BSV Forum - General - Episode Discussions

Crush

Oct 13 2008 06:12 pm   #1Scarlet Ibis
Jumping the gun, I know, but I was reading something, and had the most amazing thought (well, to me, anyway).

Why Buffy was *really* afraid of Spike.

I was rereading one of my stories, hoping to get over my writer's block, and came across this passage:

*****
Okay, to be fair, "hate" was a fairly strong word. Funny how he went from annoying, chipped vamp who wanted to kill her on occasion, but was no real threat, to now being a vampire whom she feared. And yes, at that moment, the thought of Spike did inspire a certain fear in her.

All it took was for her to hear of his potential feelings for her.

Which is completely ludicrous because Spike doesn't—can’t have feelings, being soulless and all.
*******

And it occurred to me that the reason why she freaked out (and Willow and Joyce for that matter) is because Spike had literally become a freak of nature right before their very eyes.  They had a prejudice against him and didn't know it.  Oh sure, they acknowledged his love for Drusilla once upon a time, but when he fell in love with Buffy, it was just atypical, wasn't it?  It's one thing to love someone of "your own kind," but loving Buffy, not just a human, but his mortal enemy, when he himself didn't have a soul, it went against everything they believed to be true.  Angel's alter ego left a huge impression on them--it could only be *this* way, and there was no alternative.  One could only truly love with the aide of a soul.  This of course is not true, but they bought into it.  And it created a fear.  To see Spike, outside of this labeled box of theirs scared them tremendously.  We see it often in society of course--fear breeds hatred for the unknown, and once Spike fell in love with the slayer, he officially became the unknown--the thing to be feared.  Everything else he did was expected, but to be in love? Suddenly, everyone looked at him like,  "Lock up your doors tight, boys and girls.  The Boogie Man's come to town."

The line about the prisoners, well, clearly Buffy isn't someone who believes in reforming, especially a soulless vampire.  How differently would things have been if she just let him down simply on the basis that she was not attracted to him, as opposed to "You can't change--you're evil!  We hate each other!" knowing full well that it wasn't fully true.  If it was, she never would have put the lives of her mother and sister in his hands.  He probably would have tried to convince her still otherwise, but he probably would have kept up with the chivalry, as opposed to chains. 

Symbolism--he uses the chains on Buffy, but not on Dru.  I think this alludes to bondage.  And not in the sexy kind of way.  Spike is eventually bound (to Buffy, to Sunnydale) because of his love for her.  Buffy was never the one really in chains--he was.  Poor bastard just didn't know it yet.

ETA: Notice how Buffy attempt to trivialize Spike's feelings by saying that he loves the pain--that punching him in the nose "is like second base" for him or whatever.  Which begs the question, if she truly believed that, then why keep going to what she thought Spike felt to be second base?  Why encourage him (sexually)?  Food for thought ;)
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 13 2008 06:30 pm   #2Eowyn315
Actually, I think it's kind of the opposite... they don't believe vampires can love, so they DON'T see Spike as an exception or an anomaly, they simply refuse to believe that it's really love.

Look at the language they use - dangerous, twisted. They're not talking about love, they're talking about obsession, probably due to both memories of Angelus' obsession and Spike's own persistent fixation on Slayers in general and Buffy in particular. And in that context, I can see why they might be worried about Spike. If they're expecting him to pursue this with the same level of determination he had in season 2, then it really is something to be concerned about. If he's going to mimic Angelus' style of obsession and psychological torture, then they really should be worried. But the thing that never occurs to them is that he might honestly love Buffy and want to pursue a relationship just like any other guy.

Even Buffy, who seems the least worried of all of them, refuses to acknowledge Spike's feelings as legitimate - "This'll blow over. I'm sure it's just some weird Spike thing. He'll have the hots for some Gak Demon before we know it." "Maybe this whole thing's been blown out of proportion and Spike's gone back to wanting me dead." You don't just get over loving someone that easily. For her to suggest that, she obviously doesn't see it as love - lust, maybe, or a brief infatuation, but nothing like real emotion, because in her mind, Spike isn't capable of that. To Buffy, it's not even worth considering.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 13 2008 09:32 pm   #3Guest
That's kind of what I was saying though--it can't be legitimate because he didn't have a soul.  That was their reasoning for trivializing his feelings, and believing them not to be real.

Angel's alter ego left a huge impression on them--it could only be *this* way, and there was no alternative. One could only truly love with the aide of a soul. This of course is not true, but they bought into it. And it created a fear.
Oct 13 2008 09:32 pm   #4Guest
Crap--somehow I, Scarlet, got signed out.  That was me.
Oct 14 2008 12:29 am   #5Spikez_tart
Actually, I think it was more - Buffy thinking she can only attract bums.  When I was young, I kept getting job after job where the boss was a jerk.  After awhile I thought maybe I was giving off signals - Hey Jerk!  Hire Me!  I ended up going into business for myself for 20 years.  So, I see Buffy's fear from that perspective - I only attract jerks and guys that will dump me.  Why should Spike be any different?  What if he's even worse?
If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 14 2008 01:15 am   #6Scarlet Ibis
I don't think Buffy thought of Angel and Riley as being bums...She would have taken Angel back (had he stayed with her in "Forever," ), and Riley, well, against her better judgment, she did run after him.  Riley effed up, but that didn't make him a bum.  And I don't think Buffy would chase down a bum and beg him to stay with her...If anything, Buffy's problem is abandonment issues--she always manages (in her mind) to send the guys she cares about packing.  Only Spike wouldn't go...
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 14 2008 03:17 am   #7nmcil

My personal opinion is that Buffy and Giles both were transformed irrevocably from their Angel/Angelus experience - Giles at first even refers to Angel loving The Slayer as poetic - and Buffy had feelings for Angel/Angelus even after everything went to hell with the resurfacing of Angelus. Their emotional connection and understanding, and I think their psychological defensive mechanisms, need to see Spike as utterly incapable of emotions and qualities that resemble human beings. Buffy can't see Vamp Spike as capable of Love without an acknowledgement that Angelus/Angel should have been able to love her as well. And Giles, IMVHO, falls back on the safety and reassurance of CoW dogma regarding vampires. Giles and Buffy being the leaders and having positions of responsibility cannot ever allow themselves to again believe that LOVE will be sufficient to control how a normal vampire exists and so it must be a soul. That it is illogical to trust en-souled Angel in the face of Angel/Angelus and how the complete lack of controlling human behavior comes with having a soul is lost in their process for understanding or thinking about Spike.

Even if Angelus/Angel is based on "The Curse," the "soul control mechanism" is still part of the equation based on human behavior. The primary fact that souled humans Love and Hate and Kill and Murder each other just as vampires do is ignored by Buffy, Giles and The Scoobies. The Slayer and The Watcher want to apply their "soul" argument, but it seems to me that they want it to apply through a selective lens.

If Buffy and Giles believed that Spike is incapable of having any real affections, for Dawn, or Joyce they would not have entrusted them to his care – but they did.

A Spike that cannot Love without a soul ought not to be capable of any affections nor care about these two people, he should not have cared about Drusilla or been hurt by how she treated him. Yet Spike was hurt deeply by Dru and how she abandons him for Angelus and how she treats him in South America.

Spike of the "no soul not capable of love," just like humans, feels loss and pain and suffers from his ability to love – would he be able to feel any of these things if he were incapable of deep affections and love?

Of course, Buffy from this time is very different from the Buffy of Season 6 - even with all the complexity of this timeline, what happens after she is resurected is infinetly more layered and tragic.

Sorry for the rant, I know that this subject has been discussed many times, but I always get hooked back into the discussion when this Soul/No Soul and Love comes up. We all have our own opinions, this just happens to be mine.

” Recent evolutionary models have demonstrated what politicians have long known: the best way to get people to collaborate and to think like a group is to identify an enemy and charge that “they” threaten “us.”

Michael Tomasello is co-director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Oct 14 2008 09:04 pm   #8Scarlet Ibis
My personal opinion is that Buffy and Giles both were transformed irrevocably from their Angel/Angelus experience - Giles at first even refers to Angel loving The Slayer as poetic

The Slayer and The Watcher want to apply their "soul" argument, but it seems to me that they want it to apply through a selective lens.

Very good points, and never apologize for ranting--makes threads interesting ;)

I always thought it'd be more poetic if Angel had had no soul and was in love with her.  Anyway, the "soul" argument was kind of ridiculous after we saw people like Faith, that kid who killed people and his girlfriend after using that science concoction he made, Maggie Walsh...others.  Yeah, good/evil is in no way solely defined by having a soul or not.  Beings are capable of change for the good or the worse due to their own free will.  Soul/no soul may slant one to go towards good or evil, but it is not the end all be all as we've been shown.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 15 2008 11:31 am   #9sosa lola
I'm reading, but will not comment until I see the episode :D However, I wanted to comment on this...

Anyway, the "soul" argument was kind of ridiculous after we saw people like Faith, that kid who killed people and his girlfriend after using that science concoction he made, Maggie Walsh...others. Yeah, good/evil is in no way solely defined by having a soul or not.

I think for the Scoobies having a soul means you get a choice between good and bad. Not having a soul means that you only do bad. That's why having a soul is better because you can get that person on your side, but without a soul, it'll never happen.
Oct 16 2008 02:28 am   #10Spikez_tart
Sosa - choosing between good and bad would require you to have conscience (which vampires are lacking) so you would know what good and bad would be in any particular situation.  The show conflates these two things.  Angel with a soul apparently has one because he feels bad sort of after he locks all those lawyers in a room with Darla and Dru.  Spike doesn't have one, which allows him to try to rape Buffy.  (No let's not discuss Seeing red.)  He wants Buffy to be his conscience which doesn't work.  See the school scene where Tara, Willow and Buffy are discussing the Hunchback of Notre Dame.  Tara says the hunchback (guy with messed up face - read Spike) can never win the girl because he doesn't want to be good for its own sake - only because he loves a girl.  Buffy is oblivious throughout and thinks they are talking about a cartoon. 

The scene between Buffy and Spike where he tries to tell her he loves her is about this as well.  Buffy rejects him because he's only being good because he's forced to and now because he has feelings for her.  It's not enough in the Buffyverse to be good or do good things - you have to understand what good is and make decisions that reflect that understanding.
If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 16 2008 03:07 am   #11Scarlet Ibis
(No let's not discuss Seeing red.) He wants Buffy to be his conscience which doesn't work. Well, that's not exactly fair, since you brought it up...but fine, everyone knows how I feel about that anyway.  I don't agree that he wants Buffy to be his conscience--Buffy was dead for like five months without being Spike's conscience.  Spike chose to good for all that time and then some--he made that choice, just like he chose to get a soul.

ETA: He also chose to good many times before Buffy was dead, and not all of it was about impressing her or him thinking WWBD ("What would Buffy do?" )

Back to what Sosa said though--Ah, interesting observation.  But then if that's true, theoretically, shouldn't someone who's soulless who attempts to be good (even if in that person's mind that they never could be, though "Becoming 1&2" pretty much disproves that "evil is what evil does" and so forth) be praised instead of being smite down?  Shouldn't one encourage a typical "evil doer" who wants to change for the better instead of insisting they can only be the one thing?  Especially when one is supposed to be "good" themselves?  Saying things can only be this one way with certain beings (people) is hugely prejudicial and therefore wrong.  It's called stereotyping (or hey, racial profiling).  There are exceptions to every rule, and stereotypes shouldn't be rules in the first place.  Sure, early on they didn't know any better, but by s5?  Come on--open up your eyes for crying out loud...
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 16 2008 10:43 am   #12sosa lola
theoretically, shouldn't someone who's soulless who attempts to be good (even if in that person's mind that they never could be, though "Becoming 1&2" pretty much disproves that "evil is what evil does" and so forth) be praised instead of being smite down?

I'm about to post my rewatch to Triangle and it annoyed me how Buffy reacted to Spike helping out that woman.

Oct 16 2008 03:12 pm   #13nmcil
It's not enough in the Buffyverse to be good or do good things - you have to understand what good is and make decisions that reflect that understanding. Scarlet Ibis

Claude Frollo, the man of conscience, the expression of capability and intelligence, made possible by a soul that commits the crimes against the laws of man and god. It is he that wants to abduct the object of his lust and it is another man with a soul that will attempt to rape and seduce Esmeralda.

