Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Soulless Spike vs. Souled Spike

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Soulless Spike vs. Souled Spike

    So- I was watching "Passion" today, and it made me think of the very obvious differences between Angel and Angelus. Buffy and Willow constantly state in this episode how Buffy would never love Angelus, how he's completely different than Angel, and that Angel is "gone", and Buffy can't get him back. So my question is- what would happen if Spike were ever to lose his soul?

    Firstly, how would unsouled Spike be different from the one we saw in Season Sever/Angel Season Five? I know that S-Spike (souled Spike) has a very different outlook on life than did SL-Spike (Soulless Spike). S-Spike helps people, "tr[ies] to do the right thing", and is, in general, more respectful of others. But would he not behave the same way if he were to lose his soul? He could do the "right" thing without believing it, as he did in S5-6 of Buffy, just to impress Buffy. But- as we saw in "Smashed", the first thing that Spike did when he thought his chip was gone was to try and bite someone. His chip's completely gone now. Perhaps he would say "to hell with Buffy" and, now that he's 'free', bite anyone he wants, regardless of her opinion. And- would he still 'love' Buffy? Maybe he would be angry at her for the soul, and all of the torture it inflicted upon him.

    Also, there's the dating-Buffy scenario. Would Spike try to rape her again? He did seem very conflicted about it- obviously that's why he went to get the soul- but was he upset because it was wrong, or because it made Buffy upset with him? I tend to think the latter, only because it fits with my views on soulless vampires more. So would Spike try to sleep with her again?

    Lastly- Buffy. How would she feel about him coming back? She obviously views S-Spike and SL-Spike as two different entities, just as she does Angel and Angelus. But she allowed herself to sleep with SL-Spike, whereas she tells faux-Angelus that she would never let him touch her. I think she is afraid of SL-Spike (her actions in "Beneath You" seem to confirm this) much as she was of Angelus. It would be very twisted and interesting to see how she would react to this.

    I realize that, since Spike has no 'happiness clause' in his soul-contract, this is unlikely to ever happen, but I still think it's interesting. Any thoughts?
    The story's kinda bland. It's about this guy named Dumbledore Calrissian who needs to return the ring back to Mordor.

  • #2
    If Spike lost his soul again? He would try to kill Angel and his team. He would try to kill all the scoobies. I don't know if he would go back to Drusilla or try to sire Buffy. I can see him do the last, Spike has an obsession for Buffy which isn't gone yet. But with a soul he can understand her better and give her the space she needs ... soulless Spike can't. Would he rape her again, I don't think so. He won't do it this way again because he knows that it doesn't work.

    The only reason that Buffy slept with SL-Spike was her depression and because Spike let her. Angelus would never let her and Buffy was stronger in season 2. If SL-Spike returns and Buffy would be in a better place as she was in season 6, Spike would be dust. If she isn't, Spike can destroy her. But I doubt if she has the same fear for SL-Spike as she has for Angelus. But I'm a big fan of the idea Spike as the Big Bad in season 7 (he would be so much better as the first), I think that Spike can destroy Buffy in a way that Angelus never could because of his own line: "You have to love the girl, to destroy her." SL-Spike 'loves' Buffy in a way that Angelus can't.
    Last edited by Nina; 04-02-08, 05:10 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think i'd have to agree with Nina completely here...
      If Spike lost his soul he'd still want to kill the scoobies... purely for revenge purposes. He would see them as the reason why he hasn't been able to be a 'proper' vampire for the past 4 years. Also, Buffy would have to kill him, especially if he killed again (much like with Anya).
      But he would obviously have issues with that, and what with his obsession with Buffy, he'd probably try to turn her.
      Either that, or he'd leave completely. Which i doubt.
      'Cause in the end "The animal inside - always the same". (Buffy -- "Potential")
      "Blue in the face with a choking regret."

      Comment


      • #4
        Do you know, I don't think he'd do any of those things. Maybe beacuse there's less of a 'jump' between soulless Spike compared to soulless Angel.

