to be with Spike and if that meant that Angel needed to die, she’d accept that.


1) I don't believe Angel was ever in love with Dru, He didn’t act like he wasn’t.


2) I don't believe that he would've been that interested in Buffy in AtS season 5, Angel in “Awakening” said “Buffy” right before he reverted to Angelus. Angel never has stopped being interested in Buffy. Also, Angel in “Chosen” (7.22) came to Sunnydale to try to be with Buffy.


Angel was initially jealous/curious/alarmed/interested not because Dru had someone, but because there was another male in his vampire family. “Another rooster in the henhouse.” There’s nothing ambiguous about that.


The first time there's tension between them after Angel loses his soul and comes back to the fold in season 2, it's not over Dru - it's when Spike criticizes/mocks Angel's tactics and mentions Angel having been "Slayer's lapdog", which obviously infuriates Angel, though he pretends he's OK with it. Before he goes on to use Dru to drive Spike mad and humiliate him. He may find her attractive, no doubt about that, but he sure seemed far more interested in making Spike suffer. The tension for Spike is over Dru. And if there is tension from Angel to Spike, it’s also over Dru. Why would Angel be flirting with Dru if Dru’s not an issue between Angel and Spike? Angel’s maybe also jealous that Spike’s killed two Slayers and that’s why he talked about Spike’s handicapped status.


In season 5 of AtS, Buffy was IMO just a part of Angel's overall issues/rivalry with Spike, How about BtVS S8?


Buffy's love was just one of the mystical prizes that he saw himself competing for as the ultimate proof of his worth, together with the Shanshu. Angel believed that Buffy would welcome Spike with open arms. Angel didn’t want Spike going to Italy because Angel thought that Buffy would be with Spike again.


I tend to think that Angel and Spike would've always found something to argue and compete over. Except that they only argue and compete over Drusilla and Buffy. Spike only cared about the Shanshu because a human Angel was more likely be able to be with Buffy than a cursed Angel.

kana
09-12-12, 02:14 PM
This isn’t a thread about Angel’s relationship with Spike. That’s another thread topic. Or, really, it’s a very simple topic. Angel and Spike are BFFs and the only thing that ‘separates’ them is that Spike fell for Drusilla and Buffy. If Spike hadn’t gotten with Buffy, and if Angel didn’t think that Buffy was in love with Spike, they’d be BFFs in AtS s5.


Well I think this should be discussed separately as I disagree that their relationship is as simple as you think it is.



kana

So, you believe that it’s only after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy?


I think the point you fail to see is that because my argument isn't based upon when Dru knew, I don't have to answer the question. Yours is the argument that's based upon when she knew so therefore you're the one who has to prove without any equivocation that she knew before Becoming Part 2. Considering that if she found out through psychic intuition, she could have found out at any time.

So not only do you have to prove this, but also if Dru did know, that her flirting with Angelus had anything to do with that.


And agreeing to disagree is not in a later post saying “It's an assumption, with no other basis other than your personal interpretation.” and any other such statements. “Agreeing to disagree” (at least for me) is pretty much a nice way of saying “We should stop wasting time arguing over this.” and then stop arguing that subject with each other. And not arguing that subject (at least for me) also includes not arguing subjects based on that subject.

We should also agree to disagree over whether Angel loved Darla, Dru, and Spike.

Well, to put this to rest, it seems that we disagree on the objectivity or subjectivity of love. Seen as this cannot be proven one way or the other, I'll attempt to filter this out of the subject, but it's somewhat difficult seen as this is a subject about relationships.



That “she didn’t immediately start having sex with Angel again.”

That's wasn't what I asked. Of course I don't require you to repeat yourself. I thought it was clear that I was asking what was the significance of Dru not immediately having sex with Angel again.



* I consider about the entire Angel/Darla (current stuff) in AtS to be because of Jasmine. So, I don’t really need to discuss why Angel was risking being dusted in order to save Darla. My point is that if it wasn’t because of Jasmine, the only other reasonable explanation is that Angel loved Darla. And saying it was because of redemption or anything implies that Angel would consider that by saving Darla he was going to fully and completely redeem himself.


As for your last line, that's what Angel more or less said in Epiphany, but then he was still in the mode of his 'quick fix redemption'. As for the rest of what you wrote it comes down again to the subjectivity of love, so I'll leave it.



* It is canon that Angel initially was jealous that Dru brought William home.

No it's your interpretation of canon.



* Angel doesn’t have a consistent character history. In “Becoming Part I” (2.21) we learn that Angel’s been like a homeless bum for like 90 years.


Well if we simply take this to it's natural conclusion then it's pointless to discuss characters. My argument is that it at least seems prudent to look at both quotes and patterns of behaviour to get an overall view.




* My quote: Or he was in love with Dru. Darla realized that he was creating a new ‘eternal lover’ – at the least – for himself.

Even from just what he described in “Lie to Me” (2.07), Buffy seemed to conclude that Angel had been (and maybe still was?) in love with Dru.


Again, see above about the subjectivity of love.



He wasn’t. He was addressing both Darla and Dru.

The problem here is the English language. The words "you" or "your" can refer to the singular or plural. My argument though is that Angelus replied to something Darla had just said, so it's perfectly fine to at least admit the possibility that he was addressing Darla. The point is, it's not canon that Spike and Darla had sex.


Even “Fool For Love” (5.07) has Darla saying, “Our boys are about to fight!” That could be clue that they were already all sleeping together.

Our can simply refer to "yours and mine". If a couple were leaving a party and the one of them asked the hosts "Where are our coats?" would the host assume they shared coats? Of course not! So that line in FFL means very little.


Wow, not many acknowledge that “Lie to Me” (2.07) and “Forever” (5.17) link. I consider it incongruous to consider that he reacted to Dru like that but wasn’t particularly bothered by Dru being with Spike.

I think you're being far too simplistic. I've never said that Angel wasn't attracted to Dru I mean I think Buffy commented on their familiarity, but as I said, it's not necessarily love and it doesn't necessarily mean he'd be jealous of her relationship with Spike. Dru more or less implied Angel has been more preoccupied with Darla and Buffy respectively.



It’s almost like saying that Angel wouldn’t have been particularly bothered had Buffy gotten with Spike sometime after “Forever” (5.17).

Well not really because Angel's jealousy of Buffy's relationships has been addressed. With Dru, that isn't the case.



, a light touch produced the same reaction as heavy kissing from Buffy. (Of course, Angel had likely not even seen Dru for around 98 years, so there’s a time difference).

The body language we exhibit can be similar if we are attracted to someone or if we are in love. As I've said, it's likely he's attracted to Dru and Buffy but was not necessarily in love Dru. Again, this is where subjectivity comes in.



* Drusilla being in love with Spike is canon. And, again, it seems you still haven’t read Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem With Vampires”.

Again, this is about the subjectivity of love. I'd question Dru's love as much as I'd question any character's love or any person's love. I went on record saying I believe that Dru did love Spike. You seem to want me to 'admit' that it's an objective fact when I believe love is a subjective phenomenon.