Tara’s use of Quasimodo and her argument that his acts proceed from his need and of love for a girl vs. the action from a state of "essence of goodness" – Good for the sake of Good without reward – does not apply. Quasimodo does not act from desire for reward, but from his transformation from her act of mercy. Quasimodo’s love is originally given completely to Frollo, who will use and betray him.

Quasimodo does not love from his physical nature, but from the spiritual/philosophical perspective – he loves because of her mercy and pity toward him while he is being tortured. He plays the role of her savior, but it is not for a need or desire for a return of his love, but because of her mercy toward him. Spike and Buffy, IMO, come to understand that he accepts his torture by Glory from a real love, not from Tara’s Quasimodo argument position.

Another thing about The Hunchback of Notre Damn as part of the discussion is that the writers reference the film. This film and novel are very different and, IMO, add to the layered episode theme. Quasimodo not only saved Esmeralda, but again, the man that represents the spirit of good and conscience, betrays his calling and duty and hands over the young girl to her executioners. Quasimodo and Esmeralda both become victims of Frollo and die – Quisimodo is also the avenger for her murder. 

Transcript:

WILLOW: I just don't see why he couldn't end up with Esmerelda. They could have the wedding right there. Beneath the very bell-tower where he labored thanklessly for all those years.

TARA: No, see, it can't, it can't end like that, 'cause all of Quasimodo's actions were selfishly motivated. He had no moral compass, no understanding of right. Everything he did, he did out of love for a woman who would never be able to love him back. Also, you can tell it's not gonna have a happy ending when the main guy's all bumpy.

Quasimodo, like Spike, is despised by normal humans, Quasimodo because of his hideous appearance, Spike from his vampire and "souless state." The novel has many similarities to how Spike relates with the Scoobies and Buffy and it is a wonderful use of literature in the series.

Getting back to the theme of soul and conscience; the state of existence with or without a soul does not, in my opinion, factor in as a moral guide – it is free will that sets the acts and paths of men. Spike and vampires are perfectly capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong. Like Claude Frollo and Phoebus, souled humans, they simply choose to take one path over another.

” Recent evolutionary models have demonstrated what politicians have long known: the best way to get people to collaborate and to think like a group is to identify an enemy and charge that “they” threaten “us.”

Michael Tomasello is co-director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Oct 16 2008 04:02 pm   #14Guest
Yeah, there's only so much you can get from debating a Disney movie. ;)

CM
Oct 16 2008 04:17 pm   #15Scarlet Ibis
nmcil--that wasn't me.  That was Spikez-tart.

the state of existence with or without a soul does not, in my opinion, factor in as a moral guide – it is free will that sets the acts and paths of men. Spike and vampires are perfectly capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong.

You know, a good point would be that if people expect you to be bad all the time, usually, you will be, and vice versa.  For instance, if Tara had told Buffy the night of "Dead Things" that she in fact came back wrong, she would have felt vindicated in her poor behavior all that time--hey, I'm wrong, so why not act as such?  In fact, she believed herself to have been brought back wrong, which may have contributed to her poor behavior.  But once she realized that she was in fact exactly the same, she still continued her downward spiral, even though those around her had the highest of hopes for her.  (And please, no one bring up that blasted balcony scene--that was about Spike getting Buffy off, and not about her being wrong.  Remember, he told her "You're better than this," but she wouldn't listen). 

And Spike on the other hand, had everyone (well, just about) thinking the worst in him, including the woman he loved profusely, and still persevered.  He had a real, legitimate struggle with good vs. evil, and still managed to be good, whereas Buffy didn't.  So whoever thinks a soul slants you to being good?  I think that's poppycock.  Human beings have free will--that is the whole point of free will.  Morals, and ethics, and knowing the difference between right and wrong is all there (unless you're a sociopath--they have no conscience.  I mean with morals and ethics--they know right from wrong, but just don't care).  But a person with no soul, as in the Buffyverse, is just assumed to be evil because of a lack of a soul.  They are like sociopaths in that they know all of that stuff--morals, ethics, right and wrong, etc., but can willfully ignore it because they don't have to acknowledge it due to their nature.  But they too have free will--it's just a lot harder for them.  And they, unlike human sociopaths, can "grow a conscience" if given the chance.  And just so we're clear, morals and ethics and all that other stuff I mentioned?  Totally separate from the emotion love.  I think vampires can (and do) love "greatly, if not wisely" as Drusilla said (though I don't think the same applies to human sociopaths).
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 16 2008 11:40 pm   #16chlarkspuffy
He had a real, legitimate struggle with good vs. evil, and still managed to be good, whereas Buffy didn't.

Spike just fascinates me for this reason more than all others. It matters little what his initial motivation was. The fact is, he changed against all odds. Later, it became about more than just the girl. Also, in Forever he mentions to Dawn that it's not just about Buffy, but the "Summers girls." Even back then it was more than just the one girl. Add to that he stayed and helped not only Dawn but also the scoobies when Buffy died. If one still wants to argue that it's a selfish motivation, that's fine, but I have to wonder why that matters at all. As it is, I am not convinced there is such a thing as a selfless deed in the Buffy world.

Another consideration is that Buffy's motivation to be "good" is even more questionable since she was chosen as the slayer. Do we have any evidence that if she weren't, she would fight the good fight?

"If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now."

- Zaphod Beeblebrox
Oct 17 2008 12:04 am   #17Eowyn315
Do we have any evidence that if she weren't, she would fight the good fight?
Well, there's "Helpless," where she says that she's seen too much to go back to being a regular person, so yeah, if she'd lost her powers permanently at that point, I think she'd still do it. Would she still fight the good fight if she'd never been called as the Slayer? Hard to say. Most likely, she probably would never know there was a good fight to be fought.

But really, is "willing to fight the good fight" the only determination of good? If you're not a part of this epic battle against evil, does that mean you're not good? The difference between good and evil for most people isn't "do I risk my life in the fight against evil or do I join the side of evil and commit atrocious acts?" It's much more mundane than that. "Do I follow the law? Am I a nice person? Do I care about people?" etc.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 17 2008 12:26 am   #18Guest
Spike was played as very human after season four and I think the Scoobies judged him as a human, with the final damning prejudice of his lack of soul. But they acted like he was a human who chose to ignore the right choices and chose to be perversely evil and feels no remorse or want to be good and his every act must be from selfish motivations and whatever he was 'after' to get and just manipulation. The truth is, Spike is a demon. Humans are physically his food and he spent over a century thinking he was meant to kill them and not doing so was wrong and unnatural and would turn everyone he knew, namely Drusilla, away from him.

Spike was proud of being evil, but how could it be said that a vampire's version of evil is the same as a human's? He killed humans and demons when they annoyed him, lost his temper, ate food, and enjoyed the challenge of beating a Slayer and getting the gourmet blood as a reward. From a vampire's perspective, Spike was an icon of strength and daring and rebel 'don't care what any society thinks I'm my own man, no rules'. Angelus I thought of as much more evil because he thought of humans as people and recognized the virtues and personalities and humanity, for lack of a better word, of them and wanted to cause as much psychological pain as possible for the sake of breaking them. He gloried in being evil, not necesarily in doing what a human thought of as evil.
Loved the exchange in AtS season five:

SPIKE:  (...)for a demon, I never did think too much about the nature of evil. No. Just threw myself in. Thought it was a party. I liked the rush. I liked the crunch. Never did look back at the victims.
ANGEL: I couldn't take my eyes off them. I was only in it for the evil. I was only in it for the evil. It was everything to me. It was art; the destruction of a human being. I would've considered Dana a masterpiece.
Oct 17 2008 12:30 am   #19Scarlet Ibis
From a vampire's perspective, Spike was an icon of strength and daring and rebel 'don't care what any society thinks I'm my own man, no rules'. Angelus I thought of as much more evil because he thought of humans as people and recognized the virtues and personalities and humanity, for lack of a better word, of them and wanted to cause as much psychological pain as possible for the sake of breaking them.
Excellent point.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 17 2008 03:03 am   #20nmcil
Another consideration is that Buffy's motivation to be "good" is even more questionable since she was chosen as the slayer. Do we have any evidence that if she weren't, she would fight the good fight?


Buffy and Spike are the most complex and interesting, IMO, characters of all throughout the entire series - The are the black and white reflections and all the variations of gray too. Buffy starts out as a forced agent/warrior for Good as The Slayer; Spike is "the good man" that becomes the agent/warrior for Evil. Both characters take on qualities and paths that are utterly different from their origins and then both must fight and find their ways back to their state of grace and peace and equilibrium but the struggle and eventual victory is, I firmly believe, one of partnership. Spike and Buffy begin a creation/partnership, go through a path of possible destruction of them, and ultimately together re-create themselves as units of completion and balance. But they are working together, even at their worst and lowest points, which I think is the brutal fight and brutal sexual joining in "Smashed" and "Wrecked" and of course their brutal alley scene in "Dead Things" – eventually all that violence, like the destructive/cleansing of Kali, forces their renewal in "Showtime."

Buffy, for all her Slayer/Agent/Warrior/Good, has a deep and ugly darkness as part of her primal and basic character – she can and does turn to "death" easily when she feels an extreme imperative. We see this with Faith and we see it with Spike – there is no question, at least in my mind, that she would kill Spike had he spoken to anyone about their sexual consummation in "Smashed." Spike, in contrast, goes from his vampire killer nature instincts to take on the qualities of The Slayer/Agent/Warrior/Good – most importantly with Glory-Dawn torture protector and then with the acceptance of his role as psychic whipping boy for Buffy’s self-hatred. Spike proves that he can accept Buffy in all her manifestations – Buffy when she commits to her beliefs of Spike’s potential for "being a good man" in "Sleeper" even with his kills in vampire mode is her grand moment of transformation. Both the alley scene and the basement with his victims are their point of transition from dark/agents to warriors for light and balance and re-creation. Yes, Buffy and Spike still travel a hard and dreadful path after the alley, but Spike proves that he can take Buffy both as black/white woman and warrior – Buffy. Once she commits to seeing Spike as "Good Man William/Spike" she can transcend from all her hatred and anger against Spike the Vampire. Buffy and Spike have together enacted the life-death-resurrection cycle and healed each other.

” Recent evolutionary models have demonstrated what politicians have long known: the best way to get people to collaborate and to think like a group is to identify an enemy and charge that “they” threaten “us.”

Michael Tomasello is co-director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Oct 19 2008 02:27 am   #21Spikez_tart
that's not exactly fair, since you brought it up - I know, completely unfair, but I didn't want the forum to get hijacked.

nmcil - I'm not sure that Buffy would have killed Spike for ratting her out to her friends about her sexcapades.  She doesn't kill him on many occasions when she probably should have.  She would probably have beat the crap out of him though.  Good points on the Mancheaistic transformations of Buffy and Spike. 

Okay, I'm going to bring up a thought which will no doubt start flames coming out of people's ears, but here goes.  I think Buffy (as Spike's love interest) has a duty to encourage Spike to be good and she not only fails, but ridicules his efforts, in Crush and Triangle.  Had she recognized his efforts, he would probably have not fallen back in with Drusilla or later, when he thinks the chip has failed, gone looking for a victim.  I don't mean that Spike had no responsibility on his own, but Buffy's actions, including shutting him out of her house, stall the process.  At the very least, you would think that Buffy as the Slayer, would want to encourage good behavior, no matter how lame in her eyes, in order to prevent future evil that she would have to deal with.

If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 19 2008 03:12 am   #22Scarlet Ibis
I think Buffy (as Spike's love interest) has a duty to encourage Spike to be good
That's with logical thinking, though.  And no, when it comes to dealing with certain situations, I don't perceive Buffy as being logical.