        Sure Spike back with not being able to decipher right from wrong, but not sure he would make a B line straight for the Scoobies. I think whatever he would do wouldn't be quite so drastic unless he's confronted.

        Comment


        • #5
          I agree that the difference between S-Spike and SL-Spike is less big as between Angel and Angelus. But that has two big reasons IMO, the first is that Spike had to learn to be evil and the second is that Spike sees himself as the victim.

          Spike is more vicious as Drusilla, Darla, The Master, Penn etc. I don't see a reason for him not to kill the scoobies, they are standing between him and Buffy. They made fun of him. He was only fighting with them because they helped him survive. The only reasons why Spike was part of the team was him surving and his obsession with Buffy. The AR in SR was to let the viewers know; Spike is still evil and a chip isn't a soul ... he doesn't understand (our kind of) love and he is still dangerous.

          We already know that Spike isn't the special vampire, Angelus is the one of a kind vampire. James, Elizabeth, Drusilla and Darla and the Master all of them they felt for others, some of them called it love ... some of them didn't want to use that word. But is was the empty Angelus who is the 'special' case.

          Comment


          • #6
            Well I'm still of the opinion that every vampire is special (I'm currently lobbying for vampire equal rights lol).

            Spike as a human was especially sensitive but also very adaptable. Unlike Angelus, The Master, Drusilla or even Darla, he didn't value evil as a belief system, he was very joi de vie, so it depends on what his interests are at the time. Spike didn't have a soul forced on him, he went to get a soul. His post-analysis makes us wonder what was real and what wasn't...

            Spike:.... I fought for my soul, because I knew it was the right thing to do...

            If he knew what the right thing was why get a soul anyway? Is having a soul right in itself or are the actions we take more important? I've often argued that Spike changed from the outside in. He often mirrored or adapted for his purposes but this makes sense. Vampires like human, are social creatures who can seek validation or approval. Not only that we know that vampires can have a sense of honour however twisted (El Eliminati) Spike in some cases had this. He honoured Buffy's memory after her death and let us not forget that we know that if someone is truly malicious in the verse they don't have to cause damage by their own hand (just look at W&H) and Spike wouldn't be above doing that if he had the impetus (Order of Taraka) so I think a change occured, so I doubt that Spike would 'revert' if he lost his soul considering he went through the trouble of getting one.

            Comment


            • #7
              I fought for my soul, because I knew it was the right thing to do...

              Just like you, that quote always confused me, vampires are monsters because they don't know what is right and if they know it ... it's the last thing they do because it's against their nature. If Spike did what he believed was ethically right, why does he need the soul? His soul didn't really change his persona, it changed his idea's and his view. But if he was already capable of knowing what is right or wrong, and he wanted to do the right thing ... isn't that against the whole vampire myth? And doesn't that make him a bigger monster because he knew what was right and had the ability to choose the right thing?

              I agree that William was a very sensitive man and that Spike still has qualities of William in him, soulless and soulled. But I doubt it if that will make a big difference. Angelus didn't had feelings at all, he was sadistic and narcistic ... but Liam wasn't like that. I think that Liam wasn't a bad person at all, yes he was (most of the time) drunk and a loser ... but not a psycho and Liam loved his little sister.
              Spike didn't get the title 'one of the most vicious vampires ever' just because he liked unlife. Spike is in his short unlife, way more vicious as Darla was in 400 years. It's not just joy, he didn't do it for the victims like Angelus did but I don't think that we can call Spike an vampire with much more humanity as others.

              I agree that every vampire is special in their own way just like the persons they once were. But Spike isn't the first vampire who thinks he really loves somebody ... we saw the same with Drusilla who 'loved'him back and the James and Elizabeth relation, they loved eachother. I think that we can say that The master and Darla are caring about eachother. And Darla clearly cared more about Angelus as Angelus cared about her.

              ***AtF spoilers***
              Spoiler:
              I think that Gunn is a great example that the moral compass is gone when you become a vampire. Gunn was a great man when he was alive, he was nice and caring ... did the right thing.
              He is now a vampire and he kills women he just saved. He still kills bad guys but he became one also. He thinks he does the right thing, but he doesn't.