* It’s rather baseless speculation to say that Dru in BtVS S2 ever had sex with Angel. And, again, Angel saying something doesn’t make it true.

I never said that in this thread. I asked:

"Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?





* I strongly feel that if someone has not read a comic, that someone shouldn’t comment on the comic. I consider it’s about the same as someone not having seen an episode commenting on that episode.

When have I done that?


Regarding “Redefinition” (A 2.??). No, he’d be seeing if they could survive the being set aflame.


But as I said, if he couldn't bring himself to dust them up close, then what would he do when he found them alive?
Again, he either was concerned about Spike’s reaction, he didn’t actually want to kill Dru, or both.



This is insulting to Dru. Darla was the one closest to the Hammer when they ran by. And they BOTH were running toward the fire hydrant.

Dru could have simply been following Darla.



I’m awfully tired of your saying such nonsense. I spend sometimes hours each week responding to such posts of yours that pretty much involve only a debate between you and me.

Look, you're getting personal now. I'm not trying to be rude, I'm merely responding to your post. I'm not going to shy away from calling it as I see it just because you've spent along time on a post. If I'm responding, then what makes you think I haven't spent just as much time replying?

Rather being offended, why don't you simply demonstrate how I'm mistaken.

My point still stands. You do make assumptions about character's motivations and pretty much ignore what the characters say unless it fits your theory.

I'm not saying quotes are 100% validation, but at least it's a starting point. At least I can say why I believe what a character's saying or thinking.




I like debating the Buffyverse and put in the time to try to respond to every post and every poster on this Board. But I already commented – I think more than once – about your saying such stuff about my “making up motivations”.

And I've already commented on you calling people's opinions silly but that doesn't stop you. To me, asking for validation of something you believe is not rude, it's simple debating tactics. All I'm doing is asking you to qualify your statements. Rather than be offended, why don't you simply respond to my point, or admit it's your own personal interpretation of a scene etc.

MikeB
19-12-12, 09:00 AM
kana

My quote: So, you believe that it’s only after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy?

It simply doesn’t make about any sense that she only knew after “Becoming Part II” (2.22).


if Dru did know, that her flirting with Angelus had anything to do with that. Everything fits with Dru knowing before “Becoming Part II” (2.22). She did it to focus Spike’s attention and concern on her.


it seems that we disagree on the objectivity or subjectivity of love. There is a definition for love: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/love?s=t “In love” is the only subjective thing because there isn’t a definition for it.

By the definition of the word “love”, Angel loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike: that’s simply fact. Actions speak louder than words and Angel possibly never saying he loved these people doesn’t mean that he didn’t love them.


I was asking what was the significance of Dru not immediately having sex with Angel again. That she was fine being with William only. Remember that Dru only went out looking for someone else because Angel was focusing on Darla and not much on her.


My quote: It is canon that Angel initially was jealous that Dru brought William home.

No it's your interpretation of canon. No, it’s canon.


My quote: Angel doesn’t have a consistent character history. In “Becoming Part I” (2.21) we learn that Angel’s been like a homeless bum for like 90 years.

Well if we simply take this to it's natural conclusion then it's pointless to discuss characters. No, because besides maybe Halfrek (which only involves whether she was a vengeance demon in 1880), all the other characters have consistent character histories.


My quote: My quote: Or he was in love with Dru. Darla realized that he was creating a new ‘eternal lover’ – at the least – for himself.

Even from just what he described in “Lie to Me” (2.07), Buffy seemed to conclude that Angel had been (and maybe still was?) in love with Dru.

Again, see above about the subjectivity of love. There is no subjectivity regarding Darla. Angel siring Drusilla made her an immortal and Angel intended to and did have sex with vampire Drusilla. “In love” is generally defined as loving someone, wanting to be in a sexual relationship with that someone, and being willing to sacrifice for that someone. Buffy considered that Angel had loved Dru and she would know that Angel had sex with Dru. As for willing to sacrifice, Buffy believed that he was meeting up with (and possibly making out with – she didn’t even ask Angel about either those things) an evil vampire who has been with Spike for a while. So, he’s not willing to even try to fight her even though she’s a danger to Buffy, who Angel is supposedly in love with. As for sacrifice before 1998, Angel was willing to share her with Spike.


* Proper English – which is what the Buffyverse uses (outside of the Buffyisms) – states that Angel states that Spike was also having sex with Darla and Angel was addressing both Darla and Drusilla since they both had sex with the Immortal. It would take Angel suddenly having horrible grammar or he complaining that Darla didn’t let Angel and Spike double-team her (which, again, if Spike never had sex with Darla before would be an extremely odd thing for Angel to complain about) for there to be any other conclusion.


My quote: Even “Fool For Love” (5.07) has Darla saying, “Our boys are about to fight!” That could be clue that they were already all sleeping together.

Our can simply refer to "yours and mine". It could, but that would also be bad English. She should have said something like, “My boy and your boy are about to fight!” What she was saying is that both are both of their boys. Now, I merely said, “That could be [a] clue that they were already all sleeping together.” And it would make sense because otherwise Angel would be being a hypocrite for telling William that Drusilla isn’t anyone’s girl and yet only Angel is allowed to have sex with Darla and that would be something that Spike would call Angel on.


Dru more or less implied Angel has been more preoccupied with Darla and Buffy respectively. What are you implying with the Buffy example? Do you actually think that Drusilla would have dumped Spike had Angel been more into her than Angel was into Buffy?


* I never said that Angel in BtVS S2 was in love with Drusilla (Joss on the DVDs says that either Angel actually wanted to be with Drusilla or that he was mostly doing the flirting and touching to try to drive Spike insane). He did still love her though and continues to love her in A&F.


My quote: Drusilla being in love with Spike is canon. And, again, it seems you still haven’t read Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem With Vampires”.

Again, this is about the subjectivity of love. No, it’s not. Frankly, if you think Dru being in love with Spike is subjective; you should more think that about every other relationship in the Whedonverse. The only love (and it’s not an in love thing) that is possibly stronger in the Whedonverse is the love between Simon and River Tam. For “in love”, Drusilla’s love for Spike is by far the strongest.


I went on record saying I believe that Dru did love Spike. The problem here is the “believe” is needless given that it’s canon that Dru loves Spike and the second problem is that Dru’s “in love” with Spike.


"Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike? For the 1800s stuff, we actually only saw the one flashback of that. Dru at that time didn’t even know that William thought of them as being forever. After that, it’s ambiguous because we don’t see any future flashbacks of them having sex. I don’t like to speculate. But it was probably some combination of her still being attracted to Angel and William the Bloody not yet being as ‘dominate’ (I can’t think of a more exact word) as Angel. Spike killing the Chinese Slayer was the thing that made Drusilla and Darla realize that Spike was now the actual alpha male and Dru no longer ‘needed’ the ‘protection’ of being with the Fanged Four. However, it’s possible that if William didn’t want to sire his mother that Dru would have never even gone back to Angel and Darla. For 1998, it was to get Spike’s attention and focus on her again and probably because Angel wasn’t wheelchair-bound and Angel wanted Buffy dead and didn’t want to be with Buffy.