Had she recognized his efforts, he would probably have not fallen back in with Drusilla or later, when he thinks the chip has failed, gone looking for a victim.
I agree.  I touched on this somewhere up there, but basically, if you have low expectations for a person, you usually get what you expect (though sometimes, a strong individual will persevere others negative perceptions of them eventually).  Or if someone is showing good behavior, they're usually rewarded in some form or fashion, even if it's as simple as praise--"You did a good job," and so forth.  Xander is also a good example of this.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 19 2008 03:54 am   #23nmcil
Buffy killing Spike after their "Wrecked" scene - now that I think about it a little more - at the time, SMG is so powerful saying those lines that she makes me totally believe that she would do it - had she kept that level of anger, disgust and hatred, I do think that she would.  But after your post (Spikes_tart) I have to go think about it more.  I do know that she is certainly capable of extreme violence against Spike - so under the right circumstances, she could kill him.  But as you say, she has spared his life many times.  The thing is though, this "sex coupling" is on such a different level - and if we look at the visuals from "Dead Things" all her dreamscape visions and metaphors are sexual wrapped up with staking/killing/eradication -   People do so very strange and extreme things when a sexual connection and self-esteem become entangled.  I don't put Buffy outside of  the capability of committing murder.

Thanks for making me think about this again -
” Recent evolutionary models have demonstrated what politicians have long known: the best way to get people to collaborate and to think like a group is to identify an enemy and charge that “they” threaten “us.”

Michael Tomasello is co-director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Oct 19 2008 05:42 am   #24Eowyn315
I think Buffy (as Spike's love interest) has a duty to encourage Spike to be good and she not only fails, but ridicules his efforts, in Crush and Triangle.
I disagree... sort of. As Spike's love interest, I don't think Buffy has a duty to do anything. It's not her problem if Spike's in love with her, and what he chooses to do (good OR evil) out of love for her is not her responsibility. If they were in an actual relationship, then maybe she might bear some responsibility to encourage him on the right path, but just because he has a crush, she's not obligated to even acknowledge his existence. That reminds me of an attitude that I see in some fics, that because Spike is in love with Buffy, Buffy has some sort of obligation to return the feelings or at least give him a chance. She doesn't. She doesn't have to do a thing. There's no rule that says if someone likes you, you have to like them back, or go on a date with them, or even talk to them. Spike's feelings for Buffy in no way place any duty or responsibility on Buffy to do anything.

However, as the Slayer, as someone who has accepted the duty to fight against evil and rid the world of vampires, I DO think she has the responsibility to show some encouragement if one of them make an effort to stop being evil. If she's not going to stake Spike (and if she hasn't done it by now, she's clearly never going to), then she ought to use whatever other methods are available to keep him from doing evil. That is her job, after all, to stop evil. 
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 19 2008 02:31 pm   #25slaymesoftly
Nice distinction there between Buffy, the girl Spike has a crush on, and The Slayer whose job it is to fight evil, and, by extension, one would assume, encourage goodness.
I am not a minion of Evil...
I am upper management.
Oct 19 2008 10:06 pm   #26Spikez_tart
If they were in an actual relationship - you could say that Buffy is always in a relationship of some kind (not necessarily boy-girlfriend), but some kind of relationship from the minute he blows into town.  She symbolically invites him into her own home ( and by extension her life) and gets Giles to invite him into the place where she is at (by extension her circle of friends).  She's continually involved with him.  Reluctantly, yes, but involved.  And, since one of the overriding themes of the show is the importance of community and how Buffy's friends make it possible for her to be a great Slayer (as opposed to a pushing up daisies Slayer), then maybe she does owe Spike something. 

I don't mean she owes something to Spike romantically because he's stalking her; she doesn't, although her protests of lack of interest might be more believable if she wasn't always running after him. 
If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 19 2008 10:40 pm   #27
I think Buffy did have a duty to encourage Spike to be good. Not necessarily because she was his love interest, but because she's the Slayer (agent for Good and all that). Spike shows up saying he wants to be good, the least she could have done is said, "You want to be good? Okay...do this, this and this. Don't do this, that, and the other. Oh, and good job defeating Evil last week." One thing that really irks me is that the Scoobies are constantly reminding Spike of his soulless status, and yet they judge his actions as though he was a souled person. The Scoobies are Spike's only point of contact with the Good Side, really, and they don't do anything to encourage him to stay being Good (or at least Less Evil). They don't try to encourage Spike along his road to goodness or whatever. Even if it was just to get into Buffy's pants, shouldn't they at least be content with the fact that he's not out killing or wreaking havoc anymore? Should his motivation really matter as long as his actions are good? I'm honestly amazed that Spike did it for so long. If I had been him, I would have said, "Screw this, the Evil people treated me better than you guys do," and found myself a Lair and some minions.
Oct 20 2008 01:49 am   #28Eowyn315
you could say that Buffy is always in a relationship of some kind (not necessarily boy-girlfriend), but some kind of relationship from the minute he blows into town.
Yeah, but I don't think any of those "relationships" carry the duty of helping him to be good. She's never considered him a friend of any kind - enemy, temporary reluctant ally, hostage, and paid mercenary, but never a friend or someone she cared about. In fact, at this point, if she'd said, "Okay, Spike, you want to be good? Pay me and I'll teach you how," it wouldn't be inappropriate, considering the many times he's asked her for money in exchange for HIS help with something.

If they were friends, if he were actually a member of the group, I could see her having some obligation. As the Slayer, I can see her having a duty. But not as their relationship stands now. Regardless of how many invitations he has to her and others' homes, that doesn't make him welcome.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 20 2008 11:22 pm   #29Spikez_tart
E - laughing at Buffy demanding payment from Spike to learn how to straighten up.  Just what he would have deserved. 

To add to my point, I think Buffy is on a sort of mission of an almost religious nature - consider her hanging a cross in Jewish Willow's bedroom for protection and admonishing Willow and Xander not to wander around at night without wearing a cross. That falls in line with the various other motifs and symbols that show Buffy in a quasi Messiah light.  (Strong on the quasi)  Nmcil has pointed out a number of interesting religious connections in some of the other posts.

Even if it was just to get into Buffy's pants, shouldn't they at least be content with the fact that he's not out killing or wreaking havoc anymore? - Spike proves after Buffy is dead that having sex with Buffy is not his only motivation.  He takes care of Dawn when there is no reward expected.  It would make sense that the gang should be happy that he isn't causing trouble, but the fact is his trouble making days were not that far behind him and none of them could trust him not to go back to being evil if he got mad enough.  Even in Triangle, he's telling Olaf the Troll where to find babies to eat. 


If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 27 2008 03:45 pm   #30sosa lola

- While it's nice to see Spike wearing something different now and then, I'm not so sure I like the new look.

- That was so low on Buffy's part. I mean, she goes to the guy for help and on her free time she can't spare a couple of minutes talking to him? She can dislike Spike's company all she wants, but don't run to him for help whenever it suits you. It's just hypocritical. Unless she still thinks that Spike is only helping for her money, not because he cares, which probably makes sense.

- I'm glad Spike is standing for himself, pointing out that he helped for Buffy's sake and that should earn him some appreciation and slack cutting.

- Aww, loved Anya pointing out that Xander might have hurt Spike's feelings. Also, love Xander's reply. "And you should never hurt the feelings of a brutal killer. (ponders) You know, that's, uh, that's actually some pretty good advice."

- Hee! Spike stealing Xander's money, I just love these two, especially the names they use for each other: Diabolical fiend.

- I was initially shocked when Buffy jumped off her seat and hurried toward Ben, I was like, too early for her to be interested in him. But then after their conversation, I realized she wanted to thank him for taking care of Dawn.

- XANDER: The point is, I work hard for that money.
SPIKE: And you're saying I didn't?
XANDER: You stole it.
SPIKE: And you're making it into very hard work!

And you blame me for loving these two? ;)

- Spike saying that Xander could never hurt him, just wait for the next season, pal ;)

- BUFFY: (ponders, sits) You know, I think I did. Much-needed fun, apart from Willow's headaches and Spike's cameo appearance.
DAWN: Spike was there?

There be crush :D

- Aww, poor Giles, Joyce didn't feel safe with him around. To be honest, Joyce can be such an Anya at times.

- Poor Dawn, if only she knew that Spike was the one who stole Buffy's sweater. Does that mean that Spike stole it recently? Seeing as Buffy stopped accusing Dawn for stealing her stuff since she's going through a tough time for a week now.

- If I were Spike, I'd break it off with Harmony now. He lost interest in her and she's obviously not his favorite type of company, so why is he still keeping her around?

- The Hunchback of Notre Dame discussion is interesting. They were easily talking about Spuffy. It's cute that Willow is supportive of Spuffy while Tara is against it or perhaps just being realistic.

- This episode is full of stealing, first with Spike stealing Xander's money and Buffy's clothes and now Buffy is stealing a guy's newspaper.

- While Dawn had grown infatuated with Spike, Spike still doesn't care about her one way or the other. Until she mentions Buffy. ;)

- Awww, the start of Spike and Dawn friendship with him telling her about his evil past. Adorable! Count this as one of the best friendships in the series. I loved how they startled together when Buffy banged her way in.

- Grrrr!!!! "Spike, I need your help. Dawn is…" You don't have the right after the way you talked to him at the Bronze. Buffy is annoying me in this episode. The way she's treating Spike and the way she rudely snatched that guy's newspaper, all didn't sit well with me.

- BUFFY: Why doesn't that register with you? Crypt plus vampire equals bad.
DAWN: 'Cause it was Spike!

I bet Spike won't be pleased when he hears that. Lol

- Buffy here reminds me of Xander in S6. Does denial really make people too clueless? Buffy never expected that one day Spike would actually see her as anything but an enemy, which is why she missed all the signs. In S6, Xander as well thinks that Buffy would never see Spike as anything but the enemy, which is why he missed all the signs. I love this parallel between Xander and Buffy.

- Buffy and Xander teaming together reminds me of S7. When Buffy isn't teaming with Spike, she'll be teaming with Xander. Guess she likes having her hearts close. :D

- Xander's reaction to Spike being in love with Buffy is so amusing. Guess he doesn't believe it's true.

- BUFFY: I mean, I always knew that he had this ... weird fixation with me...

Good. So she did notice.

- XANDER: It's always been me! Big funny Xander! Oh, what, she just suddenly decides I'm not the cool one any more? Why is that okay?

Well, you deserve it for laughing at poor Buffy's dismay. ;)

- Awww, I love the coziness of Joyce/Dawn/Spike, very cute. This episode is so cute… so far.

- BUFFY: Why don't you hit on Giles

He really should, Buffy. They make one sexy couple, but I guess that's just me :D

- Buffy talking about cash again also shows that she still pays Spike for helping, I guess that's why she still doesn't consider him a friend.

- I love the nervous atmosphere between Buffy and Spike in the car. It's official! S5 is probably my favorite Spuffy season :D

- Why do you think Spike instinctively opened the door for Buffy? When I first watched the episode, I used to think the writers were pushing it with Spike's well-mannered behavior toward Buffy.

- What breaks my heart is that Spike thinks Buffy feels for him. While I believe she does in S6, I don't really believe she does now in S5.

- SPIKE: (offended) I damn well do! I lie awake every night!
BUFFY: You sleep during the day!

LOL!

- I think there is a difference between a soul and a chip. The soul gives a vampire conscience while the chip only prevents a vampire from hurting humans. So I can see why Buffy would hesitate to consider Spike a potential love interest.

- SPIKE: And this has got you, what, all nostalgic now, has it?

Poor Spike, still bitter over the fact that Drusilla cheated on him and left him. *hugs him*

- SPIKE: To Los Angeles? (she nods) I've done the whole L.A. scene, Dru. Didn't agree with me.

I guess it will in S5 AtS.

- I understand why Spike isn't that thrilled with seeing Drusilla again. Why would he after what she had done to him? She cheated on him and never asked about him for years now. Obviously, she only went to Spike when things went downhill with Angel and Darla. Poor Spike, doomed to be second best. :(

- So Spike had asked Harmony they'd do a threesome? :D

- Awww, Harmony breaks my heart here as she chides Drusilla for hurting Spike, because Spike won't appreciate that, instead he'll cast her aside like worn out shoes.

- It's funny how Joyce was laughing with Spike hours ago and now she's freaked out about his feelings toward Buffy, thinking that he's dangerous and that Buffy should put a stop to this. I wonder what Spike would think if he hears her, would he even bring her flowers after her death? :lol: Even Willow, who's the sweetest Scooby toward Spike, isn't happy with the idea that he's in love with Buffy.