              And that is why I don't like the idea that Spike can make morally right decisions. Because it's against the vampire mythology and there is not enough reason to say that Spike is so different of the other vampires that he can make the right call.

              Dawson (Why We Fight) was and felt different because Angel was his sire. But Dawson wasn't ready to make the right call either. He was just confused. And Dawson had a partial soul (or something like that).

              I like the idea that Spike mirrored his morals, but if he has nothing to mirror, wouldn't he fall back on his own vampire morallity? And how strong are these feelings? And his desire and talent to survive, is mirroring (is that a word?) the people whe defend you not a easy way to save your own skin? Or is it a way to get the girl you want? Do and be what she wants.

              Maybe he wouldn't sire Buffy or kill the scoobies because of Buffy. But I think that he will kill innocents. What Buffy doesn't know, doesn't hurt Spike. Like LaJaula already pointed out, in season 6, Spike thinks that he can kill again and the first thing he does is killing at least, he tries.
              Last edited by Nina; 04-02-08, 07:52 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Just like you, that quote always confused me, vampires are monster because they don't know what is right and if they know it ... it's the last thing they do because it's against their nature.
                It's never confused me -- he's posturing. It's not true. He's 'embellishing' his motivations. That's one point in the argument where Angel gets the better point, because Spike doing it "to get in a girl's pants" is far closer to the truth. Spike rationalizes that it was his ethical choice for the same reasons that Angel probably rationalizes that the curse was destined -- so he feels a cohesive sense of purpose to his existence.

                If Spike lost his soul, he would, fairly quickly, revert to what he was before soul, before Buffy, and before the chip. It's his nature as a vampire. Maybe he had some 'humanity' in his personality, but so did Dalton, allegedly, since the Judge burned him -- but wouldn't Dalton have killed Buffy? Fed on people? Felt any compunction about it? No.

                Lawson from "Why We Fight" is a pretty interesting case -- I really wish we'd had him for more than just one episode, or that his function wasn't simply to commit suicide by Angel (which is what I think he came for). He basically had the supreme ennui of a vampire -- didn't get satisfaction out of either the monster or the man.

                Harmony is the most fascinating case. Harmony actually revolutionizes all the things we know and think about Spike, and about Angel, too. Because she is, essentially, reformed. She is pretty much as safe or trustworthy as ChipSpike, and without the chip.

                Perhaps its about personality -- it would be possible for soulless, Buffy-less, chipless Spike to be as socialized as Harmony, but might not be what he'd want to do.
                sigpic
                Banner by LRae12

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                  If Spike lost his soul, he would, fairly quickly, revert to what he was before soul, before Buffy, and before the chip.
                  Before the soul, yeah. Before the chip and before Buffy, I'm not so sure. The chip domesticated him and Buffy motivated him, and I can't see him cutting the chip- and Buffy-induced behaviour cold-turkey, if he were to lose his soul post-S7. I mean, would he tumble all the way down to "School Hard" Spike, or would he go back to where we left him, around "Seeing Red"? I think the latter is more likely -- that he'd go back to the crossroads between "monster" and "man" (and who knows, he could choose the monster over the man this time, and start regressing to early S2 Spike).

                  (set made by Francy for me)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I think the template is Darla. After she was sired again, she still had a clear concept of what she'd been and what was taken from her, but... in pretty short order... lost the willpower and the inclination to strive for it. I think Spike losing his soul would undergo much the same process.

                    Where Spike is in his existence, he has no Buffy, other than as an abstract concept. I suspect that would be of little use to him long term. ("After the Fall" spoiler)
                    Spoiler:
                    He might even run a little mad, like Gunn has, doing everything that makes him a vampire and makes him a monster, all while convincing himself that he's heroic and good still.
                    sigpic
                    Banner by LRae12

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                      I think the template is Darla. After she was sired again, she still had a clear concept of what she'd been and what was taken from her, but... in pretty short order... lost the willpower and the inclination to strive for it. I think Spike losing his soul would undergo much the same process.
                      Yeah, but Darla hadn't made any steps for the better as a soulless vampire, like Spike had; they all came after she became human again. So it makes more sense, to me, that she'd be able to cut the good behaviour cold-turkey, than that Spike would.