My quote: I strongly feel that if someone has not read a comic, that someone shouldn’t comment on the comic. I consider it’s about the same as someone not having seen an episode commenting on that episode

When have I done that? By talking about something when you haven’t read a relevant comic; since it’s the only when that’s certainly canon, I’m probably referring to Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem with Vampires”. But if any are canon: Spike and Dru : “Paint the Town Red” and “Queen of Hearts”, Juliet Landaus’s Issues of AtF: AtF 24 & 25, and the IDW Spike miniseries, are all very pro-Spike/Drusilla and Angel isn’t even mentioned in them.


My quote: Regarding “Redefinition” (A 2.??). No, he’d be seeing if they could survive the being set aflame.

But as I said, if he couldn't bring himself to dust them up close, then what would he do when he found them alive? First off, Angel couldn’t beat them by fighting them directly. And if Angel had actually wanted to kill them he would have stayed to see if they actually dusted. And they were probably in weakened states after dousing the flames and so it seems Angel possibly could have dusted them in that state.


* I don’t know where you get the idea that somehow Drusilla is stupid much less stupid to the point that she wouldn’t have tried to put out the flames engulfing her if someone else didn’t do all the work for her. All evidence points to Drusilla being smarter than Darla is, and Drusilla is perhaps smarter than Angel and Spike.


My point still stands. You do make assumptions about character's motivations and pretty much ignore what the characters say unless it fits your theory.

I'm not saying quotes are 100% validation, but at least it's a starting point. At least I can say why I believe what a character's saying or thinking. First off, one cannot know the Buffyverse by reading transcripts on Buffyworld.com. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, is a problem that only involves you.

You can’t even acknowledge certain basic canon such as:

Drusilla is in love with Spike.
Angel is initially jealous that Drusilla sired William and was having sex with William.
Drusilla wanted to do the Acathla thing and Angel knew this before helping to do the Acathla thing.


I don’t have a problem with spending hours responding to threads. I do that regularly. My problem is spending hours trying to debate with someone who cannot acknowledge basic canon.

With this thread, it is almost certain fact that Spike was into Buffy before post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) and that Drusilla knows this. And that it makes about no sense that she would only know about his being into Buffy after “Becoming Part II”. And everything makes sense if she knew it before “Becoming Part II”.

So, the problem here is that your arguments against my points in this thread are based off of something that is almost certainly not canon, which is that Dru didn’t know before post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Spike was into Buffy.

With the other thread, all your arguments against my points are based off nonsense: this being that somehow Angel didn’t already know that Dru wanted to do the Acathla thing before he helped with the Acathla thing.


I know that KingOfCretins is unhappy about some of the stuff I say about Xander (and that’s simply because he likes the character more than I do and wanted Buffy/Xander to happen when I never wanted or want that to happen), but I would never say something like “It’s subjective whether Cordelia or Anya ever were in love with Xander.” or “It’s subjective whether Willow loved Xander.” or “Giles was the first to want to make a SuperBuffy to defeat Adam” or “it’s only subjective whether Xander was jealous that Buffy got with Angel instead of him”.


My quote: I like debating the Buffyverse and put in the time to try to respond to every post and every poster on this Board. But I already commented – I think more than once – about your saying such stuff about my “making up motivations”

And I've already commented on you calling people's opinions silly but that doesn't stop you. To me, asking for validation of something you believe is not rude, it's simple debating tactics. All I'm doing is asking you to qualify your statements. Rather than be offended, why don't you simply respond to my point, or admit it's your own personal interpretation of a scene etc. First off, some things posters say are silly. All that means it that the thing said lacks common sense or is unworthy of serious concern.

For example, if someone said that nothing in BtVS S7 proves that Buffy’s in love with Spike (or that it’s subjective whether Dru was in love with Spike): that would be silly and there’d be about no point in spending time going through all the examples of why that is silly. Saying something is silly is a time-saver. Although, I’ve recently tried to refrain from using such words, I’ve noticed that some of my responses aren’t as neat as they would be if I included such words.

However, that’s different from someone saying a poster is “making up motivations” and it’s obvious why. Maybe the poster actually believes the silly thing said. But saying someone is “making up motivations” is saying that that someone is being malicious. It’s saying that the poster doesn’t actually even believe what they are saying and is simply making stuff up to… I don’t even know to what you are exactly accusing me. Maybe your not aware of what that phrase actually means in the context of posting on a debating and discussion forum.

As for “debating tactics”: saying something is silly, or whatever else, is simply a timesaving device. But using such phrases as “making up motivations” implies that one’s arguments aren’t actually based on the show and instead are only in the minds of one’s personal Buffyverse instead of Joss Whedon’s Buffyverse.

Anyway, it’s possible that you didn’t actually mean that my arguments weren’t actually based off the show, but that’s what that phrase implied, I probably told you exactly that, and you continued to repeat the phrase.


Anyway, I’m pleased that you are responding to my posts again. :)

Gemini9857
20-12-12, 12:10 AM
How do you think Dru felt about Angelus?
I think for Drusilla it may have been something similar to Stockholm Syndrome. Angel completely destroyed her when she was human and she obviously remembers it all and I think it on some level bothered by it (when talking to him in Season 2 she mentions how he ripped out her uncle's throat and such). I think she considers Angel to be her family now and has for quite a while.

How do think Angelus felt about Dru?
He obviously likes her, he was obsessed with her to begin with and made her life miserable. He also kept around once he turned her and I think he does on some level care about her. I also think she's a constant reminder for him of what he did. She may be an evil killer, but she's also one of his victims. I think he does feel somewhat responsible for her and I don't think he ever really wanted to kill her. In "Lie to Me"when he encounters her he just talks to her and suggests that she leave before things go badly (like what happened with Darla) but doesn't stake her the way he did Lawson. If he didn't care about her at all he would have probably would have just dusted her.

Why do you think Dru continued to sleep with Angelus in the 1800s and flirted so openly with him in 1998 when she was with Spike?
She probably didn't think much about it. She picked Spike because she liked him and wanted to be with him, but I don't think she cared about being exclusive. I think she does love Spike, but that doesn't mean she won't sleep with anyone else.

Now I'm aware of the blurring lines that barely divide Angel and Angelus but to extend the conversation (because I believe Angel having a soul or not having a soul clearly affects his relationships), how do think Dru felt about Angel?
I think she likes it better when he doesn't have a soul. When they're both evil they can hang out and have a good time, but Angel's not going to be doing that when he does have his soul. She seemed pretty happy when he lost his soul and he moved in with her and Spike.

And vice versa, how do think Angel felt about Drusilla?
I already answered this in the second question.