- BUFFY: Thanks, but ... I think this is something I have to do myself. Besides, you know, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this, this whole thing's just been blown way out of proportion and ... he's already gone back to wanting me dead.
WILLOW: Here's hoping.
Heee! :D

- Spike's conflict to drink off the woman is interesting, shows that he wants to be the man Buffy expects not the man Drusilla expects.

- Funny how Buffy seems to have gotten scared of Spike when she found her stolen clothes and pictures, she could barely move when he caught her coming up the ladder.

- SPIKE: If you don't admit ... that there's something there ... some tiny feeling for me ... then I'll untie Dru, let her kill you instead.
DRUSILLA: (nodding quickly) Yes, please. I like that game much more.

For some reason Drusilla sounded sane here. :D

- I see parallels between Spike and Angel as well as Spike and Xander here. Spike wants to kill his sire Drusilla for Buffy just like Angel killed his sire Darla for Buffy. The similarity with Xander is in the fact that Spike can't take rejection well (see how Xander handled Buffy rejecting him in Prophecy Girl) both of them start acting like idiots and immature babies.

- HARMONY: I thought I could change you, Spike. I thought maybe if I gave and I gave and gave, maybe you'd come around. Maybe be a little nicer. Stop treating me like your dog.

Doesn't it sound like Spike in S6?

- HARMONY: And you can say good-bye to this (pointing at her butt) because you're not gonna see it any more ever.

Until S5 AtS ;)

- I hate how Spike clings to Buffy later. He's like Anya with Xander, it’s frustrating. Show some pride, man! It's not surprising that Buffy isn't interested. If a guy kept clinging to me like that, I'll just explode.

- However, he did break my heart when he realized that Buffy did the de-invite spell. It shows how serious she is about not wanting him in her life. :(
 

Oct 27 2008 04:46 pm   #31goldenusagi
Joyce's reaction always seemed a bit strong for me.  Just because a guy says he's in love, doesn't make him dangerous.  Up to this point, Spike hadn't done anything creepy to Buffy.  Yes, I know his horrible past was an issue, but if it had been a large issue, Joyce wouldn't have had him hanging around her kitchen.  She would have thanked him for brining back Dawn and sent him home.  Also, we never see Dawn's reaction to Spike's declaration toward Buffy, do we?  Sure she was mad at him in the next episode, but that was more because of the chains and threats, I'm imagine.  What do you think she thought when she found out Spike said he was in love with Buffy?  Was she happy he might be around more, or was she jealous her crush was crushing on someone else?

Why did Buffy just let Dru and Harmony walk away?  Harmony's an idiot, granted, but she's still a vampire who kills.  Dru, of course, the writers might need later, but why shouldn't Buffy stake her?  Spike probably wouldn't jump in, as he'd offered to kill Dru just before.  At least threaten Dru, instead of just letting her wander off.  Also, where does Dru go?  This has always confused me about Spike's lower level in the crypt.  Is it just a basement, or is it the tunnels?  It must have tunnel access, but it couldn't be an actual part of the main tunnels.  You wouldn't set up a cozy lower level if just any demon might come walking by.
Oct 27 2008 05:18 pm   #32sosa lola

Joyce's reaction always seemed a bit strong for me.

I guess it's understandable. Joyce didn't want Buffy and Angel dating because she looks ahead. There's no future for such a relationship. Why would Buffy dating Spike be any different? If she was all happy about it, it'll make her hypocritical, which Joyce isn't.

I guess Joyce is also like the other Scoobies, Spike is fun to hang out with from time to time but not for something serious like dating one of her daughters. She had called him twisted, so she must have heard some stories about him from Buffy. 

What do you think she thought when she found out Spike said he was in love with Buffy?

Perhaps she was jealous.

Why did Buffy just let Dru and Harmony walk away?

She should have staked Dru after the mess she had caused. But Harmony did nothing wrong, so I don't see why she should stake her. The show grew gray now, the Scoobies only kill those who start killing. (Just like when Giles wasn't interested in staking those vamps who get paid for sucking on people.)

Oct 27 2008 07:00 pm   #33Eowyn315
While it's nice to see Spike wearing something different now and then, I'm not so sure I like the new look.
Yeah... that look was so not Spike. He's had better attempts at changing up his wardrobe (I love his short season 7 jacket, before he gets the duster back).

She can dislike Spike's company all she wants, but don't run to him for help whenever it suits you. It's just hypocritical. Unless she still thinks that Spike is only helping for her money, not because he cares, which probably makes sense.
Yeah, I think she mainly sees him as a paid mercenary - if she runs to him for help, she usually expects to pay for it, so I don't see it as a particularly social relationship. I do think it's funny (in a mean and ironic sort of way) that she apparently can't stand to be around him, but she has no problem subjecting her mother and sister to him in "Checkpoint."

Why do you think Spike instinctively opened the door for Buffy?
Well, under all the bleach and leather, he IS a Victorian gentleman. I think he was always pretty chivalrous toward Drusilla (like giving her his coat), so it makes sense he'd do the same for Buffy once he has feelings for her. Also, opening a door for someone isn't quite the shocking act Buffy makes it out to be. I open doors for people all the time, and it doesn't mean I'm in love with them. Sometimes I don't even know them.

SPIKE: To Los Angeles? (she nods) I've done the whole L.A. scene, Dru. Didn't agree with me.
I always assumed he was talking about "In the Dark," which worked out pretty badly for him, lol. I can see why he might not want to go back.

What do you think she thought when she found out Spike said he was in love with Buffy?
Well, she pretty much already knew, since she's the one who first puts it in Buffy's head - "Spike's totally in love with you." So I don't think it would've been much of a surprise. I think her reaction in the scene where she says that is sort of a mixture of jealousy and appreciation - she's annoyed that Spike prefers her sister, but she also knows that his crush on Buffy is the only reason he's spending time with her, so she has to be a little bit grateful.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 27 2008 07:11 pm   #34sosa lola
I open doors for people all the time, and it doesn't mean I'm in love with them. Sometimes I don't even know them.

Sure, if you're next to the door, but Spike ran toward it to open it. It was so awkward and funny, I don't think Spike knew he was doing it until Buffy expressed her shock.
Oct 27 2008 10:39 pm   #35goldenusagi
I guess it's understandable. Joyce didn't want Buffy and Angel dating because she looks ahead. Why would Buffy dating Spike be any different? If she was all happy about it, it'll make her hypocritical.

I'm not saying she should hop on board the Spuffy train, but I still don't think there was a reason for her to get so jumpy.  If Spike truly bothered her, she wouldn't have been chatting so amicably with him earlier.  Who spends time with someone they actually believe is twisted?

I guess Joyce is also like the other Scoobies, Spike is fun to hang out with from time to time but not for something serious like dating one of her daughters.

It still feels like poor writing to me.  Even if she didn't want Spike dating Buffy--which in no way was going to happen because Buffy wasn't interested, so Joyce couldn't have been worried about an actual relationship--it seemed like an overreaction for what had happened so far.
Oct 28 2008 12:38 am   #36Scarlet Ibis
I'm not saying she should hop on board the Spuffy train, but I still don't think there was a reason for her to get so jumpy. If Spike truly bothered her, she wouldn't have been chatting so amicably with him earlier. Who spends time with someone they actually believe is twisted?
I agree with that.  Her response in itself was hypocritical.  It was too over the top--I get that she'd be worried about dating another vampire, but again, her reaction was very strange.  I also agree it was poor writing.  Buffy was clearly expressing her disinterest in Spike, so there was no need to be all "oh dear."  Seriously, all she had to say was, "Just tell him you're not interested dear" or something.

Also, and I'm sure I've mentioned this somewhere before (maybe on another thread), but if Buffy truly felt that Spike would think that punching him in the face is second base, then why bother doing it?  Why keep "turning him on" or whatever?

Also agree that she way overreacted to him opening the door for her.  I open the door for people all the time because it's a common courtesy, and not because I have romantic feelings for people.  Really, she could have said, "thanks" and kept on moving.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 28 2008 01:27 am   #37Eowyn315
If Spike truly bothered her, she wouldn't have been chatting so amicably with him earlier. Who spends time with someone they actually believe is twisted?
Actually, it's Buffy who says Spike is twisted - what Joyce says is, "These things can get pretty twisted..." which I think is a direct reference to Angelus. Spike is fine as long as he's just the friendly vamp who pops round to say hi, but when he starts talking about love, that's a huge red flag - Angelus' obsession with Buffy was because he loved her, and look how horribly that turned out. From Joyce's perspective, I think she'd be disproportionately more wary of a vampire claiming to be in love with Buffy than Spike just hanging around. The thing is, Spike isn't just "a guy in love with her daughter" - he's a vampire, so "love" automatically translates to "creepy stalkerish obsession," no matter how nice and friendly the vampire is otherwise.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 28 2008 12:13 pm   #38sosa lola

but I still don't think there was a reason for her to get so jumpy.

In the end, he's a vampire. I think that's reason enough. In most vampire novels and movies, vampires tend to get obsessive and creepy when they feel attached to someone -remember what they had gone through with Angelus?- And Buffy had been in love with a vampire before, so there's a possibility she'll fall for another vampire.

However, I don't think Joyce was hearing and thinking that Buffy would be interested or not, she just heard "Spike is in love with me." And her brain stopped functioning. And for some reason, I don't think Joyce really has a strong bond with Spike, the only times we see them together were coincidences. Either Spike comes over to the house, in which Joyce treats him with the hospitality and civility she treats all her guests. Or when Buffy took her and Dawn to his crypt for protection. Other than that, she never really asked for him or thought about him.

I open the door for people all the time because it's a common courtesy, and not because I have romantic feelings for people.

Maybe if Dawn hadn't said anything about Spike being in love with Buffy, she wouldn't have reacted strongly to it. Notice how every move he makes fills Buffy with anxiety that was only built after Dawn told her about Spike's feelings for her. If Buffy had no clue Spike was in love with her, she'd have rolled her eyes at his polite gesture and left. Sadly without saying "Thank you."

but if Buffy truly felt that Spike would think that punching him in the face is second base, then why bother doing it? Why keep "turning him on" or whatever?

I think she was just mocking him. I don't think she really believes that Spike gets off on beating the crap out of him.
 

Oct 29 2008 02:39 am   #39Scarlet Ibis
Side note:  The Bronze band for this ep (Devics-- "Key") was one of the better songs played on the show, IMHO.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 29 2008 02:56 am   #40Spikez_tart
I always assumed he was talking about "In the Dark," which worked out pretty badly for him, lol. I can see why he might not want to go back. - yeah.  Angel would have kicked his ass.  Again.  Which makes me wonder when does Angel find out about Spike's chip. 

but if Buffy truly felt that Spike would think that punching him in the face is second base, then why bother doing it?  Why keep "turning him on" or whatever? - I'm thinking Buffy has a bit of a hitting problem - she shoves Joyce, whaps Dawn and regularly wails on Spike.  (And Willy.)  She even hits Angel once and is shocked and upset when he whacks her back.  Who did she learn this from?  Daddy Dearest?







If we want her to be exactly she'll never be exactly I know the only really real Buffy is really Buffy and she's gone' who?
Oct 29 2008 12:48 pm   #41sosa lola
Who did she learn this from? Daddy Dearest?

I think it has more to do with being a slayer. Her fists save the world and she is to use them a lot, so I can see how that affected her behavior.

About Buffy having a bit of hitting problem, I'm reminded of this exchange from S2:

Buffy:  (smiles) I better stop him before he gets in trouble.

Willow:  I got it. The non-violent approach is probably better here.
(goes over to Rodney)

Buffy:  I wasn't gonna use violence. I don't always use violence. (looks
up at Xander) Do I?

Xander:  The important thing is *you* believe that.
Oct 29 2008 01:24 pm   #42Scarlet Ibis
I'm thinking Buffy has a bit of a hitting problem - she shoves Joyce, whaps Dawn and regularly wails on Spike. (And Willy.) She even hits Angel once and is shocked and upset when he whacks her back. Who did she learn this from? Daddy Dearest?
Interesting point, Spikez_tart.  Unfortunately, all we have to go by is Buffy and Faith.  Well, Kendra wasn't prone to hitting people for the sake of it, from what we saw of her, anyway.  Maybe it wasn't just a slayer thing after all.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 29 2008 06:35 pm   #43Eowyn315
Which makes me wonder when does Angel find out about Spike's chip.
It's possible it came up after Buffy died. If Angel came to Sunnydale at all for the funeral, he would've seen Spike, and it probably would've come up in an explanation of why he's hanging around with the Scoobies. Even if he didn't see Spike, Willow could've told him about the battle with Glory, which would again prompt questions about Spike's involvement.