                      (set made by Francy for me)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I don't see a reason for him not to kill the scoobies,
                        Because he's not completely stupid? Also to be perfectly frank I think Spikes 'outgrown' that part of his life', souled or not.

                        And that is why I don't like the idea that Spike can make morally right decisions. Because it's against the vampire mythology and there is not enough reason to say that Spike is so different of the other vampires that he can make the right call.
                        Spike has always been an anomaly amongst other Vampires. Right from the onset he appeared to act differently from his fellow vamps, although saying that I'm also of the opinion that each vampire should be seen as a different case. Lawson and James also showed emotions not normally associated with vampires, so who/what do you believe?

                        The think the whole thing has always been a very grey area in the Jossverse.
                        Last edited by sueworld; 04-02-08, 08:06 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          It's never confused me -- he's posturing. It's not true. He's 'embellishing' his motivations. That's one point in the argument where Angel gets the better point, because Spike doing it "to get in a girl's pants" is far closer to the truth.
                          I agree- IMO, almost everything Spike says to Angel in "Destiny" is a lie- he's only doing it to mess with Angel's head. Spike is trying to beat Angel psychologically here in order to beat him physically; he does this to Buffy, too (Harsh Light Of Day, Smashed).

                          Do you think SL-Spike would hate the idea of his souled self? Angelus definitely does; he tries to get back at Buffy for making him 'human'. I can't quite remember how newly-sired Darla feels. I know that, as a human, she hated her soul and how it made her feel; I think she finally felt freed once it was gone. I think Spike would feel much the same- in retrospect, SL-Spike might view the soul much as he viewed the chip-- as a leash to restrain him and hold him back.
                          The story's kinda bland. It's about this guy named Dumbledore Calrissian who needs to return the ring back to Mordor.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Oh that guy is called Lawson, not Dawson. I knew I wasn't right.

                            Originally posted by sueworld
                            Because he's not completely stupid? Also to be perfectly frank I think Spikes 'outgrown' that part of his life', souled or not.
                            I always had the feeling that vampires can't grow without a soul. They don't change a bit in their unlife. Chipped Spike 'changed' to survive and to please Buffy, but he can't grow as a person without a soul. Although I'm not sure it's canon.

                            Spike has always been an anomaly amongst other Vampires. Right from the onset he appeared to act differently from his fellow vamps, although saying that I'm also of the opinion that each vampire should be seen as a different case. Lawson and James also showed emotions not normally associated with vampires, so who/what do you believe?

                            The think the whole thing has always been a very grey area in the Jossverse.
                            I think that every vampire can show emotions. With Angelus as a special case. But I'm not sure about that one either, Angelus touching Buffy as a love sick puppy in Passion doesn't seem emotionless. So, what makes Spike different of other vampires? Why don't all the vampire's go to Lurky? Because they don't have a Buffy obsession? Maybe, but that doesn't make Spike a 'good' or a 'special' vampire, it just makes him a love sick vampire who is done with the good fight when Buffy doesn't look or when the love is gone.

                            I think it's really dangerous to make vampires grey figures, because that would make Buffy's work ethical wrong. I think that soulless vampires are pure evil, just to defend Buffy's calling.

                            Originally posted by KingofCretins
                            It's never confused me -- he's posturing. It's not true. He's 'embellishing' his motivations. That's one point in the argument where Angel gets the better point, because Spike doing it "to get in a girl's pants" is far closer to the truth. Spike rationalizes that it was his ethical choice for the same reasons that Angel probably rationalizes that the curse was destined -- so he feels a cohesive sense of purpose to his existence
                            That sounds more like what I saw on tv. It just doesn't make sense if you hear what Spike is saying in the last episodes of season 6. Why would Buffy deserves to have a Spike in her pants? Stupid Retcon.
                            Last edited by Nina; 04-02-08, 10:18 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I'm not troubled by Spike's statements, even if him meaning the soul and not the chip is a bit of a cheat. Even meaning the soul, saying Buffy "deserves" him with his soul is him making the assumption that Buffy deserves to be with *someone* with a soul, someone who wouldn't do the things he had done and always would tend to do. And he believed that with that soul, he could be that someone.
                              sigpic
                              Banner by LRae12

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                So, what makes Spike different of other vampires?
                                Well because he was the only vamp out of literally thousands to have ever fought for a soul and won.