Jack Shaftoe
20-12-12, 12:19 AM
So, the problem here is that your arguments against my points in this thread are based off of something that is almost certainly not canon, which is that Dru didn’t know before post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Spike was into Buffy.

With the other thread, all your arguments against my points are based off nonsense: this being that somehow Angel didn’t already know that Dru wanted to do the Acathla thing before he helped with the Acathla thing.

I know that KingOfCretins is unhappy about some of the stuff I say about Xander (and that’s simply because he likes the character more than I do and wanted Buffy/Xander to happen when I never wanted or want that to happen), but I would never say something like “It’s subjective whether Cordelia or Anya ever were in love with Xander.” or “It’s subjective whether Willow loved Xander.” or “Giles was the first to want to make a SuperBuffy to defeat Adam”

Oh, really? I seem to remember you saying that the powers that be must have resurrected Buffy in Prophecy Girl, not Xander? Or your theory that Spike cast a spell off-screen in Becoming? Accusing others of twisting canon to suit their argument is hilarious, considering you do it too.

Skippcomet
21-12-12, 05:52 AM
Oh, really? I seem to remember you saying that the powers that be must have resurrected Buffy in Prophecy Girl, not Xander? Or your theory that Spike cast a spell off-screen in Becoming? Accusing others of twisting canon to suit their argument is hilarious, considering you do it too.

I bolded the specific sentence above so we can state, once and for all, what the "Spike cast a spell offscreen to keep Acathla from swallowing the world" so-called theory what it actually is: utter bullshit conjured by a Spike fanboy to make his role in the episode important than it already was. It's completely and utterly unnecessary to the story being told, and in fact robs the fight between Buffy and Angel(us) of any drama or point.

"Hey, Buffy! You don't need to fight soulless Angel to the death to save the world, or be forced to send Angel to Hell after both his soul is restored and Acathla opens his mouthy portal! Spike already saved it for you, by casting a spell when we never see him cast one before or pretty much after! And he's so modest he never, ever mentions it!"

*eyesrolloutofsocket*

kana
24-12-12, 02:03 AM
My quote: So, you believe that it’s only after “Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Dru knew that Spike was in love with Buffy? It simply doesn’t make about any sense that she only knew after “Becoming Part II” (2.22).


Did you even read my post? My argument is not dependent on when she knew, yours is. And why doesn't make sense that she might have known after Becoming part 2? You haven't actually explained yourself



Everything fits with Dru knowing before “Becoming Part II” (2.22). She did it to focus Spike’s attention and concern on her.

How? You don't seem to understand that it only fits if you make the assumption that Dru was flirting with Angelus to get Spike's attention on her. I'm not making that assumption. It's just what you want to believe Mike. I'ts pure fanon!


There is a definition for love: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/love?s=t “In love” is the only subjective thing because there isn’t a definition for it.

I think I'm actually failing miserably here. I thought it was obvious what I meant. Mike, I'm not talking about a superficial dictionary definition of love. I'm talking about what love means to different people. The meaning it holds for them. You may say you love someone. Now how do I know that the feelings you have are the same feelings I'd associate with love, be it familial, romantic or otherwise? This is what I'm talking about.


By the definition of the word “love”, Angel loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike: that’s simply fact. Actions speak louder than words and Angel possibly never saying he loved these people doesn’t mean that he didn’t love them.

But does this prove that what he felt for say Dru was the same or as intense as what he felt for Buffy? Does he place the same significance in his relationship with Dru as he does with Buffy? You can't answer that which some 'one line' superficial, dictionary definition. The meaning of love transcends the dictionary definition, it transcends a Wikipedia entry. If I love someone, you can't simply read a dictionary then know exactly what that person means to me. This applies to characters in the Verse too.


That she was fine being with William only. Remember that Dru only went out looking for someone else because Angel was focusing on Darla and not much on her.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I've never had a problem with the idea that Dru would want some alone time with William.


No, it’s canon.

Yeah, you repeating something dogmatically doesn't make it canon.


No, because besides maybe Halfrek (which only involves whether she was a vengeance demon in 1880), all the other characters have consistent character histories.

It was never stated, even in Becoming that Angel was on the streets for 90 years, so what point are you trying make?


There is no subjectivity regarding Darla.

See above about what I wrote about love.


Angel siring Drusilla made her an immortal and Angel intended to and did have sex with vampire Drusilla.

You do realize that sex isn't just about love for many people don't you?



“In love” is generally defined as loving someone, wanting to be in a sexual relationship with that someone, and being willing to sacrifice for that someone.

Generally defined by who? MikeB?


Buffy considered that Angel had loved Dru

No she didn't. She said they were 'friendly'. So of course it would suggest a familiarity with her. Most people don't think that every relationship one has equates to love. Maybe you need to put down your dictionary and actually talk to people.


As for willing to sacrifice, Buffy believed that he was meeting up with (and possibly making out with – she didn't even ask Angel about either those things) an evil vampire who has been with Spike for a while.

Buffy also believed one can't love without a soul. She never actually accused Angel of cheating despite her jealousy, so I don't see your point.


So, he’s not willing to even try to fight her even though she’s a danger to Buffy, who Angel is supposedly in love with.

Not being able to kill her is not proof of a conscious sacrifice. He hoped that Dru would leave anyway.


As for sacrifice before 1998, Angel was willing to share her with Spike.

He literally told her to find herself another lover. From what we saw, Angelus got to sleep with Darla and Dru. Poor guy ;).


* Proper English – which is what the Buffyverse uses (outside of the Buffyisms) – states that Angel states that Spike was also having sex with Darla and Angel was addressing both Darla and Drusilla since they both had sex with the Immortal.

Now matter how much you assert it, it doesn't make it canon that he was addressing both women. Darla said, concurrently and Angelus comment was a response to that.



It could, but that would also be bad English.

How?


She should have said something like, “My boy and your boy are about to fight!”

If anything that's incredibly clumsy English. Let's prove this!

Say for example the group consisted of 10 girls and 10 guys. Let us say all the guys were about to fight. If Dru and Darla were a part of this group of girls, based upon your logic Darla would have to say "My boy, your boy, your boy, your boy, your boy, your boy, your boy, your boy, your boy and your boy are going to fight." Seriously?


What she was saying is that both are both of their boys.

No she's not. You're simply wrong. There is no other way to explain this. Open a thread on this based upon this reasoning and see what happens. I dare you.


Now, I merely said, “That could be [a] clue that they were already all sleeping together.”

No it's simply what you want to believe.


And it would make sense because otherwise Angel would be being a hypocrite for telling William that Drusilla isn’t anyone’s girl and yet only Angel is allowed to have sex with Darla and that would be something that Spike would call Angel on.

I never implied that Angelus wasn't allowing Spike to sleep with Darla. So what's your point?


What are you implying with the Buffy example? Do you actually think that Drusilla would have dumped Spike had Angel been more into her than Angel was into Buffy?