Willow might've also mentioned something off-screen when she came to reensoul Angel in s4. When he drops off the amulet, Angel doesn't seem terribly surprised to find out that Spike's around, and even though he's annoyed that Buffy smells like him, I think his reaction would've been a lot stronger if he thought Spike was still killing people, so somewhere along the line, he must've found out that things had changed.

Well, Kendra wasn't prone to hitting people for the sake of it, from what we saw of her, anyway.  Maybe it wasn't just a slayer thing after all.
But Kendra's also very disciplined and barely shows any emotion at all. I think excess aggression probably is a Slayer thing, at least for those who never had the training or the motivation to control it.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 29 2008 07:53 pm   #44Guest
I'd say it's half Slayer thing and half personality. And a BIG dose of immaturity. Once season 7 rolls around, Buffy no longer hits first, asks questions later. She's finally realized that how she's behaved wasn't a good thing. I hate that it took so long for the series to say it's not okay to hit someone that can't hit back just because Buffy was the hero and a girl.

It's sad how no one goes "Hey, remember the lengths Spike would go to for Drusilla? I wonder if we can channel that for our side....." They've already got a point in the right direction, with Spike having the chip. The whole thing wouldn't have been NEARLY as big a deal without the Angelus memories.

CM
Oct 29 2008 10:20 pm   #45Eowyn315
I'd say it's half Slayer thing and half personality. And a BIG dose of immaturity.
Yeah, I don't think it can be entirely personality, since I can't imagine pre-Slayer Buffy hitting anyone. She'd be more the type to use the flirty or pouty approach, rather than hitting people, so becoming the Slayer must have changed her at least a little bit. Also, I think the immaturity thing kind of goes along with the training - I mean, if Giles (or anyone, really, but he's the one who's supposed to be teaching her the proper use for her powers) had perhaps said to Buffy, "Your use of violence to get what you want is inappropriate," maybe she would've noticed she was doing it a bit sooner.

It's sad how no one goes "Hey, remember the lengths Spike would go to for Drusilla? I wonder if we can channel that for our side....."
Hmm... I don't think so, not if Buffy didn't have any feelings for him. If they'd done that, then we'd probaby be saying how awful it is that they're using Spike and taking advantage of his feelings for Buffy to get him to do what they want...
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Oct 29 2008 10:43 pm   #46Guest
I don't mean take advantage....never, but I do think , since Spike was going to feel what he's going to feel, that if Buffy had talked to him like a person, been nice about it, lead the way with the others, that Spike would have more reason to try for better. I know if it was me, that I would have used the knowledge to start an amicable relationship, not necessarily as immediate friends, but it could have been something positive, is all.

A lot of her inappropriate violence happens when Giles isn't there, though.....I really don't think he ever knew the extent. She's on better behavior in front of him. But *nobody* said to Buffy that violence isn't okay just because you *can* use it. She liked the power trip, didn't question what she did with her hands except with the Ted incident.......it's not just a training thing, it's a character flaw. The show showed her being a bully to a lot of evil things and it was "okay" because they were bad guys.....and the audience is just trusted to infer that using violence when it isn't necessary is wrong. What needed to be dealt with is Buffy channeling her anger, frustration, etc. into living beings.....and the only time someone (that she'd listen to) called her on it was Angel, on *his* show.
Oct 29 2008 10:54 pm   #47Guest
Yeah, I don't think it can be entirely personality, since I can't imagine pre-Slayer Buffy hitting anyone.
But it does in fact go to her personality and more importantly her character--she obtains this great power, and she uses it to bully others.  Not just evil doers, but people she doesn't like, those that she's stronger then, people who don't agree with her (Angel, as Guest pointed out), and those who simply can't fight back.

I don't mean take advantage....never, but I do think , since Spike was going to feel what he's going to feel, that if Buffy had talked to him like a person, been nice about it, lead the way with the others, that Spike would have more reason to try for better. I
I get what you're saying--why make an unnecessary enemy?  She could have given him a simple, "I'm just not into you" or "No really, I'm not interested.  Sorry," or "Hey, there's just too much history there.  Besides, I'm not looking for a new relationship," etc. and resumed things as normal.  You can be a woman about things, and not be a total bitch about it.  You don't have to be in a relationship with someone to work with them--if that was the case, Xander would have been long gone.

Scarlet


Oct 30 2008 06:05 am   #48Guest
That was me up there. Clicked before I signed my name. :P

CM

Yeah, Scarlet, exactly......there are so many times life is easier if you're not a bitch to people.
Oct 30 2008 10:05 pm   #49sosa lola
Once season 7 rolls around, Buffy no longer hits first, asks questions later. She's finally realized that how she's behaved wasn't a good thing.

I beg to differ. The second she saw Faith in Dirty Girls, she hit her. Actually, Buffy is always immature around Faith, and to be honest, I can't blame her. What Faith had done to her in the past was just too awful to be forgiven so easily.  
Oct 30 2008 10:26 pm   #50Guest
That was the exception, though....and she really didn't expect to see Faith, so I can give that one a pass, even though she jumped the gun. Buffy would assume that Faith broke out of prison and came for revenge or something, given their track record. But, she does the mature thing later with Faith, visibly trying not to fall into their old snipping habits, so, maturity.

'Course, much of Season 7, Buffy doesn't have her old vibrance and snap, either, so there is the fatigue to take into consideration in her responses......she just doesn't have the energy even if she had the motivation - which she doesn't because she's trying not to be Season 6 Buffy anymore. The self-righteousness doesn't hold up anymore, thank goodness.

CM
Oct 30 2008 10:33 pm   #51Guest
That was the exception, though....
Actually, come to think of it, she shoves Spike out of the bed in the ep after CwDP (I can't for the life of me recall the name), and she had no good reason to do so.  I know there was a calmer, more rational (and less violent way, considering their history) way to handle that.  Yeah, she's tired and whatnot, so it made her tone it down, but when you think of it, that's not maturity at all--that's just her being too tired.
Oct 30 2008 10:34 pm   #52Scarlet Ibis
Damn it, that was me.

"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 30 2008 10:34 pm   #53sosa lola

She could have given him a simple, "I'm just not into you" or "No really, I'm not interested. Sorry," or "Hey, there's just too much history there.

Didn't she do exactly that? She had told Spike that she wasn't interested, but that never seemed to be enough for him.

That was the exception, though....and she really didn't expect to see Faith, so I can give that one a pass, even though she jumped the gun. Buffy would assume that Faith broke out of prison and came for revenge or something, given their track record. But, she does the mature thing later with Faith, visibly trying not to fall into their old snipping habits, so, maturity.

To be honest, I think Buffy only handled Spike's situation well. Everything else? Not so much. I'd cut her some slack since she's under a lot of pressure. I think once everybody stood up to her in Empty Places, she was finally humbled and forced to see the error of her actions. Spike's support also helped bring her confidence back, and she returned stronger and more mature than ever.
 

Oct 30 2008 10:49 pm   #54Scarlet Ibis
Didn't she do exactly that? She had told Spike that she wasn't interested, but that never seemed to be enough for him.
No, she didn't.  What she said was this:

BUFFY: Oh my god. Oh ... oh no. Are you out of your mind? No! No, no, feelings do not develop. No feelings. Loathing. Disgust.  Please! Spike, you're a vampire.   Angel was good!  What, that chip in your head? That's not change. Tha-that's just ... holding you back. You're like a serial killer in prison!  Uhh! Uhh.  You don't know what you mean! You don't know what feelings are!  We don't need to do anything! Okay, there is no we! Understand?

You don't have to like everyone or want to date everyone, sure, but you don't have to be mean and/or insensitive about it.  No matter how gross or whatever the guy may seem, most women just say a simple, "Sorry, not interested" and leave it at that.  It's especially insulting to say that the person who has affection for you does not know what feelings are, and that they must be crazy.  How necessary is that?  Why not a "Spike, you're not my type.  We can work together, but it ends there."  Very simple.

"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 31 2008 02:05 am   #55Guest
Uh-huh. :)

Oh, I think she still made a lot of mistakes in relating to people in season 7. All I wanted to point out was that the violence part of her temper outbursts had toned way down, and I think a good part of it is not wanting to be Season 6 Buffy anymore. As far as being a leader, well......some things she handled wrong, and others had way too much pressure on her to know all the right answers. She's a 22 year-old with no strategic training - yet no one had any suggestions until she makes a mistake. Um, hello, Giles? Person in his 40s that's supposed to have the knowledge?
Buffy's mistake with the charge that went wrong was that she should have gone in by herself and done it like she did, later, in the first place. She was so scared by all the stuff, that she thought she had to have an army do it.....when all she needed was to believe in herself enough to follow her gut and use her skills. It's what a Slayer was bred for. Caleb couldn't even touch her when she didn't want him to. (I love that scene.)

After CWDP, she was pissed off that Spike might have been snowing her, that he was actually killing and turning people while trying to get back in her good graces - so shoving him off the bed to wake him up is a good way to make him off balance for that talk, to give her the strong position in case she needs to take him out now. i don't blame her for that moment, after what Holden told her and the weirdness so far, and it's not like she hurt or could hurt Spike by doing that. Pushing him was a big step up from punching him in the nose, if you think about it. ;) 

CM
Oct 31 2008 02:25 am   #56Scarlet Ibis
After CWDP, she was pissed off that Spike might have been snowing her, that he was actually killing and turning people while trying to get back in her good graces - so shoving him off the bed to wake him up is a good way to make him off balance for that talk, to give her the strong position in case she needs to take him out now. i don't blame her for that moment, after what Holden told her and the weirdness so far, and it's not like she hurt or could hurt Spike by doing that. Pushing him was a big step up from punching him in the nose, if you think about it.
This is true.  I guess the ending was like salt in that wound, though.  I won't go into details, cause I don't want to hijack the thread :P

ll I wanted to point out was that the violence part of her temper outbursts had toned way down, and I think a good part of it is not wanting to be Season 6 Buffy anymore.
This is true.  However, I feel like she was trying to counter that Buffy with Boring, Speechifying Buffy.  Irksome, but better.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Oct 31 2008 10:36 am   #57sosa lola

You don't have to like everyone or want to date everyone, sure, but you don't have to be mean and/or insensitive about it.

If it were any other guy, I can see Buffy being polite when rejecting them -like when she had rejected Xander. But it's Spike. The vampire who tried to kill her more than once, not only that, but they never seemed to have a civil relationship. Either he mocks her or she mocks him. Both had been insensitive to the other, so I understand why she was insensitive to him. His feelings didn't matter to her much, not because she was a bitch, but because he was Spike.

All I wanted to point out was that the violence part of her temper outbursts had toned way down, and I think a good part of it is not wanting to be Season 6 Buffy anymore.

Perhaps. I think she limited her violence to those she dislikes, like Faith.

She's a 22 year-old with no strategic training - yet no one had any suggestions until she makes a mistake.

I disagree. Advices and suggestions were still there, sadly Buffy chose to ignore what she disliked. Like chaining Spike for example, I've always thought it was a reasonable suggestion by Giles, but Buffy's feelings for Spike blinded her from hearing reason. Giles wouldn't have agreed to help Wood, if Buffy found a way to keep Spike grounded since he was a high risk, seeing as The First had promised to use him for bigger plans in the future.

In Dirty Girls, everybody had suggested that Caleb was setting a trap. Buffy didn't want to listen, not even pause at the fact that no one was agreeing with her. Even Spike thought it was a trap. So Empty Places wasn't the first time they had decided to grow a pair and voice their opinions.