                                Personally I don't think it weakens the impact of what he did by saying 'he just did it for Buffy' because lets face it, how many of us do good deeds or actions for the love of someone else? To try and please them, do what they think they might want? Hell, the world is made up of such people, thank goodness, so Spikes personal reason for obtaining a soul don't seem any the less to me.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                                  Harmony is the most fascinating case. Harmony actually revolutionizes all the things we know and think about Spike, and about Angel, too. Because she is, essentially, reformed. She is pretty much as safe or trustworthy as ChipSpike, and without the chip.
                                  Harmony is, to quote Cordelia, a sheep. She'll do whatever it takes to fit in with the popular crowd - and if that means giving up human blood and behaving herself, she'll do it. But she'll turn on a dime the moment someone more powerful or cool shows up. She's absolutely untrustworthy, except in the sense of "you can have absolute trust in the fact that she's going to betray you sooner or later."

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    As Angel and co found to their cost twice on in their dealings with her, betraying them all to Hamilton being the last occasion.

                                    She is a sheep, but quite a cute one though...*g*

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                                      Harmony is the most fascinating case. Harmony actually revolutionizes all the things we know and think about Spike, and about Angel, too. Because she is, essentially, reformed. She is pretty much as safe or trustworthy as ChipSpike, and without the chip.
                                      Thankyou! I've always believed that and I've always felt people try and make it something less than it actually is by stating she's too stupid to care ect.

                                      Originally posted by sueworld View Post
                                      Because he's not completely stupid? Also to be perfectly frank I think Spikes 'outgrown' that part of his life', souled or not.
                                      I never took Spike's remarks about killing Xander if he could as idle threats. I believed him completely when he said if it weren't for his handicap he'd do him in himself (Entropy.)

                                      Spike has always been an anomaly amongst other Vampires. Right from the onset he appeared to act differently from his fellow vamps, although saying that I'm also of the opinion that each vampire should be seen as a different case. Lawson and James also showed emotions not normally associated with vampires, so who/what do you believe?
                                      I wouldn't say Spike is the anomaly in the strictest sense. I'd actually say Angelus was. The Judge sensed the humanity in Dalton and in Spike and Drusilla. We saw James and Elizabeth being able to love each other, we saw the inner struggles with Lawson and Harmony showed genuine human compassion and sorrow towards Gunn about about Fred's death. Angelus, is the only vamp as far as we know who can't love and doesn't have humanity in him. Spike's an anomaly in the fact he's the only to fight for his soul, but IMO not his general makeup.

                                      Harmony is, to quote Cordelia, a sheep. She'll do whatever it takes to fit in with the popular crowd - and if that means giving up human blood and behaving herself, she'll do it. But she'll turn on a dime the moment someone more powerful or cool shows up. She's absolutely untrustworthy, except in the sense of "you can have absolute trust in the fact that she's going to betray you sooner or later."
                                      I disagree. Harmony wasn't following anyone when she sat at her desk feeling sad about Fred's death or when she rested a hand on Gunn's shoulder as he cried and showed genuine compassion towards him. Her character was often played for laughs, but if she'd been taken a harder look at like they did over on Btvs with Spike there'd have been something truly captivating with her as well.

                                      ~ Banner by Nina ~

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        I never took Spike's remarks about killing Xander if he could as idle threats. I believed him completely when he said if it weren't for his handicap he'd do him in himself (Entropy.)
                                        Yes, but I'm talking post Chosen I'm afraid. I think during season 5 of AtS a lot of things changed for Spike. If nothing else it proved he wasn't just a bit of 'set dressing' for Buffy, for a change.
                                        Last edited by sueworld; 05-02-08, 03:21 AM.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X