No, I'm saying he's more bothered by Darla and Buffy than he is by Dru and Spike's relationship.



* I never said that Angel in BtVS S2 was in love with Drusilla (Joss on the DVDs says that either Angel actually wanted to be with Drusilla or that he was mostly doing the flirting and touching to try to drive Spike insane). He did still love her though and continues to love her in A&F.

Hopefully now you understand what I mean about the subjectivity of love...


No, it’s not. Frankly, if you think Dru being in love with Spike is subjective; you should more think that about every other relationship in the Whedonverse.

I'm talking about every relationship, in the Buffyverse or otherwise.


The only love (and it’s not an in love thing) that is possibly stronger in the Whedonverse is the love between Simon and River Tam. For “in love”, Drusilla’s love for Spike is by far the strongest.


Which is measured by the most scientific means? The MikeB Love-o-Meter? ;).


The problem here is the “believe” is needless given that it’s canon that Dru loves Spike and the second problem is that Dru’s “in love” with Spike.

I see canon as mainly relevant to continuity. Believing all love is subjective doesn't break this continuity. Even in the Verse (Heartthrob) characters talk about what love means to different people.


For the 1800s stuff, we actually only saw the one flashback of that. Dru at that time didn’t even know that William thought of them as being forever.

No Dru questioned in general whether they were forever. She didn't know that William said she was his destiny. Funnily enough she laughed along with Angelus about it...


After that, it’s ambiguous because we don’t see any future flashbacks of them having sex. I don’t like to speculate.

For me, it's the fact that it hurt William and Dru didn't seem to care. She more or less mocked him.


But it was probably some combination of her still being attracted to Angel and William the Bloody not yet being as ‘dominate’ (I can’t think of a more exact word) as Angel.

This is possible. We can't simply say it's not love just because it doesn't conform to everyone's idea of love. I mean, I'm actually defending Sprusilla here. I've seen many people trash it and call it superficial love (some even did that in your Sprusilla thread I believe) but I wouldn't place my idea of love onto Dru or anyone else.


Spike killing the Chinese Slayer was the thing that made Drusilla and Darla realize that Spike was now the actual alpha male and Dru no longer ‘needed’ the ‘protection’ of being with the Fanged Four.

This is veering into speculation. We still don't know what happened to split them up. We know Angel left with the baby, but we don't know if Dru and Spike were still in China at that point. For all we know Darla could have abandoned Dru and Spike.

This said, I do think that Dru was happy just being with Spike, but this doesn't mean she wouldn't mind a bit of Angel as well if she had the chance.


However, it’s possible that if William didn’t want to sire his mother that Dru would have never even gone back to Angel and Darla.

Not necessarily, Dru seemed to want Darla and Angelus to meet William. She may have planned this all along.


For 1998, it was to get Spike’s attention and focus on her again and probably because Angel wasn’t wheelchair-bound and Angel wanted Buffy dead and didn’t want to be with Buffy.

Possibly or maybe she simply liked having 'Daddy' around. Dru rarely talks in terms of pragmatism when talking about Angelus, Spike or Darla, she talks in terms of sentimentality, even with other people (like Lindsay etc.)


By talking about something when you haven’t read a relevant comic; since it’s the only when that’s certainly canon, I’m probably referring to Tales of the Vampires : “The Problem with Vampires”. But if any are canon: Spike and Dru : “Paint the Town Red” and “Queen of Hearts”, Juliet Landaus’s Issues of AtF: AtF 24 & 25, and the IDW Spike miniseries, are all very pro-Spike/Drusilla and Angel isn’t even mentioned in them.

So what? It actually doesn't change my point. It may focus on Dru and Spike but it doesn't change my stance on the subjectivity of love. I said I believe Spike and Dru loved each other (read 'in love' if you're confused), so I don't understand what your problem is.


First off, Angel couldn’t beat them by fighting them directly. And if Angel had actually wanted to kill them he would have stayed to see if they actually dusted.

This is really dragging....

I said if he couldn't dust them up close then it would be pointless to see if they dusted. If they weren't, then what?


And they were probably in weakened states after dousing the flames and so it seems Angel possibly could have dusted them in that state.

If he could bring himself to dust them face to face.


* I don’t know where you get the idea that somehow Drusilla is stupid much less stupid to the point that she wouldn’t have tried to put out the flames engulfing her if someone else didn’t do all the work for her.

If someone panics they can make 'stupid decisions'. Doesn't mean the person in question is stupid in general.


All evidence points to Drusilla being smarter than Darla is, and Drusilla is perhaps smarter than Angel and Spike.

This is a general statement. Dru wasn't even lucid enough to know she had a cell phone in her cleavage but Darla was the one who was 'switched on' to get it. Different people can show different levels of aptitude at different times. Unless Dru was joking, Darla in both situations demonstrated she was more 'in tune' with what was going on. Dru's advantage however is psychic intuition. However, how she had a vision about her being set on fire and still didn't avoid it makes me question things a bit. Maybe her visions aren't that reliable or clear.


First off, one cannot know the Buffyverse by reading transcripts on Buffyworld.com. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, is a problem that only involves you.

Again Mike, please read my post properly. I said they weren't 100%.


You can’t even acknowledge certain basic canon such as:

Drusilla is in love with Spike.

Yet you believe being "in love" with someone is subjective. Make up your mind.


Angel is initially jealous that Drusilla sired William and was having sex with William.

You're the only person I've seen who's asserted this. Your so called proof includes "No, it's canon". Should I reply by saying "No it's not". We could that do for eternity. Or you could qualify your statement, or we could agree to disagree. Or could put it to a vote. I'm open to suggestions.


Drusilla wanted to do the Acathla thing and Angel knew this before helping to do the Acathla thing.


Look in the other thread for argument on this.


I don’t have a problem with spending hours responding to threads. I do that regularly. My problem is spending hours trying to debate with someone who cannot acknowledge basic canon.

I do acknowledge basic canon, but like many people on this forum, I don't acknowledge MikeB fanon.


With this thread, it is almost certain fact that Spike was into Buffy before post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) and that Drusilla knows this.

No it's not and it's certainly not a fact that part of the reason she flirts with Angelus is that she was trying to get Spike's attention away from Buffy and on to her.


And that it makes about no sense that she would only know about his being into Buffy after “Becoming Part II”. And everything makes sense if she knew it before “Becoming Part II”.

Just because you say so?


So, the problem here is that your arguments against my points in this thread are based off of something that is almost certainly not canon, which is that Dru didn’t know before post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) that Spike was into Buffy.

Not at all. You haven't been listening anything I've said like, ever. I don't have an argument that is based upon when Dru knew about Spike's feelings or potential feelings for Buffy, but you do. Therefore it's up to you prove she knew before then and that her flirting with Angelus is based upon that. You've still failed to do this.



With the other thread, all your arguments against my points are based off nonsense:

That's a bit harsh.


this being that somehow Angel didn’t already know that Dru wanted to do the Acathla thing before he helped with the Acathla thing.