 

Oct 31 2008 11:47 am   #58Guest
The point is they looked to her to have the final answers. And, she WAS right about something special being at the Vineyard - it's just the execution of the plan that doesn't go well. Her instincts, that hunch, was dead on. Her mistake was in trying a tactic so foreign to her, which was not going in alone and kicking ass like she's done for 7 years. She wasn't meant to be a general, no Slayer is....they're soldiers with the Council/Watchers in the General role of sending them somewhere with a plan. She asked for other suggestions on how to go in there, and no one had concrete answers, just doubts based on fear. And free will - if someone, anyone, wanted to stay home and refuse to go, they could have. They could have all said "You go alone", but the Scoobies went because of sentiment, because they didn't want to leave her alone in it - nice, but not helpful. And the Potentials are just trying to follow a leader that sounds like they know what they're doing because they're all afraid for their lives and far from home.

The only person Spike hurt in the group was Andrew.....and no one there was broken up about that but Andrew. And come on, Giles didn't do it because he was afraid of Spike being used in the house, he did it because he didn't like Buffy's attachment to another vampire. Spike was aware of the situation enough to chain HIMSELF up, and there was no way that he was going to hurt anybody during the times he was in control - Buffy's belief in him gave him the confidence to work through the trigger and not let Wood beat him, and led him to saving the world. Giles needed to trust his Slayer.

CM
Oct 31 2008 06:20 pm   #59sosa lola

And, she WAS right about something special being at the Vineyard - it's just the execution of the plan that doesn't go well. Her instincts, that hunch, was dead on.

I agree. The scene in Empty Places, while badly written, was a situation where both sides were right and wrong. I think one of the writers admitted that this was what they were going for, two sides debating something and each side has a point.

The only person Spike hurt in the group was Andrew.....and no one there was broken up about that but Andrew.

I don't mean what had happened before. I meant what's gonna happen in the future. In First Date, Andrew had said to the gang that The First has plans for Spike in the future, to which you see Giles frown thoughtfully. That's what Giles is afraid of, what The First has planned for Spike. And Giles was told about the trigger and how Spike is helpless when it comes to it and just blindly obeys The First. What if Spike was controlled again and went for the potentials and the Scoobies? Giles can't have that happening.

And come on, Giles didn't do it because he was afraid of Spike being used in the house, he did it because he didn't like Buffy's attachment to another vampire.

Do you seriously believe that Giles will actually go and kill Spike just because Buffy has the hots for him? I don't think Giles cares one way or another who Buffy dates or likes. Actually, the words he used about Buffy and Angel were "That's kind of poetic." When Buffy told him about having sex with Spike, he actually laughed. Sure, maybe he thinks Buffy could do better than Spike, but he won't butt in and stop the relationship from happening.

Giles had asked Buffy to keep Spike chained for their safety, you've seen what happened when Spike went out of control, Dawn had gotten hurt. Buffy was still stubborn about it. I understand why Giles was scared and disappointed with Buffy, I also understand why he agreed to help Wood. But I don't support what he did. No matter what, he shouldn't have gone behind Buffy's back to kill someone she loves. I'd like it better if he was upfront about it like in The Gift when he had admitted he would kill Dawn if it came to it.
 

Oct 31 2008 10:47 pm   #60Guest
What he said about Buffy and Angel was before the Angelus debacle, so those feelings are now moot.
Being with a vampire is not what he wants for Buffy, and he hasn't trusted Spike since he showed up with the soul. As for when Dawn got hurt, they were all in the room, INCLUDING Giles, who could have used the Stone on a chained up Spike right there. He could have asked Spike to use the chains, and Spike would have done it. Spike has been chaining himself up since he realized he was a danger to others and Buffy wouldn't stake him. Giles didn't put one ounce of credit in Spike's soul - not even talking to him once like he does with Angel now, which definitely AIN'T cordial, but still respectful. He and Angel aren't friends, will never be friends, yet Giles is polite and considers Angel's opinion. Spike's been harmless for years, he now has a soul, he and Giles have had some bonding moments - he didn't for a second show the same level of respect, a level of credit. Spike doesn't get the free pass of soul-having with Giles.
He wouldn't like Spike either way, but as a vampire, he wants him far away from Buffy, because he thinks Buffy is easily manipulated and snowed over. I mean, *look* at what Giles' actions show of how much credit he gives Buffy's intelligence and insight. It's downright insulting. Vampire = dangerous to Giles, and will *always* mean that. Spike never had a chance.

He laughed because it was an absurd and surprising revelation, not because it didn't disturb him. People laugh at times because their mind can't think of a more appropriate reaction.
 And he doesn't trust Buffy an ounce anymore when it comes to men she has affection for. He'd be looking for any man to turn evil just because Buffy is the focus of their attention - just look at the track record, he'd think. By betraying Buffy, and Spike, he undermined her authority in the house (because nothing stays secret around there), displayed he didn't trust her judgment as an adult and general, and only feels bad about it because Buffy's pissed. He shouldn't have encouraged Wood in an unhealthy agenda, and he should have had more patience with the Stone, that it was still working - which probably would have come up with a little more research! But he didn't trust Spike's heart.....and it's clear he doesn't respect Spike's age or intelligence. Triggers, whether manufactured or organic, are buried in the subconscious for a reason, because they work by being attached to things you won't or can't remember. Which leads to...

Spike won't share his private memories in that room and talk about his mother because the atmosphere is so hostile from half the occupants. Giles didn't for a second consider that maybe, just maybe, Spike didn't want to hash out personal issues in front of people that are strangers or don't like him! He just thought Spike was being difficult because that's what Spike does. And because Giles doesn't treat the matter respectfully with Spike, Spike's not repectful back. But it really had nothing to do with the Stone working or not working there - it was about presuppositions on Spike's character. The only person that needed to be there when the Stone was used was Buffy, really, since she could have read the spell, and she can easily take Spike when he's triggered. And she's built enough trust back at that time that Spike would probably talk about it if she's there to listen and help.

CM
Nov 01 2008 12:43 am   #61Scarlet Ibis
Spike won't share his private memories in that room and talk about his mother because the atmosphere is so hostile from half the occupants.
First, let me say I agreed with everything you said Caro.  Second, it seemed to me that they wanted to put Spike on display.  I could see Giles being there, Buffy obviously, and Willow.  If you want to throw in Xander cause he's part of "the team," fine.  But Dawn, Wood, Anya?  What the hell did Giles (or any of them for that matter) really think that Spike was going to share?  They all know the First is making him its bitch by using something from his past, and they just expected him to tell what he learned in front of a room full of people?  That was beyond stupid.  Furthermore, it was clear to Giles that Wood had a vendetta.  That whole entire bit was petty on Giles' end, and not professional at all.  Also, I don't think it was in character, but more of a deus ex machina on the writer's end.  They didn't really need to add Giles to that equation, but whatever.

But it's Spike. The vampire who tried to kill her more than once, not only that, but they never seemed to have a civil relationship. Either he mocks her or she mocks him. Both had been insensitive to the other, so I understand why she was insensitive to him. His feelings didn't matter to her much, not because she was a bitch, but because he was Spike.

Come on, you have to admit that over all in s5, she was a bitch to Spike.  Busting down his door, punching him in the nose preceding a question (or demand rather), etc.  Also, two wrongs don't make a right.  She could have taken the high road.  Maybe my expectations are too high, but she is "the hero" after all.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 01 2008 03:55 am   #62Guest
Yeah, I felt the same about Buffy. This was the season when I started to not like her a bit, just because she was a bitch so many times she didn't need to be.

Thanks, Scarlet. Yeah, the whole watch the Spike show vibe there....no wonder Spike was uncomfortable. Only thing missing was popcorn.
It could be in character, if we'd seen Giles more jaded, etc. through the season so far.....I don't see it some much as ooc, as..exaggerated character. They ratcheted up traits and feelings he already had, but just for the storyline, to push Buffy into being willing to take it on, on her own. It did serve Spuffy well, LOL. Gave us that "it's her and Spike against the world" feeling.

CM
Nov 01 2008 12:29 pm   #63sosa lola
To be more accurate:

When they started asking Spike personal questions, the only people around were Giles, Buffy and Wood. And they needed these answers to stop The First from using Spike again, it's not because they're interested in his life story.

I understand why Spike didn't feel like sharing, because no one would, but the information was needed. Giles wasn't being a jerk, he just wanted answers. He'd have done it to anybody, no matter who they are... Buffy, Xander, Willow... it doesn't matter. To save the world, you need answers, even if giving them is painful.

And Giles asked Buffy to keep Spike chained AFTER Spike had hurt Dawn when he had lost control. Spike and Buffy were the ones who were unreasonable. Spike was screaming to get unchained and Buffy just wouldn't listen, her feelings for Spike blinding her completely.

Buffy walks toward Spike, but Giles stops her.

GILES
What are you doing?

BUFFY
I'm going to unchain him.

GILES
Buffy, just—

BUFFY
(whispering) This is pointless, Giles. He doesn't know anything. Your prophylactic stone didn't work.

GILES
(whispering) Because he's not cooperating. This process takes time. He's blocking whatever's flooding his consciousness. And what he does—he's endangering us all.

ROBIN
So, the trigger's still working?

GILES
Much as ever.

If Buffy had kept Spike chained until Giles found a cure or a way to release Spike from The First's control, he wouldn't have teamed with Wood to kill him in the first place.

Nov 01 2008 04:40 pm   #64Scarlet Ibis
And what was Robin's point in being there?  There was no valid reason for his presence. And furthermore, they all didn't have to be down there to watch "the show," as Spike says in the first place.  Giles wasn't trying to find a cure, he was asking Spike questions that he didn't have to answer, nor could he right then.  The root of the problem didn't present itself until later that night anyway. 

Also, there was no reason to keep Spike chained once he was in full control of faculties, and Buffy could see that.  Spike's problem was being chained like a rat who was meant to be observed and take notes on.  He had no problem being chained when it was necessary, and in times when he clearly wasn't meant to be a monkey on display.  He chains himself as CM pointed out, and he did that when there wasn't even potentials in the house.

Even if they had left him chained, and they still weren't finding a solution quick enough to Giles' liking, who's to say he still couldn't have made that deal on the side with Wood, and just lead Buffy away from her house while Wood takes him out in the basement?  Or still move Spike from the house because he "was a danger?"  Spike was impatient, but so was Giles.  He could have researched the stone, see if it went wrong or anything, but no, he makes a side deal with Robin to have Spike killed.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 01 2008 05:12 pm   #65Guest

As Scarlet points out, keeping Spike chained still wouldn't have kept him safe from Robin. Robin would have no problem staking Spike while Spike can't defend himself. And boy, did Robin seize upon the few clues Spike did have! He immediately looks up the song so he can trigger Spike into being a mindless killing machine, as he imagined him to be when Spike killed Nikki.

Spike licks his wounds in private - as most guys do. If he's aware that anything's linked to memories of his mother, he's going to want to work that out in his own way and time, without an audience. The only person he *might* share that with is Buffy. Spike's mind wasn't going to *allow* the issue to be worked through unless he was either relaxed or caught off guard so the flashbacks would come. Having Giles and Wood in the room, along with the others in the beginning, just keeps his guard up. It's not even all conscious, if you understand how the mind deals with traumatic memories. When there's a deep block, it's only going to release when you feel your safest, or when something triggers an intense, visceral reaction to bring the memory forth, like a sound or smell.

Giles is a jerk about it because of his tone. It's condescending. Plus, the impatience Scarlet mentions.

CM

Nov 01 2008 09:02 pm   #66sosa lola
Okay, guys, I'll ask you this question:

Why do you think Giles agreed to kill Spike with Wood? If it wasn't about The First's trigger, then why?
Nov 01 2008 09:32 pm   #67Scarlet Ibis
Fair enough.  The trigger was a flimsy excuse as to Giles motives for agreeing to distract Buffy so would could try to kill him.  Here's the real reason here:

GILES
(pacing) Spike's a liability, Buffy. He refuses to see it, and so do you. Angel left here because he realized how harmful your relationship with him was. Spike, on the other hand, lacks such self-awareness.

It's about Spike depending on Buffy, and more importantly, Buffy depending on Spike.  It has nothing to do with the trigger.  Spike, Buffy's latest vampire love interest, lacked Angel's "self-awareness," so Giles decided to do something about it.

ETA: It was more about Buffy's handicap (Spike) as opposed to Spike's handicap (the trigger).  Even if (and when) Spike conquered his, Giles didn't see Buffy being able to conquer hers while Spike was still around.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 02 2008 01:18 am   #68Eowyn315
It was more about Buffy's handicap (Spike) as opposed to Spike's handicap (the trigger).
But the reason it's a problem that Buffy depends on Spike is because Giles doesn't think Spike can be trusted as long as he has the trigger. I don't think Giles is suggesting that Buffy shouldn't depend on people, but that he fears her dependence on Spike will eventually bring about disaster if she's counting on him and he suddenly and unpredictably turns against them (against his will, of course). I do think that if Spike had been able to get rid of the trigger (without the plan to kill him), Giles would've treated Spike the same as he treats Willow, Anya, Andrew, and all the other "reformed killers" in the bunch.

I think he DOES do that to some extent, since there's no objection raised to Spike wearing the amulet (which requires Buffy - and all of them - depending on him), but it's hard to say if his acceptance is solely because Spike's trigger is gone or also because Buffy ripped him a new one about the plan with Wood.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Nov 02 2008 01:18 am   #69Guest
Yup, that part is all about vampire=bad, bad, bad for his Buffy. Moving back to England seemed to put the old Watcher back into Giles. If Spike had no trigger, Giles would still have thought him a liability just because Buffy+relationship=distraction, and if ever there was a time he wants her to be a traditional Slayer, it's now. His sole focus here is "where is Buffy's head at?", not an actual physical danger.

What Giles didn't get, is that it wasn't a codependence/weakness kind of thing, it was love.......and killing Spike won't make her focus, it will send her into grief and shatter the fragile hold she has on herself with the stresses already here. And what did he really expect, that her eyes would suddenly clear from a spell and she would say thank you?! They've already known the First is trying to divide them, so he deliberately acts out a plan that *will* cause a rift....Giles was more an agent for the First's agenda than Spike ever was.

CM
Nov 02 2008 02:21 am   #70YesMyPet

Scarlet said: (sorry, I think I used the quote function wrong.)

"BUFFY: Oh my god. Oh ... oh no. Are you out of your mind? No! No, no, feelings do not develop. No feelings. Loathing. Disgust.  Please! Spike, you're a vampire.   Angel was good!  What, that chip in your head? That's not change. Tha-that's just ... holding you back. You're like a serial killer in prison!  Uhh! Uhh.  You don't know what you mean! You don't know what feelings are!  We don't need to do anything! Okay, there is no we! Understand?

You don't have to like everyone or want to date everyone, sure, but you don't have to be mean and/or insensitive about it.  No matter how gross or whatever the guy may seem, most women just say a simple, "Sorry, not interested" and leave it at that.  It's especially insulting to say that the person who has affection for you does not know what feelings are, and that they must be crazy.  How necessary is that?  Why not a "Spike, you're not my type.  We can work together, but it ends there."  Very simple."


Well...  I think Buffy overreacted here because she was attracted to Spike on some level despite herself.

She had SEVERAL opportunities to stake Spike.  So why didn't she?   If you ask me if I like Guy A, and I don't really feel attracted to Guy A, I'll shrug. If I'm hiding my secret, WRONG attraction to Guy B and you ask me about him,  I'd be saying "God, no! Yikes!  Yuck!" if not on guard.

Opposites - evil/good etc. attract .   I do NOT think Buffy was as repulsed as she pretended to be at any point.   If she had been actually freaked/disgusted she could have dusted Spike without breaking a sweat.

Nov 02 2008 02:49 am   #71YesMyPet
Jeez, this is freakin' amazing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8g7Nq7NEFE

Nov 02 2008 03:35 am   #72Eowyn315
If Spike had no trigger, Giles would still have thought him a liability just because Buffy+relationship=distraction, and if ever there was a time he wants her to be a traditional Slayer, it's now. His sole focus here is "where is Buffy's head at?", not an actual physical danger.
So, wait - is it that Spike is a vampire or that Buffy has feelings for him? Because that's two different arguments. Based on what we've seen previously on the show, "Buffy+relationship=distraction" is definitely true, but I think that's true regardless of whether the relationship is with a human or a vampire, and I can't see Giles reacting this way if the object of Buffy's affection wasn't a threat. Would Giles agree to killing Spike if he didn't have the trigger? I think absolutely not. He might have argued that the time for relationships is after they save the world (which I think Buffy would agree with, given the fact that she doesn't attempt a relationship with Spike), but I can't imagine him advocating that Spike be killed simply because he's a distraction. Hell, if all it takes for a death sentence is to be a distraction, Andrew would've be dead in minutes, and most of the potentials wouldn't have lasted much longer than that.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Nov 02 2008 03:39 am   #73Scarlet Ibis
But the reason it's a problem that Buffy depends on Spike is because Giles doesn't think Spike can be trusted as long as he has the trigger. I don't think Giles is suggesting that Buffy shouldn't depend on people
But by him bringing up Angel proves that that is not the sole reason--it's the relationship part of it that irks him.  Also, to Giles, Spike is not a people--he's a vampire.

ETA:  If Spike had been human, it would have been different.  But he wasn't--he was a vampire who Buffy had affections for.  That made him expendable two times.

If Spike had no trigger, Giles would still have thought him a liability just because Buffy+relationship=distraction, and if ever there was a time he wants her to be a traditional Slayer, it's now.  
I concur.

YesMyPet--for quoting, just highlight and click the "Quote" tab ;)

If I'm hiding my secret, WRONG attraction to Guy B and you ask me about him, I'd be saying "God, no! Yikes! Yuck!" if not on guard.
I can see that.  Although I do think a big part of it was "he doesn't have a soul" thing (which I don't agree with).  Angelus did more to Buffy than Spike ever did, but she was able to reconcile that.  Buffy's biggest hurdle has always been "soul=redemption," which isn't true, but that's the only way she can view the world, and therefore, Spike could never be "good" or love without the aid of one.  With that in mind, how could someone like Buffy even like someone (something) as soulless as Spike?  It's there (at the very least, basic attraction), true, but she could never allow herself to fully explore it--not under those circumstances.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 02 2008 09:34 am   #74Guest
I can see that. Although I do think a big part of it was "he doesn't have a soul" thing (which I don't agree with). Angelus did more to Buffy than Spike ever did, but she was able to reconcile that. Buffy's biggest hurdle has always been "soul=redemption," which isn't true, but that's the only way she can view the world, and therefore, Spike could never be "good" or love without the aid of one. With that in mind, how could someone like Buffy even like someone (something) as soulless as Spike? It's there (at the very least, basic attraction), true, but she could never allow herself to fully explore it--not under those circumstances.

This brings me back to my original post - that both Buffy and Giles, had become transformed from their experience after Angel/Angeles and by their dogma. Either from a logical or illogical perspectives, neither will ever trust that vampires have the innate capacity to make the moral choice toward their definition of "Good Vs Evil." Buffy’s definition of Spike as "a thing" and "not a man" "You don't know what you mean! You don't know what feelings are!" sound like the desperate attempt to salvage her worldview.

We should remember that this "Soul/Moral Choice" parameter in the series comes from an avowed atheist. From this world view, the idea of a soul being the controlling factor, the very spirit of Goodness and High Moral Choice, is most often seen as preposterous and a complete failure for the moral conduct of human beings. Souled humans kill and murder each other every single day and have done so throughout their history. Clearly having a soul has no factor in the moral choice or conduct and clearly having a soul does not even work in Sunnydale – all of the Scoobies and Giles, along with demons, are capable of some very bad moral choices and conduct. Hell, the leading hero figure has attempted murder and the dogma and belief in "the superior position" are equally at play within the CoW and The Initiative.

Being an atheist myself, the theory that Soul/God/Good/Morality equals Goodness or works to control moral choice is fantasy – moral conscience does not have to be connected to a spiritual essence as the all important Buffyverse Soul=Good appears to demand. While I don’t mean to suggest in any way that my atheist POV is what Joss Whedon thinks; I do think that a secular perspective should be part of the "Soul" discussion.

Regarding Giles and Wood – I think that Spike’s being controlled by The First and Buffy’s past history with Angel both play a part in his choice to eliminate Spike – and again we come full circle to "soul" and moral choice.

Nov 02 2008 12:08 pm   #75sosa lola

Would Giles agree to killing Spike if he didn't have the trigger? I think absolutely not. He might have argued that the time for relationships is after they save the world (which I think Buffy would agree with, given the fact that she doesn't attempt a relationship with Spike), but I can't imagine him advocating that Spike be killed simply because he's a distraction.

I completely agree with this. Giles never really cared about who Buffy dated in the past, why would he now? Even after Angel came back, the only reason Giles was upset was because Buffy hid Angel's return from them. And his anger was focused only on Angel, but he never butt-ed in on Buffy's relationship with him.

So even if Giles didn't think Spike was good enough for Buffy, he knows it's not his business to interfere, unless Buffy wanted Spike away from her. I think the comment you posted Scarlet had more to do with Spike being a threat than the actual relationship. Giles had chided all the Scoobies for wasting their time on dates and love when they were in such a dangerous situation.

I still think the real reason to Giles agreeing to off Spike with Wood was about the trigger. If there was no trigger, then Giles wouldn't have done it. Simple as that.

Nov 02 2008 02:00 pm   #76Scarlet Ibis
Giles had chided all the Scoobies for wasting their time on dates and love when they were in such a dangerous situation.
Yeah, but he didn't put a hit out on Anya or Kennedy, or any significant other except for Spike.

I still think the real reason to Giles agreeing to off Spike with Wood was about the trigger. If there was no trigger, then Giles wouldn't have done it. Simple as that.
I don't see how it's possible that you can blatantly disregard what Giles said.  If it was about the trigger, then what was the point of bringing up Angel at all?  Why not say that "Buffy, Spike's still volatile.  We don't know what the First has in store for him, and we don't know how to curb its hold over him.  He's too dangerous" ?  Or see what went wrong with the stone, or hey, even wait at least twenty-four hours to see if Spike's circumstances have changed from the stone?  He didn't even wait.  That's because it didn't have anything to do with the trigger.  Giles saw that they were "in a time of war," and he didn't feel that Buffy's head was fully in the game because of Spike.  If Angel had been brought back in a similar situation in s3, who knows, maybe Giles would have reacted the same way.  Regardless, his decision was because of their relationship, and not the trigger.  Why?  Because he said so.  Simple as that.
"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 02 2008 04:55 pm   #77Eowyn315
Yeah, but he didn't put a hit out on Anya or Kennedy, or any significant other except for Spike.
Because no one else was a threat. No one else had killed people while under control of the First. No one else could lose control of their body if someone whistled a happy tune. That proves my point, which is that it's about the trigger, not just that Buffy is distracted by a relationship.

I don't see how it's possible that you can blatantly disregard what Giles said. If it was about the trigger, then what was the point of bringing up Angel at all? Why not say that "Buffy, Spike's still volatile. We don't know what the First has in store for him, and we don't know how to curb its hold over him. He's too dangerous" ?
What he said was, "[You understand] That we can't allow any threat that may jeopardize our chances of winning." What he said was, "Spike is a liability, Buffy. He refuses to see that. And so do you."

Threat. Liability. Not "distraction" or "inappropriate relationship." He's talking about the trigger, the fact that Spike could still be used against them.

What he said was, "Angel left here because he knew how harmful your relationship with him was. Spike, on the other hand, lacks such self-awareness." He's talking about judgment calls - isn't that what the entire conversation is about? - and he's saying he supported Angel's decision to walk away from Buffy, even though that's not what she wanted, because it was what was best for Buffy and she couldn't (or wouldn't) see that. He's saying he wishes Spike would have the same independence. Spike himself has said that he's dangerous and that he should leave, but he won't because Buffy wants him to stay. He's saying that neither Buffy nor Spike have the strength to give up each other, even though it might be what's best for the group.

Or see what went wrong with the stone, or hey, even wait at least twenty-four hours to see if Spike's circumstances have changed from the stone? He didn't even wait. That's because it didn't have anything to do with the trigger.
No, it's because Spike wouldn't cooperate, meaning the spell was as good as useless. He said the stone was just a catalyst, and it was up to Spike to do the rest of the work. Well, Spike wasn't doing it; he was firmly resisting what the stone was trying to uncover. Like it or not, if Wood hadn't done what he did, Spike probably would never have resolved those issues and deactivated the trigger. If Spike wasn't going to cooperate and get rid of the trigger himself, then something else would need to be done.