I'm not going to get into it here, but it's actually you who is basing their argument on biased speculation. Funnily enough many other posters call you on this. I've never been called this, apart from maybe by you.


I know that KingOfCretins is unhappy about some of the stuff I say about Xander (and that’s simply because he likes the character more than I do and wanted Buffy/Xander to happen when I never wanted or want that to happen), but I would never say something like “It’s subjective whether Cordelia or Anya ever were in love with Xander.”

From my perspective, it has nothing to do with favourite characters. My view of love is independent of any of the individual characters or ships.



or “It’s subjective whether Willow loved Xander.” or “Giles was the first to want to make a SuperBuffy to defeat Adam” or “it’s only subjective whether Xander was jealous that Buffy got with Angel instead of him”.

Not all these things are the same. Feelings are not straight forward. For me, I tend to see canon as the 'reality' of the Verse. For me, feelings are subjective in real life, so feelings in the Verse are no more 'objective'.



First off, some things posters say are silly.

These things are always subject to opinion. My point is, saying something is silly is not constructive in a debate, it's just rude. It also demonstrates arrogance and a lack of respect for other posters. All one needs to do is state why they disagree with another's post. Saying someone's opinion is silly, is superfluous and rude.


All that means it that the thing said lacks common sense or is unworthy of serious concern.

Again, just simply point out the flaws in someone's logic. If their argument is as weak as you're implying, then it shouldn't be too difficult.


For example, if someone said that nothing in BtVS S7 proves that Buffy’s in love with Spike (or that it’s subjective whether Dru was in love with Spike): that would be silly and there’d be about no point in spending time going through all the examples of why that is silly.

Despite the fact that love means different things to different people. People may observe Season 7 and come to that conclusion, because when they were in love, they behaved differently from Buffy in regards to Spike. You said that actions speak louder than words, right? how can you factor that people who claim to be in love, have varying displays of behaviour?


Saying something is silly is a time-saver.

No it's not, because saying something is silly still requires the reason why one thinks it's silly. So if this qualification is required then saying something is silly is pointless and rude.

And honestly what do you think someone would respond to that as well?

"Actually MikeB, because you said my argument is silly, all of sudden it's all so clear to me now. The 'S' and the 'I' and the double 'L' and not to mention the 'Y' totally disprove my argument. I mean, the 'S' particularly really demonstrates logical reasoning"

Admittedly, I'm being facetious, but my facetiousness has a purpose: To demonstrate how saying an argument is silly adds nothing to a debate.

If you can't demonstrate how someone's logic is flawed, you are either not adept at articulating yourself or you're just being lazy.


Although, I’ve recently tried to refrain from using such words, I’ve noticed that some of my responses aren’t as neat as they would be if I included such words.

Then you need to try harder to express yourself. Sometimes a terse response isn't always an adequate response. Don't get me wrong, no response is perfect, but I do believe in reflection and improving where we can.


However, that’s different from someone saying a poster is “making up motivations” and it’s obvious why.

Such statements are used to demand qualification for the assertion of a character's motivations. You saying "It's fact" or "This is canon" isn't sufficient. Such opinions and yes, they are opinions need to be qualified or one needs to admit that it's just their interpretation.


Maybe the poster actually believes the silly thing said.

So you honestly think that stating it's silly will somehow demonstrate to the poster the flaw in their logic.


But saying someone is “making up motivations” is saying that that someone is being malicious.

No it's saying that someone is failing to qualify their assertions. If you're stating that 'character X' is thinking something, then at least demonstrate how. This is not something that is simply my issue. Many posters have called you on this. It's not a random coincidence, it's how your post come across.


It’s saying that the poster doesn’t actually even believe what they are saying and is simply making stuff up to…

I admitted I wasn't very diplomatic in how I expressed myself. Perhaps what I should have said is that you make a lot of assumptions without objective qualification, especially regarding your favourite characters.


I don’t even know to what you are exactly accusing me. Maybe your not aware of what that phrase actually means in the context of posting on a debating and discussion forum.

I'm completely aware of it. My only regret is that I should have been more diplomatic in how I expressed myself.


As for “debating tactics”: saying something is silly, or whatever else, is simply a timesaving device.

Which adds nothing to a debate. Try placing yourself in the other posters shoes: How would you respond if someone simply said your opinion was silly? Surely, for effective communication, you'd have to state why it's silly, so therefore, you only need to demonstrate how their logic is flawed. You saying their opinion is silly is superfluous and as I've said, rude.


But using such phrases as “making up motivations” implies that one’s arguments aren’t actually based on the show and instead are only in the minds of one’s personal Buffyverse instead of Joss Whedon’s Buffyverse.

No offense but that's exactly what I'm implying. If it's fact then it's simple to prove. Most your arguments on such things include you simply repeating yourself and simply saying "It's canon".


Anyway, it’s possible that you didn’t actually mean that my arguments weren’t actually based off the show, but that’s what that phrase implied, I probably told you exactly that, and you continued to repeat the phrase.

It's about precise in one's arguments. If you say that 'Character X' is likely to kill 'Character Y' then at least demonstrate how the dialogue or behaviour implies that. Certainly you have problem with assuming character's motivations and thoughts. I'm not the only poster to call you on this. Rather than looking at me, you should look to yourself.



Anyway, I’m pleased that you are responding to my posts again. :)

Well it's entertaining if nothing else and I mean that genuinely as a compliment. The 'Boards are never dull when you're posting. :)

MikeB
28-01-13, 04:17 AM
All caught up




Gemini9857


In "Lie to Me"when he encounters her he just talks to her and suggests that she leave before things go badly (like what happened with Darla) but doesn't stake her the way he did Lawson. If he didn't care about her at all he would have probably would have just dusted her. This requires that he considered he could have dusted her. There’s no proof Angel even knew she was ‘sick and dying’.


She picked Spike because she liked him and wanted to be with him, but I don't think she cared about being exclusive. I think she does love Spike, but that doesn't mean she won't sleep with anyone else. Angel was her sire and lover of 20 years, that’s hardly “anyone else”. Other than him, it’s implied that the Immortal was the only time she cheated on Spike and Angel. The post-“Becoming Part II” (2.22) ‘cheating’ happened because Spike was in love with Buffy, thinking about her all the time, and he “tasted like ashes” and she had to “get [her] pleasure” somewhere.



Jack Shaftoe


I seem to remember you saying that the powers that be must have resurrected Buffy in Prophecy Girl, not Xander? Or your theory that Spike cast a spell off-screen in Becoming? Accusing others of twisting canon to suit their argument is hilarious, considering you do it too. Those things you mentioned are irrelevant to the thread.



kana

My quote: There is a definition for love: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/love?s=t “In love” is the only subjective thing because there isn’t a definition for it.

You’re not accepting this doesn’t mean it’s not true. There is a definition for love. And based on the definition of love, Angel loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike.