Giles saw that they were "in a time of war," and he didn't feel that Buffy's head was fully in the game because of Spike.
I think you're twisting things around here. Giles isn't just claiming that Spike is a distraction - like I said before, the whole house is full of distractions, and Giles doesn't want them all killed. He's saying that Buffy and Spike are both blinded by their dependence on one another, and they can't see (or won't accept) that Spike's leaving might be what's best for the group. Just like in season 5, when Buffy's love for Dawn blinded her to the fact that she might have to kill Dawn to save the world, here she's doing the same thing with Spike. Why do you think Giles brings up Dawn? Why do you think he forces her to say that, given the choice now, she would kill Dawn to save the world? He's trying to show her that she's not thinking in the best interest of the group when it comes to Spike, keeping him around when the trigger makes him a danger to them all.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Nov 02 2008 06:52 pm   #78Guest
Giles isn't just claiming that Spike is a distraction - like I said before, the whole house is full of distractions
Yeah, but only one distraction in particular applies to Buffy--Spike.  And to Giles, that's the only distraction that matters.

and they can't see (or won't accept) that Spike's leaving might be what's best for the group.
Actually, Spike offers to leave--Buffy tells him to stay, so he does.

No, it's because Spike wouldn't cooperate, meaning the spell was as good as useless.
He only wasn't cooperating because they were trying to make a sideshow out of him.  And just because he wasn't divulging information right then did not mean it wasn't working.  Giles should have known Spike well enough by then to know to give him a moment in private.  At the very least, as a common courtesy. The stone's purpose was to delve into the mind and bring up past uglies. Who wants to have a therapy session in front of a bunch of people?  Seriously, how hard was that to figure out?

What he said was, "Angel left here because he knew how harmful your relationship with him was. Spike, on the other hand, lacks such self-awareness." He's talking about judgment calls - isn't that what the entire conversation is about? -
Yes, but judgement calls due to their relationship. If they weren't involved in any sense of the word, if they were strictly platonic, then it wouldn't have been an issue.  To discount that--the fact that a big part of Giles' problem was their feelings for one another, is ludicrous. If it'd been oh say, Anya with a trigger, I'm sure Giles would have not felt the same.

No one else had killed people while under control of the First.
No, but there'd been others who killed people of their own free will--recently I might add, and we didn't see Giles get worked up into a tizzy over that, did we?

~Scarlet
Nov 02 2008 07:15 pm   #79sosa lola

Yeah, but only one distraction in particular applies to Buffy--Spike. And to Giles, that's the only distraction that matters.

Why? Because Spike is a threat. The other characters aren't.

He only wasn't cooperating because they were trying to make a sideshow out of him.

While I understand why it sucks for Spike, it's still not a good reason not to cooperate. He could've said that he didn't want all these people around as he pours out his soul, I'm sure Buffy would have sent everybody out except for Giles and Willow. So it's not an excuse.

If they weren't involved in any sense of the word, if they were strictly platonic, then it wouldn't have been an issue.

Do you mean that if Buffy didn't have feelings for Spike, Giles wouldn't have teamed with Wood to kill him?

If it'd been oh say, Anya with a trigger, I'm sure Giles would have not felt the same.

Actually, Giles wanted to kill Dawn for the world and she's more important to him than Anya.

No, but there'd been others who killed people of their own free will--recently I might add, and we didn't see Giles get worked up into a tizzy over that, did we?

Like who?

Nov 02 2008 07:31 pm   #80Guest
Why? Because Spike is a threat. The other characters aren't.
Threat or distraction?  He was more of a distraction than an actual threat.  Being a distraction is not a good reason to put a hit on someone.  In fact, when Spike was an actual threat, he got a pass everytime.  So why is Giles so concerned now?  Because Buffy cares (about him).

While I understand why it sucks for Spike, it's still not a good reason not to cooperate.
We'll just have to agree to disagree.  I think the situation should have been handled better.  Privacy is not a hard thing to obtain, and therefore, it felt like they were exploiting him out of pure disrespect callousness.

Do you mean that if Buffy didn't have feelings for Spike, Giles wouldn't have teamed with Wood to kill him?
Yes, in my opinion, Spike would not have mattered as much if he had not mattered to Buffy.

Actually, Giles wanted to kill Dawn for the world and she's more important to him than Anya.
He didn't want to kill Dawn, but would for the sake of the world as a last resort.  He said that in a "if we don't get there in time to stop Glory from spilling her blood" kind of deal, not just straight up kill her like the Knights of Byzantium wanted to.

Like who?
Willow was still struggling with her magic, and was therefore volatile, Andrew obviously (who killed his BFF, knowing that it wasn't Warren telling him to), and yes, though I'm aware Anya didn't have her powers, she did kill a bunch of people within the last few months. Sure it was washed away with the death of her BFF, but she still did it.   The bulk of their team is corrupt in some form or fashion. At least Spike had a valid reason of not being in control.
Nov 02 2008 07:59 pm   #81Eowyn315
Actually, Spike offers to leave--Buffy tells him to stay, so he does.
Right - which is exactly the point Giles is trying to make. Spike - like Angel - knows that he's better off staying away from Buffy, but unlike Angel, Spike won't take the step and go, because Buffy asked him to stay. And by Spike staying, neither one of them is putting the best interest of the group first.

If they weren't involved in any sense of the word, if they were strictly platonic, then it wouldn't have been an issue.
Right, because if they weren't involved, if they were strictly platonic, Buffy wouldn't put him ahead of the group. She'd be able to let him leave - might even tell him to leave - if he's a potential threat. But if she didn't, I have no doubt that Giles would still feel the same way.

No, but there'd been others who killed people of their own free will--recently I might add, and we didn't see Giles get worked up into a tizzy over that, did we?
You just said the key words right there - "their own free will." If they killed people of their own free will, it means they can STOP killing of their own free will. Spike can't - the soul doesn't stop him, the chip didn't stop him, all the good intentions in the world don't mean a thing if the First can just control his body whenever it wants. I'm sure Giles realizes that Spike doesn't want to kill people, but he knows that Spike won't be able to stop himself. Willow, Anya, Andrew - they all made a decision to change, and nothing but their own weakness can make them start killing again. Spike unfortunately doesn't have that.

Threat or distraction? He was more of a distraction than an actual threat.
I disagree. Having someone who can be controlled by the First and made to do things they don't want to do is a threat. It's easy for us as viewers to say, "Oh, the First is stupid and didn't plan this well," but the characters don't know that. If they said, "Well, the First hasn't used Spike to kill potentials yet, so that means it's not going to," that would be a horrible assumption, and they'd all deserve it if Spike killed them all. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it's not still going to - right from the First's mouth, it said it wasn't time for Spike yet.

He didn't want to kill Dawn, but would for the sake of the world as a last resort. He said that in a "if we don't get there in time to stop Glory from spilling her blood" kind of deal, not just straight up kill her like the Knights of Byzantium wanted to.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Dawn's blood could only open a portal at a certain time in a certain location. There was no reason to kill her unless they were at that place and time and there was no other way to stop the ritual. Spike's trigger could be set off at any place, at any time, with no warning. It's a much harder situation to control. I don't think he needed to be killed - all they had to do was get him out of Sunnydale - but Buffy wasn't willing to accept that, so how else were they supposed to remove the threat? Abduct Spike and drop him outside city limits? Presumably, he'd just turn around and come right back.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Nov 02 2008 08:45 pm   #82Guest
Right, because if they weren't involved, if they were strictly platonic, Buffy wouldn't put him ahead of the group.
Exactly.  This goes to my point of it not being just about trigger, but about their relationship.  The trigger is just used as an excuse to separate them.

You just said the key words right there - "their own free will." If they killed people of their own free will, it means they can STOP killing of their own free will. Spike can't - the soul doesn't stop him, the chip didn't stop him, all the good intentions in the world don't mean a thing if the First can just control his body whenever it wants. I'm sure Giles realizes that Spike doesn't want to kill people, but he knows that Spike won't be able to stop himself. Willow, Anya, Andrew - they all made a decision to change, and nothing but their own weakness can make them start killing again. Spike unfortunately doesn't have that.
Though the First doesn't control him whenver it wants. Once Buffy frees him from the Ubervamp, the First doesn't do anything with Spike.  Willow, Anya and Andrew in a sense are more volatile, because who knows when they're going to change their minds or get bored?  When Spike had no free will, he was still able to stop himself from hurting Buffy.  By comparison, the others with their fantastic free will, aren't looking so good.

I disagree. Having someone who can be controlled by the First and made to do things they don't want to do is a threat.

Well, I disagree with that. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

You're comparing apples to oranges.
I didn't bring up the whole Dawn/Giles thing for a comparison--Sosa did, and I was just explaining that Giles didn't want to kill her as she said, but said that they might have to if absolutely necessary.

~Scarlet
Nov 03 2008 01:24 am   #83Eowyn315
This goes to my point of it not being just about trigger, but about their relationship. The trigger is just used as an excuse to separate them.
No, actually, it doesn't. The problem is still the trigger. If Spike didn't have the trigger, but Buffy still had feelings for him, Giles might be annoyed about it, and he might think that it's a distraction, but it would be grounds for a conversation with Buffy, NOT having Spike killed. I have said it before - I absolutely DO NOT believe that Giles would've tried to have Spike killed if he didn't have the trigger. If you do, then we clearly have different interpretations of Giles.

Though the First doesn't control him whenver it wants. Once Buffy frees him from the Ubervamp, the First doesn't do anything with Spike.
How do you know it doesn't control him? The First itself said that it wasn't time for Spike yet. There's absolutely no indication that it can't take control of Spike again at any point. Just because it hasn't doesn't mean it can't or won't, and as I said already, making that assumption would be very dangerous for those living in the house with Spike.
Writing should feel easy, like a monkey driving a speed boat.
Nov 03 2008 01:58 am   #84Scarlet Ibis
How do you know it doesn't control him?
I didn't say it didn't--I just said that it hadn't.  The First had other more important things to worry about other than Spike.  Also, since the First knew that Buffy knew that he was being controlled, it was pretty pointless to try and use him again since Buffy was keeping a close eye on him.  The First tried to control Spike in house, and when that didn't work, it had him kidnapped.  Then the First saw that Spike couldn't be broken, and then Buffy rescued him.  Saying that it "had plans for Spike" was probably nothing more than it trying to  keep up a disturbance among Buffy's people, which it did.  At that point, that was the most effective plan it had for Spike.  "Ooh, I might make him do something crazy at some point.  Be scared!"

I absolutely DO NOT believe that Giles would've tried to have Spike killed if he didn't have the trigger. If you do, then we clearly have different interpretations of Giles.
I think it goes to the circumstances.  And under those circumstances, yeah, I could see him doing that.  He isn't Saint Giles.  The Giles I've observed follows the tough love approach, combined with whatever he thinks is best for Buffy.

"Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, it became a butterfly."
https://www.facebook.com/FangirlNovel
Nov 03 2008 11:54 am   #85sosa lola
No, actually, it doesn't. The problem is still the trigger. If Spike didn't have the trigger, but Buffy still had feelings for him, Giles might be annoyed about it, and he might think that it's a distraction, but it would be grounds for a conversation with Buffy, NOT having Spike killed. I have said it before - I absolutely DO NOT believe that Giles would've tried to have Spike killed if he didn't have the trigger. If you do, then we clearly have different interpretations of Giles.

I agree. Giles only kills when it's for the greater good (I'm not talking about his Ripper days here :D ) But he never kills because he thinks this person isn't good enough for Buffy or for hate. If that was the case, then he would have tried to kill Angel in S3, but he just stuck with hating him from a far.

How do you know it doesn't control him? The First itself said that it wasn't time for Spike yet. There's absolutely no indication that it can't take control of Spike again at any point. Just because it hasn't doesn't mean it can't or won't, and as I said already, making that assumption would be very dangerous for those living in the house with Spike.

Giles and Wood had talked about this, The First had promised to use Spike in the future, it'll be stupid of them not to do something about it.