The only subjective thing is whether he was in love with Darla and whether he was in love with Drusilla. Since we are unlikely to agree on what “in love” means, we should agree to disagree whether he was in love with Darla and whether he was in love with Drusilla.


* Drusilla knew from “Halloween” (2.06) – at-latest – that Spike was into Buffy.

She was responding to Angel’s flirting at least partly to focus Spike’s attention on her and off of Buffy. Since you consider she didn’t know until after “Becoming Part II’ (2.22) that Spike is into Buffy, we should agree to disagree regarding why Dru in 1998 was responding to Angel’s flirting.


It was never stated, even in Becoming that Angel was on the streets for 90 years, It was implied.


* My quote: Buffy considered that Angel had loved Dru

This was the whole point of Buffy in “Passions” (2.17) bringing up what Angel did to Dru.


She never actually accused Angel She should have said something like, “My boy and your boy are about to fight!”

Say for example the group consisted of 10 girls and 10 guys. It wasn’t, so you’re reasoning is flawed.


I'm saying he's more bothered by Darla and Buffy than he is by Dru and Spike's relationship. What are you referring to with Darla? Also, 1998 is 98 years after likely the last time Angel saw Drusilla and he’s still jealous of Spike/Dru.


My quote: For the 1800s stuff, we actually only saw the one flashback of that. Dru at that time didn’t even know that William thought of them as being forever.

No Dru questioned in general whether they were forever. She didn't know that William said she was his destiny. Funnily enough she laughed along with Angelus about it... I’m referring to the later scene.


* My quote: Spike killing the Chinese Slayer was the thing that made Drusilla and Darla realize that Spike was now the actual alpha male and Dru no longer ‘needed’ the ‘protection’ of being with the Fanged Four.

This is the most likely reason Spike and Drusilla left Angel and Darla. There’s simply zero indication that Darla left Spike and Dru or that Drusilla or Spike knew that Angel left again. In fact, Spike in 1945 didn’t even ask about Angel’s leaving.


My quote: However, it’s possible that if William didn’t want to sire his mother that Dru would have never even gone back to Angel and Darla.

Not necessarily, Dru seemed to want Darla and Angelus to meet William. She may have planned this all along. Dru did not plan on William wanting to sire his mother or that he would want it to be the three of them together forever. I do reason that Dru was always going to go back to Angel and Darla if merely to have William taught things. I also reason that if William didn’t sire his mother that it’s less likely that Dru would have had sex with Angel again.


* Angel didn’t want to actually dust Drusilla. That’s probably all that’s important for this thread regarding “Redefinition” (A 2.11).


*
My quote: Angel is initially jealous that Drusilla sired William and was having sex with William.

You're the only person I've seen who's asserted this. I don’t remember my ever discussing this with anyone else.

kana
29-01-13, 07:44 AM
kana

My quote: There is a definition for love: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/love?s=t “In love” is the only subjective thing because there isn’t a definition for it.

You’re not accepting this doesn’t mean it’s not true. There is a definition for love. And based on the definition of love, Angel loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike.

But as I've said, there is a difference between a superficial dictionary definition of love and understanding that love means different things to different people. As I've said (and you once again conveniently ignored) is that looking up such terms in the dictionary doesn't demonstrate what that love means to different people and significance it holds. Try asking what love means to different people. How many would say: "I know what love is because I looked it up in the dictionary"? Come on, here's where a bit of common sense has to apply.

Even in the 'Verse we see evidence of this with James and Elizabeth


Elisabeth: "You love her? (Bobby nods) You'd do anything for her. (He nods again) What if - we just kill her and let you go? Hmm? (Bobby just stares at her) Come on now. Life's about making choices. - You or her, what's it gonna be?"

Bobby, after a long moment: "Her. - Take her. God, I..."

Elisabeth: "Gee. Bobby, you call that love? We get home (pets the side of his head) I'll show you what love is."


James: "*You* loved someone - with all your heart."

Angel: "Yeah."

James: "No you didn't. - Because if you had you wouldn't be standing here playing games with me. You wouldn't be able to - because once she died or some bastard killed her, it would have killed everything in you."

Angel: "How's that, invincible boy, huh? - Is that your idea of love, James, hmm? It's not real unless it kills, you?"

James, panting: "Yeah. What's yours? It's fun as long as it doesn't cost me anything? - You don't know what love is!"




Now of course James and Elizabeth have a very specific view on love but it demonstrates people have different ideas about what love is that goes beyond the dictionary.


The only subjective thing is whether he was in love with Darla and whether he was in love with Drusilla. Since we are unlikely to agree on what “in love” means, we should agree to disagree whether he was in love with Darla and whether he was in love with Drusilla.


Sort of. Even platonic or familial love can be defined differently for different people. Again, I urge to ask other people about this. They wont necessarily give you exactly the same answer.


* Drusilla knew from “Halloween” (2.06) – at-latest – that Spike was into Buffy.

No, this is, has always been and would probably always be you interpretation.


She was responding to Angel’s flirting at least partly to focus Spike’s attention on her and off of Buffy.

Mike, you don't need to repeat this. I know this is your opinion, but you have yet to prove it. If you cannot prove it, at least, simply state this is your personal interpretation.


Since you consider she didn’t know until after “Becoming Part II’ (2.22) that Spike is into Buffy, we should agree to disagree regarding why Dru in 1998 was responding to Angel’s flirting.

You're obviously not paying enough attention to what I'm saying. This is the problem with you actually missing out parts of my posts, because it isn't clear what you've understood and what you haven't. I specifically stated my argument isn't dependent on when she knew. What part of that isn't clear? I don't know when she knew or how she knew, but then I'm not arguing that she knew at a specific time. You are!!! Therefore, the burden of proof is not on me, but on you. Either you can prove it or you can't, it's as simple as that. I have nothing to prove.



It was implied.

If we are looking at things from a Watsonian perspective there are only inferences. So therefore it is merely your inference that he was on the streets for 90 years. I actually never assumed that.


* My quote: Buffy considered that Angel had loved Dru

This was the whole point of Buffy in “Passions” (2.17) bringing up what Angel did to Dru.


Well not everyone associates obsession with love. It's possible that as Angel he loved Buffy but as Angelus he was obsessed with both Dru and Buffy.



It’s clear she considers he could have cheated on her with Drusilla. That’s the whole point of asking him where he was last night and her later tersely asking him, “Who’s Drusilla?”

This mainly started when I was talking about the subjectivity of love. You appeared to be attempting demonstrate how he loved Dru objectively. You talked about Buffy accusing Angel of cheating and that was a definition of sacrifice which was one of your criteria. Well Angel wasn't cheating on Buffy so how is this a sign of love for Dru on Angel's part?


* My quote: Proper English – which is what the Buffyverse uses (outside of the Buffyisms) – states that Angel states that Spike was also having sex with Darla and Angel was addressing both Darla and Drusilla since they both had sex with the Immortal

This will always be true.

I'm dropping this. You're simply insisting you're right without any qualification. We'll perhaps agree to disagree. Especially considering you haven't even bothered to address what I said properly.


* It’s ambiguous whether by the Mine Shaft scene in 1880 Spike was already having sex with Darla.

If it's not stated, I wont bother assuming.


It wasn’t, so you’re reasoning is flawed.


My argument is based upon how one would express themselves in a situation whereby we are dealing with multiple people with multiple 'possessions' for want of a better word. Saying 'our boys' has nothing to do with any specific regards to ownership. It doesn't imply anything. Please give a link on some kind of academic site that proves your point. You literally have no argument. If a group of women, or even two women talk about 'their boys' that simply doesn't suggest anything other than the boys belong to them. It says nothing either way about how monogamous they are.


What are you referring to with Darla?

Obviously I meant back in the day


Also, 1998 is 98 years after likely the last time Angel saw Drusilla and he’s still jealous of Spike/Dru.


As for being jealous of Spike and Dru...is he? Again this seems to be you personal intepretation. Mike, a little tip: try to qualify your statements. You simply saying something is that case doesn't make it so.



I’m referring to the later scene.

Which scene? The only time it was mentioned was here.


SPIKE: We're forever me and Dru.

DRU: Are we?

Dru never questioned whether or not Spike thought of them being forever, she simply questioned whether they were forever. In any respect it seems a little strange. Based upon what she said to Darla and Angelus was siring someone who could be "hers forever with a kiss" or something along those lines. If she was looking for a fling, why sire William in the first place?

Dru didn't seem insecure about her future based upon Williams behaviour, so if she changed her mind, it's possibly because he wasn't living up to her expectations.


* My quote: Spike killing the Chinese Slayer was the thing that made Drusilla and Darla realize that Spike was now the actual alpha male and Dru no longer ‘needed’ the ‘protection’ of being with the Fanged Four.

I wouldn't necessarily go as far as saying the alpha male, but I'd say he certainly went up in their estimation. Interesting question, would this make Dru's love conditional to such things? Did she always know he was going to kill a Slayer or would she have left him had he not acheived such a feat? Maybe those are questions for your thread.



This is the most likely reason Spike and Drusilla left Angel and Darla. There’s simply zero indication that Darla left Spike and Dru or that Drusilla or Spike knew that Angel left again. In fact, Spike in 1945 didn’t even ask about Angel’s leaving.

We've had this discussion before. The details are still not clear as to what happened exactly. We don't know if Darla lied about what happened to Angel or something else occurred. I don't work off 'negative proof'. Spike not mentioning Angel leaving is proof of nothing.



Dru did not plan on William wanting to sire his mother or that he would want it to be the three of them together forever.

I understand that, but we still don't know if that had anything to do with her behaviour, towards him in the earlier years. Regardless on one's view on love, one of the keys to many a successful relationship is communication. If Dru was jealous about it, why didn't they simply talk about it? I suppose I'm making a fundamental error here, because I suppose we cannot seperate the love from the lover if you know what I mean. I can't really judge Dru, just because I can't relate to her behaviour all the time.



I do reason that Dru was always going to go back to Angel and Darla if merely to have William taught things.

I think it's a familial thing more than anything. A kind of 'meet the parents' kind of deal. Unless of course Dru was incapable of 'tutoring' William and thought Angelus would be more equipped.


I also reason that if William didn’t sire his mother that it’s less likely that Dru would have had sex with Angel again.

We have no indication that the two are linked.


* Angel didn’t want to actually dust Drusilla. That’s probably all that’s important for this thread regarding “Redefinition” (A 2.11).


We'll agree to disagree on the specifics I guess, but I'll say that Angel definitely has trouble with the idea of dusting Dru. I'm totally speculating but the only time Angel would be likely to try would be if Dru was seriously threatening someone he cared about.


* I don’t remember my ever discussing this with anyone else.

I mean you're the only person who I've seen assert it.

MikeB
20-02-13, 05:31 AM
kana

* There is a definition of “love”; there isn’t one “in love”.

* As I’ve said, just because Angel may not say that he ever loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike, that doesn’t mean he didn’t.


* Essentially, Angel loves Drusilla, Drusilla loves Angel, they have some connection to each other, but Drusilla only allowed Angel’s flirting in 1998 because she was trying to get Spike’s focus on her instead of on Buffy.


* Other stuff discussed like Spike/Darla and such is not strictly related to the thread, so I’ll simply drop that subject in this thread because that’s more about Angel-Spike and Spike/Dru than Angel/Dru and Angel-Dru.

kana
27-03-13, 09:35 AM
kana

* There is a definition of “love”; there isn’t one “in love”.


Let's frame this a different way. Are you saying categorically that love means the same thing to every individual?

I'm not contradicting what you're saying, in that there is a dictionary definition of love, but for many it goes beyond that. Are you saying this is false?



* As I’ve said, just because Angel may not say that he ever loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike, that doesn’t mean he didn’t.

Well, we don't know. I do think he has some affection for vampire family, whether he'd call it love or not is another matter.



* Essentially, Angel loves Drusilla, Drusilla loves Angel, they have some connection to each other, but Drusilla only allowed Angel’s flirting in 1998 because she was trying to get Spike’s focus on her instead of on Buffy.


Look, you don't have to repeat this point because I understand it, but I just don't think there is any proof that you're right.



* Other stuff discussed like Spike/Darla and such is not strictly related to the thread, so I’ll simply drop that subject in this thread because that’s more about Angel-Spike and Spike/Dru than Angel/Dru and Angel-Dru.

Fine.

MikeB
23-04-13, 07:54 AM
kana

* I’m saying that actions speak louder than words. I’m saying that even though Angel may not categorize what he felt toward Darla, Drusilla, and Spike as love, he did love them.


* Come to think of it, I don’t remember Drusilla ever saying she loved Darla or Angel. She obviously loved Angel to an extent and loved Darla to an extent.

kana
28-04-13, 12:38 PM
kana

* I’m saying that actions speak louder than words. I’m saying that even though Angel may not categorize what he felt toward Darla, Drusilla, and Spike as love, he did love them.

But actions are still open to interpretation. I do think he has a familial devotion to his group, but he may categorize those feelings differently to how he felt about someone like Buffy.




* Come to think of it, I don’t remember Drusilla ever saying she loved Darla or Angel. She obviously loved Angel to an extent and loved Darla to an extent.

She certainly saw them as family, however my personal feeling is that she was only in love with Spike, by at least her definition.

MikeB
21-05-13, 04:57 AM
I do think [Angel] has a familial devotion to his group, but he may categorize those feelings differently to how he felt about someone like Buffy. I never said or implied that Angel loved Darla, Drusilla, and Spike in the same way he loved Buffy.

I merely said that it seems obvious that he did love them, even though he may not admit it.

______

We seem to agree on who Drusilla loves (and to what extent?). :)